Young “cons” indeed

SEK points at and mocks a couple of young tools doing “conservative rapping” and includes their video, which is as excruciating as you imagined when you read “conservative rapping”. But that’s not important right now, what I found interesting was the shirts these two douches were wearing, as seen in the screenshot above. Because I’m sure they think they’re wearing the symbols of two iconic conservative superheroes, when in fact both Superman and Captain America can best be described as FDR Democrats. Superman spent his first appearances fighting wifebeaters (Action Comics #1), crooked businessmen and war profiteers (#1 and #2), not to mention mine owners who put profit before safety (#3). Not to mention that he’s either an illegal immigrant or America’s most famous anchor baby, depending on whether he was born on Krypton or only when his little rocket hit Kansas and spent most of the sixties, seventies and eighties as duly deputised police officers of the United Nations, together with his cousin Supergirl!

Captain America on the other hand is the textbook example of the premature anti-fascist, knocking out Hitler on his first appearance, in March 1941, has been consistently portrayed as a proper liberal, other than in Mark Millar’s revisionist imaginations, in the seventies saw that the head of the fascist Secret Empire was none other than Nixon a high public official, got desillusioned with America and went all Easy Rider, while in the eighties had to deal with a Reagan inspired challenger to his role who ultimately couldn’t cope with it.

All in all, two quite odd choices to wear for two such conservative stalwards.

Rightwing bully is real life bully — Film at eleven

Dutch political news has been consumed this past week by the strange saga of Eric Lucassen, Dutch M.P. for Geert Wilders’ “Freedom” Party (PVV) and its spokeperson on defence and neighbourhoods. That last might seem an odd subject, but has become one of the buzzwords of modern Dutch politics, somewhat of a dogwhistle as well, as we’ve belately rediscovered that the old city neighbourhoods have been somewhat neglected and not very nice places to live in, not to mention full of foreigners. Though on the whole the Netherlands never had to deal with mass deindustrialisation on the scale as what happened in the North of England, nor ever had ghettos even roughly comparable with the classic American ghettos, every now and again we do get a moral panic about what we’ve done to our cities. In centre left politics this than manifestates as attempts at artificial gentrification, on the right it’s more about getting tough on crime and disorder, which quite easily transforms into getting tough on people of colour, especially young people of colour. Wilders and the PVV used this to win the last elections and Lucassen there held quite an important post within the party.

Until an interested newspaper started talking to his former neighbours and discovered that Lucassen himself might have been a bit of a bully…

Quite a shock to discover that an authoritarian politician is a bully in real life, I know, but the facts are there. He insulted and threatened several people, threw a bucket of water over a seventytwo year old man, shorting out his hearing aid, called one woman a fat pig, not to mentioned threatened yet another family with sulphuric acid — and all this supposedly caused by an argument about dogshit.

Bad enough, but that was just the tip of the iceberg. He also turned out to have played a minor role in a big sexual abuse case when he was still in the army back in 2002. Military instructors had been having sex, voluntarily or otherwise, with the women they had been training at the barracks Lucassen also worked. He himself was disciplined by a military court for having had a relationship with at least one woman in his chain of command, consensual though still improper.

There have been other scandals with PVV MPs, but this has been the first big test of Geert Wilders and his party. Arguably Lucassen’s track record meant that he was not suitable as a member of parliament, especially so since he had failed to mention any of this to Wilders. On the other hand, the current government only has a majority in parliament with the support of the PVV and this majority is only one seat big. Lucassen can not be forced to give up his seat to his party: once elected the seat was his until the next election, not the party’s. Only by his own resignation would it be freed up for a more suitable person. If Wilders therefore kicks him out of his party, that would mean Lucassen could go on as an independent MP and the majority of the government therefore would rest on the support of a loose cannon, unhindered by party loyalty. Not the best outcome for Wilders, or the government.

Yet Wilders has spent years hammering his law and order credentials, accusing the leftwing parties of mollycoddling criminals and decrying any leniency towards them. He has also spent most of the past decade attacking people, both inside and outside parliament, for dodgy behaviour, e.g. doubting the integrity of two ministers in the last government for having a double nationality… So here is a member of his own party with a criminal past, accused and convicted of the same kind of antisocial behaviour has party had promised to punish severely. So surely he would throw Lucassen out of the PVV, right?

Of course not. Political expedience trumped principles, just like it would’ve for every other politician. It’s a huge blow for his image as harsh but honest spokesman of the silent majority, as he casts aside his socalled principles the first time they get him in hot water. For those of us who have hated his guts from the first time he opened his odious little mouth however, it’s immensely satisfying to seem him hoist on his own petard. About time too.

