In the Bookmobile
Jonah Goldberg is one of the finest young conservative minds of our time.
The Slippery Slope of Fighting Barbarism [Jonah Goldberg]
A friend sends this quote of the day along:
Your debate with Beinart made me remember this great Evelyn Waugh quote. It'd be interesting to hear a Ron Paul acolyte respond to this point:
"It is in the nature of civilization that it must be in constant conflict with barbarism. Very few empires have been the result of a deliberate ambition. They have grown, inevitably, because it has been found necessary to expand in order to preserve what is already held. The French had to annex Algiers because it was the only way in which the Mediterranean could be made safe from pirates. Empire moves in a series of 'incidents,' and these 'incidents' mean that it is impossible for a country to live in isolation. Barbarism means constant provocation."
From "We Can Applaud Italy" (1935), in The Essays, Articles and Reviews of Evelyn Waugh.
Update: Just for the record, the above post does not, in fact, constitute an endorsement of Waugh's applause for Italy. I just thought the quote was interesting.
This is not a parody. "I just thought the quote was interesting." Liberal Fascism, right... (Also noted here.)


Looking into my crystal ball, I see that Goldberg tomorrow will make the case that Waugh was, in fact, a liberal.
Posted by: va | November 30, 2007 at 03:12 AM
Wow, how unintentionally revealing.
Does he even know what "fascism" means?
Posted by: Molly Ivors | November 30, 2007 at 05:35 AM
Do you suppose Jonah knows about the cage?
Posted by: julia | November 30, 2007 at 05:47 AM
Benito-fucking-Pantload
Posted by: Lakeesha Shaidle | November 30, 2007 at 09:15 AM
Fascist Fascism: The Fascist Temptation from Mussolini to Me
Posted by: Righteous Bubba | November 30, 2007 at 09:44 AM
Benito couldn't have been as stupid as the Pantload,but he did come to a just end. That's something all Fascists should remember.
Posted by: PR | November 30, 2007 at 09:50 AM
"Very few empires have been the result of a deliberate ambition."
Which only demonstrates a truly self serving ignorance of history by both Waugh and Pantload. I challenge them to actually find any empire that was established (or maintained) any other way.
Posted by: DrDick | November 30, 2007 at 10:31 AM
There is some type of pun trying to build up in me around a combination of two of my favorite t-shirts of all time: "Fuck you, You Fucking Fuck" and "Post-Modern as Fuck" ... something along the lines of "Fuck you, You Fucking Fascist" (too subtle, a little too straightforward to capture the humurous nature of the reference), "Post-Fascist as Fuck", "Fascist You, you Fucking Fuck" ...
I think it's in there somewhere.
Benito fucking pantload indeed.
Posted by: nick | November 30, 2007 at 10:55 AM
"Very few empires have been the result of a deliberate ambition."
That would have been news to Cecil Rhodes.
Or to Alexander the Great and Napoleon, for that matter.
Posted by: JJB | November 30, 2007 at 11:17 AM
Does anyone else notice that when rightwingers look at the lessons of WWII, they inevitably "don't endorse" Mussolini and Hitler, but find their views "interesting", simultaneously thay have NO problem BOASTING their STRONG objections to FDR?
That's what I think is Interesting!
Posted by: Auggie Doggie | November 30, 2007 at 11:21 AM
...and to this day, the right wing in Italy has been essentially neuteured(sp?).
What exists of the 'right' is mostly a grouping of parties devoted to very modest tax cuts, marginally less government, law and order, a somewhat more pro-American stance than the left, creating a more business-friendly environment (especially to Berlusconi-owned media enterprises), changing the laws to keep Berlusconi out of court/prison, and partitioning Italy into two north/south countries. I can't think of ANY politicians in Italy who talk about dismantling or reducing the social safety net or national health care.
In other words, a kind of right-wing that Jonah would call 'liberal fascism' if it existed in this country.
Posted by: r€nato | November 30, 2007 at 11:24 AM
It seems acceptable to Mr. Goldberg to showcase an adoring quote about Italian Fascism. I guess that's okay. I mean, Italian fascisti weren't nazis, after all. Right?
Ultimately the Italians had to be forced to round up and surrender their Jewish citizens to the germans, didn't they? Well, once they were prodded, they got into the game with gusto, you bet -- but it's not like they were actual nazis or anything.
Not so German, you know. They were Italians; their hearts weren't in it.
Hey, Jonah (before we give you the Mordechai Rumkowski Award for 2007 (Jacky Abramoff won it last year): Does your mom feel that way, too? How about your grandparents?
Duce! Duce! Yeah, Jonah. That's so much better than Seig Heil!, huh?
__________________________
(* in 1942-43, Mordechai Chaim Rumkowski was the appointed head of the Lodz Ghetto's Judenrat, and responsible for the civil well-being of those in the Ghetto.
While there is some debate over whether Rumkowski was able to bargain with the nazis, prolong the existance of the ghetto and so save lives, Yehuda Leib Gerst, a religious educator and survivor of the Lodz ghetto, wrote of Rumkowski: This man had sickly leanings that clashed. Toward his fellow Jews, he was an incomparable tyrant who behaved just like a Fuhrer and cast deathly terror to anyone who dared to oppose his lowly ways. Toward the perpetrators, however, he was as tender as a lamb and there was no limit to his base submission to all their demands, even if their purpose was to wipe us out totally.
The annual Rumkowski Award for 2007, Jonah. It's all yours. )
Posted by: TS | November 30, 2007 at 11:25 AM
After the French lost Algeria, pirates took over the Mediterranean. It was the French loss of Algeria which explains why Italy is now ruled by Captain Hook.
Posted by: Carnacki | November 30, 2007 at 11:28 AM
F*** Benito M and the horse he rode in on. The same goes for Goldberg!
Posted by: halle Salassie | November 30, 2007 at 11:29 AM
Jonah Goldberg is one of the finest young conservative minds of our time.
that's a pretty low bar, of course...
Posted by: r€nato | November 30, 2007 at 11:32 AM
The Nazi's were liberal facsists.
Italian Fascists were merely "left of center."
Posted by: AlladinsLamp | November 30, 2007 at 11:42 AM
Hey! The Italian government never performed better than during the 1930s. Call it "fascism" if you insist. I call it low crime, national pride, economic growth, successful foreign policy and a series of decisive wins for the military. If this is fascism, sign me up!
Posted by: Jonah's Id | November 30, 2007 at 11:42 AM
I know it's hilarious to make fun of Jonah, and I indulge from time to time, but honestly, you have to laugh or you'd never stop crying. How does someone so willfully, blatantly, arrogantly stupid get compensated for publishing every third-rate brainfart he has? How? How?
Posted by: sophronia | November 30, 2007 at 11:44 AM
Does he even know what "fascism" means?
SURE he does! When, like Hillary or somebody talks about health care, or like when women are allowed to have maternity leave or something. I'm pretty sure that's fascism.
Very few empires have been the result of a deliberate ambition. They have grown, inevitably, because it has been found necessary to expand in order to preserve what is already held.
Word the fuck up. Everyone remembers "I came, I saw, I conquered," but nobody ever completes Caesar's actual sentence: "but only RELUCTANTLY, it was a really regrettable incident, they really backed me into a corner there, I couldn't NOT come-see-conquer, really, look what they were WEARING, etc."
I do feel that modesty was Mussolini's most underrated personal trait.
Posted by: Jake H. | November 30, 2007 at 11:57 AM
"Barbarian Barbarism: The Threat to Nice Nations from Haile Selassie and Winston Churchill to Saddam Hussein"
Posted by: calling all toasters | November 30, 2007 at 12:00 PM
"Empire moves in a series of 'incidents,"
Mistranslated.
Empires expand using a series of (inevitable) conflicts - which in context is taken to mean, excuses.
Posted by: Sky-Ho | November 30, 2007 at 12:01 PM
There's an awesome 1933 issue of Fortune magazine entirely devoted to gushing over Italy and Mussolini.
Posted by: American | November 30, 2007 at 12:41 PM
And the trains ran on time.
Posted by: eRobin | November 30, 2007 at 01:35 PM
Hey! The Italian government never performed better than during the 1930s
Was the Ducati factory making motorcycles during the thirties? No! You call that a better performance?
Posted by: Mooser | November 30, 2007 at 01:40 PM
Duce! Duce! Duce!
(Just for the record, the above does not consitute an endorsement for the Italian fascist war cry, but I thought the quote was interesting.)
Posted by: Jonah Goldberg | November 30, 2007 at 01:41 PM
Are you telling me Bertie Wooster was a Nazi?
Man am I bummed
Posted by: Buzzcook | November 30, 2007 at 01:59 PM
Damn to early for me its Wodehouse for Wooster.
Thank god Bertie's not a Nazi anymore.
Posted by: Buzzcook | November 30, 2007 at 02:03 PM
I find Goldberg's comment a very serious, thoughtful comment that has never been made before in such detail or with such care.
Posted by: acallidryas | November 30, 2007 at 02:26 PM
"In the matter of abstract justice, the Americans have as much right to govern; in the matter of practical politics, it is certain that their government would be for the benefit of the Arab Empire and for the rest of the Middle East. … It will be the supreme trial of Dear Leader’s regime. We can, with clear conscience, fold our hands and await the news on teh intertubes."
Posted by: melior | November 30, 2007 at 02:26 PM
I just have to ask; has Jonah been blowing the same goats as Mickey Kaus or does he blow entirely different goats? I mean, what if Mickey is generous and likes to share his goatcock with others in a musky orgy of goatluv? Does Jonah condone PROMISCUOUS goat blowing, or is it more monagamous?
Posted by: bob | November 30, 2007 at 02:26 PM
Does anyone else notice that when rightwingers look at the lessons of WWII, they inevitably "don't endorse" Mussolini and Hitler, but find their views "interesting", simultaneously thay have NO problem BOASTING their STRONG objections to FDR?
Uh-huh.
They're also the people who will, in order to minimize what Hitler did, holler "But Stalin and Mao killed more!", a claim which is 1) in considerable dispute (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalin#Number_of_victims and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao_Zedong) and 2) not germane to the matter at hand, which is that Hitler offed millions of people not for political reasons, but because they were Jews or Gypsies or gays or any other class of what he called "untermenschen".)
It's like when Steve Chapman attacks Hugo Chavez more for being a "Communist" (which is funny, because capitalist entities have thrived under Chavez) than for being an alleged dictator.
Posted by: Phoenix Woman | November 30, 2007 at 03:50 PM
Well, once they were prodded, they got into the game with gusto, you bet
Not really. The Italians were probably the least enthusiastic perpetrators of the Holocaust, when they were perpetrating it at all. Italian Jews weren't rounded up at all until after the German occupation in 1943, and it was the Germans doing the rounding up. In Italy's occupation zone in southern France from 1942-1943, the Jews were protected. In the Balkans (Greece and Yugoslavia), the Italians did an incredibly bad job of rounding up Jews.
Which is not to defend fascism, or to deny the hilariousness of Goldberg's endorsement of Waugh's endorsement of Mussolini's invasion of Ethiopia. Especially from a guy writing a book called Liberal Fascism.
Posted by: John | December 01, 2007 at 11:36 AM
The Mordechai Rumkowski Award for 2007...renato, you've done it again.
Who says you can't learn anything on the Internets tubes?
Good God, what a perfect reference to an equally morally-ambiguous present-day figure...it's enough to make you shiver.
Posted by: Daddy-O | December 01, 2007 at 01:19 PM
I'm not rEnato, but thanks.
If this were 1945 Europe, Jonah's 'published' droolings would never make it past a denazification court.
Posted by: TS | December 01, 2007 at 01:56 PM
On this topic, D. Pantload is basically a fucktard Michael Ledeen.
Posted by: pseudonymous in nc | December 03, 2007 at 01:50 AM
Fascism aside, Waugh's claim is bollocks.
"The French had to annex Algiers because it was the only way in which the Mediterranean could be made safe from pirates. ... Barbarism means constant provocation."
No, the French annexed Algiers because they were behind on their payments for Algerian grain. When a French diplomat got whacked in the face, this "barbarism" became casus belli.
Posted by: Fats Durston | December 03, 2007 at 06:20 PM
Waugh's stories often contain a good deal of barbarism with the most vivid examples often being his British characters. The passage about Empire from Waugh should remind us that great writing and political understanding do not necessarily emanate from the same person.
Posted by: digitusmedius | December 03, 2007 at 09:04 PM
"They're also the people who will, in order to minimize what Hitler did, holler "But Stalin and Mao killed more!", a claim which is 1) in considerable dispute (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalin#Number_of_victims and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mao_Zedong) and 2) not germane to the matter at hand, which is that Hitler offed millions of people not for political reasons, but because they were Jews or Gypsies or gays or any other class of what he called "untermenschen".)"
'bob' -
What a load of shit. Even the lower estimates put Stalin on par (or over) Hitler, and, regardless, the two share responsibility for WWII due to their shameful treaty and gang-rape of Poland. And killing people for political reasons is less heinous than killing out of racism? Go back and listen to your Rage Against the Machine CDs, bob.
Posted by: mike morris | December 03, 2007 at 11:17 PM
Scott Stapp is worse than Hitler, Stalin, and Jimmy Carter put together.
Posted by: Thers | December 03, 2007 at 11:28 PM