Streetwise Professor

September 20, 2010

Burn the Witch!

Filed under: Politics — The Professor @ 1:46 pm

I am much more understanding, tolerant, and respectful of someone who dabbled in witchcraft in their youth, then walked away, than someone who dabbled in Marxism in their youth and did so (if they did) (especially when such Marxist dabbling took place in the mid-1980s, not the 1920s or 1930s).  After all, witches don’t routinely try to impose their views on others by force, violence, and fraud.  Far more witches and purported witches have been the victim of unjust deaths and persecution than witches have killed or persecuted others.  The same cannot be said of Marxists.  In their case, the toll is reversed, by many orders of magnitude.  (Mao alone, 45 million in the Great Leap.)

Witches get burned.  Marxists do the burning.  This any sentient being should have known in 1985.

Remind me again which youthful view is considered indicative of an intellect and judgment unsuited for public office?

I find interesting the youthful superstitions the self-appointed adjudicators of opinion deem acceptable, and those that they consider beyond the pale.  I further find it interesting that official Catholic teachings are considered the subject of shock and ridicule among this set, but that any questioning of the far more brutal, and at times lethal, strictures of shariah is considered outrageous bigotry.  These things speak volumes.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email


  1. Do we burn Christine O Donnell? 🙂

    Comment by Surya — September 20, 2010 @ 6:45 pm

  2. […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by June Moore, R. R said: Teenage witch versus a Marxist. One is harmless, the other (Coons) supports the murder of millions of ppl. #tcot […]

    Pingback by Tweets that mention Streetwise Professor » Burn the Witch! -- — September 20, 2010 @ 7:41 pm

  3. 1. Standard conservative boilerplate. Unoriginal. Have to up your game.
    2. Perchance projection?
    3. Out of curiosity, have you ever read anything by Marxists apart from Communist Manifesto?

    Comment by Sublime Oblivion — September 21, 2010 @ 1:03 am

  4. Well, quite a bit of Marx and Engels writings did advocate the extermination of inferior races, in particular those thought to be incapable of revolutionary development and action.

    Interestingly the Russians were classed in that group.

    If you choose to follow a doctrine that espouses genocide thats your business, by the way, the Nazi party was also based on Marxism.

    Comment by Andrew — September 21, 2010 @ 3:19 am


    The armed revolution of 1848 by subject nations of the Austro-Hungarian empire had failed. Both Marx and Engels were understandably disappointed, and showed their anger for the nations who had been more interested in securing national autonomy than the proletarian revolution. Friedrich Engels wrote an article titled “The Magyar Struggle” for the Neue Rheinische Zeitung, No. 194, January 13, 1849, of which his friend Karl Marx was editor.

    The tenor of Engels’ disgust with certain nationalities and his wish to see “petty hidebound nations” wiped out is reflected in these excerpts from the article:

    The year 1848 first of all brought with it the most terrible chaos for Austria by setting free for a short time all those different nationalities which, owing to Metternich, had hitherto been enslaving one another. The Germans, Magyars, Czechs, Poles, Moravians, Slovaks, Croats, Rutheinans, Rumanians, Illyrians and Serbs came into conflict with one another, while within each of the nationalities a struggle went on also between the different classes. But soon order came out of this chaos. The combatants divided into two large camps: the Germans, Poles and Magyars took the side of revolution; the remainder, all the Slavs, except for the Poles, the Rumanians and Transylvanian Saxons, took the side of counter-revolution.

    All the earlier history of Austria up to the present day is proof of this and 1848 confirmed it. Among all the large and small nations of Austria, only three standard-bearers of progress took an active part in history, and still retain their vitality – the Germans, the Poles and the Magyars. Hence they are now revolutionary.

    All the other large and small nationalities and peoples are destined to perish before long in the revolutionary world storm. For that reason they are now counter-revolutionary.

    … at the first victorious uprising of the French proletariat, which Louis Napoleon is striving with all his might to conjure up, the Austrian Germans and Magyars will be set free and wreak a bloody revenge on the Slav barbarians. The general war which will then break out will smash this Slav Sonderbund and wipe out all these petty hidebound nations, down to their very names.

    The next world war will result in the disappearance from the face of the earth not only of reactionary classes and dynasties, but also of entire reactionary peoples. And that, too, is a step forward.

    Lenin and Joseph Stalin agreed with Engels that wiping out “entire reactionary peoples” … “is a step forward.” Lenin was in the habit of couching his orders for criminal actions in euphemisms, or of arranging for one of his commissars to issue them. Lenin’s recommendation for eradicating recalcitrant nationalities, reported by Stalin in Foundations of Leninism (1924), typically refers to the right to self-determination as a “particle” which “must be cast off.” One can suppose that a “concrete instance” for doing so would be when the majority of a nation fights resolutely against communist take-over. Stalin writes:

    In the forties of the last century Marx supported the national movement of the Poles and the Hungarians and was opposed to the national movement of the Czechs and the Jugo-Slavs. Why? Because the Czechs and the Jugo-Slavs were then “reactionary nations” in Europe, outposts of absolutism; whereas the Poles and the Hungarians were “revolutionary nations,” fighting against absolutism; … “The various demands of democracy,” writes Lenin, “including the right to self-determination, are not absolute in themselves, but are particles of the general democratic (now general socialist) world movement. In certain concrete instances a particle may contradict the whole in which case it must be cast off.” [from: Foundations of Leninism, International Publishers, New York, 1932; p. 77]

    The eradication of stubbornly resistant nationalities was adopted as a policy of state in the Soviet Union. It took three forms: a) physical extermination, deportation and relocation, b) cultural genocide by suppression of national language and traditions, c) dilution of the ethnic stock by encouraging settlement of people from other nationalities on the nation’s territory. This policy was followed most rigorously against the independence-minded nations in the Caucasus region and in the Baltic states. Marx and Engels can be credited with injecting the idea of nation-killing into communist doctrine.

    Comment by Andrew — September 21, 2010 @ 4:13 am

  6. Any comments, S/O? This is the true nature of Marxism that you love so much… Seriously, grow up, already!

    Comment by voroBey — September 21, 2010 @ 1:08 pm

  7. Did you get a chance to look at FOMC comments? Looks like there is going to be QE2. Deflation rather than inflation seems to be the biggest worry now….

    Comment by Surya — September 21, 2010 @ 8:00 pm

  8. The distasteful remarks about Czechs and Russians are an early bug, not a feature.

    A bug that, one might add, is a good example of Romano-Germanic, i.e. Western, supremacism (the hegemonic ideology of the time).

    Comment by Sublime Oblivion — September 21, 2010 @ 9:43 pm

  9. Sorry Sublime Tosser, history does not bear you out on that one.

    144,000,000 deaths caused directly by communist murder of “reactionary peoples” shows that extermination of those considered inferior was a central feature of Marxist Leninist policy.

    And you really are pathetic, Russia has a worse history of chauvinism than the west. It also has a hegemonic ideology and “Great Russian” chauvinism that is all too current.

    Grow up.

    Comment by Andrew — September 21, 2010 @ 11:24 pm

  10. Sorry Andrew, history does not bear you out on that one.

    500,000,000 deaths caused directly by capitalist murder of “progressive peoples” shows that extermination of those considered inferior was a central feature of Lockean Hitlerite policy.

    And you really are pathetic, the West has a worse history of chauvinism than Russia. It also has a hegemonic ideology and “Romano-Germanic” chauvinism that is all too current.

    Grow up.

    Comment by Sublime Oblivion — September 22, 2010 @ 12:22 am

  11. Care to provide a figure for 500,000,000 deaths?
    Just pulled it out of your arse as usual I guess.

    I can easily provide a figure for Communist ones.

    You really are a pathetic little chap S/O.

    There the total for colonialism is 50,000,000 the total for communism 144,000,000

    Sorry gormless troll, but Communism, spread by Russia, was and is the most evil form of government in history.

    Compared to Soviet Russia and Communist China the Nazi’s were amateurs, they were also based on Marxist doctrine however (Nationalist Socialist German Workers Party…..)

    USSR: Chapter 1. 61,911,000 Victims: Utopianism Empowered 1917 to 1987

    China: 76,702,000

    Obviously your education is lacking, but then by rumor you did study at Berkly so maybe that is not so surprising.

    Comment by Andrew — September 22, 2010 @ 4:24 am

  12. By the way, here is an appropriate symbol for modern Russia:

    As for hegemonic tendencies, well look at Russia thinking it can dictate to all its former colonial possessions.

    You do realise one of the reasons why Putin hates Saakashvili so much is because the latter stopped the tradition of the Russians appointing the interior, defence and foreign ministers of Georgia.

    Then there is all of Russia’s BS about a “right to a privileged sphere of interest” etc.

    Lets not get into who provides cover for the most repulsive dictatorships in the world today at the UN.

    Comment by Andrew — September 22, 2010 @ 4:32 am

  13. That’s a funny picture.

    I wonder how seriously you’d take someone who replaced the 50 stars on the American flag with the hammer and sickle to make a point.

    Comment by Andrew #2 — September 23, 2010 @ 10:21 pm

  14. After all, witches don’t routinely try to impose their views on others by force, violence, and fraud.

    And that is the main difference between witches and the American foreign policy; as per Iraq, Panama, Serbia etc.

    Witches get burned. Marxists do the burning.

    So, you think that Marx is responsible even for the Spanish Inquisition?

    Comment by Ostap Bender — September 23, 2010 @ 11:21 pm

  15. A better version:

    After all, witches don’t routinely try to impose their views on others by force, violence, and fraud.

    Aha, so you have discovered the main difference between witchcraft and the American foreign policy; as per Vietnam, Iraq, Panama, Serbia etc.

    Witches get burned. Marxists do the burning.

    So, you blame Marx even for the Spanish Inquisition, Salem, NH, and McCartheism?

    Comment by Ostap Bender — September 23, 2010 @ 11:26 pm

  16. He bender, Marx was responsible for the largest orgy of mass murder in history, led by Russia.

    61,000,000 dead in the Soviet empire, 74,000,000 dead in the Chinese communist nightmare, and millions more dead in eastern Europe, South East Asia, and Africa, and anywhere else the Russian virus of communism spread.

    By the way, with regards to Vietnam, if the Russian backed north had not been invading the south, there would have been no war.

    Are you too stupid to understand this?

    And how many people did McCarthy sign the death warrants for?

    Trying to compare anything the US has done with the evil that is Russia is ridiculous, and just shows what an infant you are.

    Comment by Andrew — September 27, 2010 @ 12:21 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Powered by WordPress