What you get when not freaking out about teen sex

Comparison of number of gonerrhea cases in Holland and America

33 times fewer gonorrhea cases in the Netherlands amongst teenagers than in the United States for a start. But also drastically lower rates for HIV infection, Syphilis, teen pregnancy, abortion, undsoweiter. It’s almost as if treating teenagers having sex as a normal part of growing up and sexuality something you can teach your children about to treat with care and respect you can actually avoid or drastically lessen the dangers of sexualy ignorance… Honestly, even the danger of getting killed by a serial killer when losing your virginity is less in Holland. The Dutch approach isn’t perfect of course, there have been setbacks in recent years, but on the whole it scores so much better than trying to scare teenagers away from sex.

But even if the Dutch system was perfect, it still has one big flaw that would always keep it from being adopted in the US: it’s not punitive enough. Too many people do not want their — and others’ — children to be safe so much as punished. It’s the old idea that good people don’t have sex until they’re married and if they can’t wait, they deserve what they get. Let’s not even mention homosexuality or other “deviant” behaviour…

What’s strange is why America has gotten so fucked up about, well, fucking, when European countries like the Netherlands have long since outgrown such feelings. Holland used to be a strict calvinist, moralistic country as well after all, but we changed while the US slid back. Even our religious nutters are so much less strident than we’ve seen from across the Atlantic. It’s a mystery.

South Park conservatives? Try Merry Marvel conservatives

Venerable Comics blog ComicsComics has proof that the annoying tendency of modern conservatives to see evidence of conservative values in any halfway popular media phenomenom. But whereas today it’s television series like South Park, Lost or even The Wire they like to claim for the rightwing, back in 1966 it was Marvel comics:

But despite their lightheartedness, the heroes are indeed heroic, and the villains villainous. This in itself is not amazing—but the fact that the heroes run to being such capitalistic types as arms manufacturers (Tony Stark, whose alter ego is Iron Man), while the villains are often Communists (and plainly labeled as such, in less than complimentary terms) is a breath of fresh air in a world such as ours, where all too often “good guys” and “bad guys” are portrayed as being indistinguishable.

And it is in their frank recognition of the difference between good and evil that makes Marvel Comics, at least in my opinion, “right wing” in tone. The “Bullpen Gang,” as the Marvel staffers refer to themselves in print, is not afraid to say that good and evil are mutually incompatible. Furthermore, they equate good with freedom and evil with totalitarianism, whether Communist, Nazi, or inhuman in origin. This is the “message” so assiduously repeated in all their sagas—and with such a message, no YAF member should have any quarrel.

Zeitgeist

Drive your rightwing friends even more batty: Nixon was worried about climate change:

Adviser Daniel Patrick Moynihan, notable as a Democrat in the administration, urged the administration to initiate a worldwide system of monitoring carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, decades before the issue of global warming came to the public’s attention.

And again: Reagan was kind of a wuss compared to the wingnut fantasy version of him:

In fact, Reagan was terrified of war. He took office eager to vanquish Nicaragua’s Sandinista government and its rebel allies in El Salvador, both of which were backed by Cuba and the Soviet Union. But at an early meeting, when Secretary of State Alexander Haig suggested that achieving this goal might require bombing Cuba, the suggestion “scared the shit out of Ronald Reagan,” according to White House aide Michael Deaver. Haig was marginalized, then resigned, and Reagan never seriously considered sending U.S. troops south of the border, despite demands from conservative intellectuals like Norman Podhoretz and William F. Buckley. “Those sons of bitches won’t be happy until we have 25,000 troops in Managua,” Reagan told chief of staff Kenneth Duberstein near the end of his presidency, “and I’m not going to do it.”

Continuing our theme, the epic tale of when Terry Savage met a free lemonade stand shows that when it comes to political correctness even the most uptight liberal leftwinger has nothing on the wingnut right:

“No!” I exclaimed from the back seat. “That’s not the spirit of giving. You can only really give when you give something you own. They’re giving away their parents’ things — the lemonade, cups, candy. It’s not theirs to give.”

I pushed the button to roll down the window and stuck my head out to set them straight.

“You must charge something for the lemonade,” I explained. “That’s the whole point of a lemonade stand. You figure out your costs — how much the lemonade costs, and the cups — and then you charge a little more than what it costs you, so you can make money. Then you can buy more stuff, and make more lemonade, and sell it and make more money.”

Imagine having to live this way, of having to determine of anything you do whether or not it’s properly capitalist or backsliding deviantism and worse, having to do this not just for yourself, but for anybody you meet?

Some quick links to end the day: