59 thoughts on “Open Thread VII”

  1. Lee Harvey Oswald, 5th Generation Warrior?

    When I came across this Ed Driscoll essay the other day I immediately thought of some of your 5GW ideas.


    “Oswald turned out to be one of the most consequential assassins in history,” Piereson says. “He's a communist who shoots the president of the United States. You would think that there would be a reaction against communism. But there is no reaction against communism in the United States after Kennedy's killed. In fact, communism is the vogue,” particularly on college campuses. “Kennedy's death sparks a kind of anti-Americanism, and creates among the youth a vogue for the left which was completely unpredictable.”


    “Imagine the 5th Generation Warrior as an assassin on the large, crowded, dance floor. She cross the floor and get close enough to the yakuza boss to kill him. However, she is weak and unable to defend herself in a fight.”

    But instead of an expected blowback against the assassin's ideology and cause, the opposite occurs:

    Driscoll: “Liberals had great difficulty assimilating this idea that a communist would kill Kennedy. It made sense to them that an anti-civil rights person might do it, or an anti-communist might do it, but not a communist.”

    But that's exactly who Oswald was, having defected to the Soviet Union in 1959 and then spending two and a half years there, and attempting to denounce his American citizenship along the way. Piereson says that his April 1963 attempt to kill Edwin Walker, former army general, anti-civil rights leader, and head of the John Birch Society in Texas says much about Oswald as well. In addition to his anti-civil rights action, Walker also gave frequent speeches calling for the overthrow of Castro. Piereson believes that Oswald's attempt to kill Walker sheds light on why he killed Kennedy: his policies towards Cuba and his leading the nation's other Cold War actions of the time.

    “However, that is not how the Kennedy assassination was interpreted,” Piereson says, with enormous understatement. Instead, a sense of collective guilt is imposed on the nation through its liberal elites and media. “And this is really the first time that you get on the liberal-left this idea that America is guilty. But this however now becomes a metaphor for the left for everything that happens moving on in the 1960s.”
    End Driscoll.

    So Oswald's act serves as a catalyst at the right cultural moment, so that the liberals most effected by Kennedy's assassination become more open to the radical left's ideology and vision of society, rather than react against it. 5GW jujitsu?


    “This is the ultimate form of jujitsu, and shows how in SecretWar one can subdue (take-down) the enemy through subverting (taking-over) him.

    “How might one use this jujitsu to conspiratorally subvert a society so that it destroys itself totally, and the society feels good about it afterwards?
    “The conspiracy's goal could be to engineer the rise of a disasterously misguided leader, who would kill millions (including possibly loved ones of the SecretWarriors, destroy the country's infrastructure, etc), all to permanently weaken that state and engineer the rise of another…”

    If we re-write the last paragraph as:

    “The conspiracy's goal could be to engineer the rise of a [mass cultural revolution furthering the assassin's own ideology] all to permanently weaken that state and engineer the rise of another…”

    then it looks like that is what might have actually happened.

  2. I think it is a gigantic stretch to say Communism was in vogue on college campuses in 1963. There was gigantic change in activism, which cannot be seriously considered Communist as it wasn't, between 1963 and 1968, but most of that change happened after 1965.

    People keep trying to turn the 1960s into something they weren't.

    In 1963 you had boys coming to age like my brother. They were patriotic and clean cut, and they wanted very much to be like their WW2 fathers. Roughly 70% of the boys who fought in Vietnam were volunteers. In 1963 kids stood up in class and read little speeches about how the commies had to be stopped no matter what the cost. I heard dozens and dozens of those speeches.

    I think at the time people figured out pretty quickly that Lee Harvey Oswald was a deeply troubled Korean War vet. Newspapers and magazines carried pictures of him in his USMC uniform. There was talk about him being brainwashed, but his oddities are what caught people's attention. Like his own brother indicated, LHO was headed for that day for most of his life – just a deeply troubled individual.

  3. But GTA IV becomes the second title I'd be interested in (after NCAA Football 07) to work better on xbox 360 than ps3 [1]:

    “”They're identical games,” Simon continued. “We're not hardware makers, and we're not like a pawn between these companies, we try not to be as much as we can. We make great games for people to enjoy on whichever system they want.

    “But I guess if you want the complete experience with the episodes, then yeah, you should buy the 360, I suppose,” Simon said.”

    [1] http://www.gamesradar.com/us/ps3/game/news/article.jsp?articleId=20070725111542242077&sectionId=1006&releaseId=20060313153735796095

  4. sonofsamphm1c,
    “I think it is a gigantic stretch to say Communism was in vogue on college campuses in 1963”

    That is not what is being said. In the book review I linked to, Driscoll quotes James Piereson, author of “Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism”:

    “In 1963, you have a fairly conservative country, culturally,” Piereson notes. “You have a communist assassinate the president, a popular president. In 1968, the country has kind of gone off the rails, especially liberal-left culture as you find in the universities, and places like that. The students are taking drugs, and they're demonstrating, and they're rioting against the war in Vietnam.

    “Their hero is Castro, and people like Ho Chi Minh and Mao Tse Tung,” Pierson says, noting the surfeit of Castro and Ché-style army fatigues being worn on campuses. “So how do you get, really, from this place in 1963, where Kennedy is shot by a communist, to '68 where communists like Castro are heroes to the left?”

  5. Phil,

    “So how do you get, really, from this place in 1963, where Kennedy is shot by a communist, to '68 where communists like Castro are heroes to the left?”

    A call to sacrifice. The criticism (mostly from the Left) that Bush has not made Americans “sacrifice” more for the war is self-serving, as such as call would have sped up Qaeda chic.

  6. Lee Harvey Oswald was mentally ill first, and whatever next. JFK was shot by a deeply troubled man who thought he was a Communist. He was as odd and out of place to Communists as he was to us. A misfit is pretty much the same everywhere.

    The Communists did not order and organize the assassination of JFK. A Communist agent did not shoot JFL; a garden-variety fruitloop did that.

    As for Castro being a hero to the left, that is also another rather weird stretch. Do you have a scientific poll done in 1968 that reflects the notion that Castro had become a hero to a significant percentage of the American public, or are you talking about a small smattering of college students in a photograph who wore fatigues one day instead of their prized bell bottoms? I would believe a consensus of Americans came to believe it was wrong to assassinate him, but that does not mean they thought of him as a hero.

    The 1960s were controlled by the Greatest Generation; not by college students.

    All of this is why I think the right is just as debilitated by Vietnam syndrome as the left.

    And you are dead wrong about the call to sacrifice, but I was not making any sort of statement about that.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *