Portland Protestors abducted by secret police

[G-Man]

Meh. I think you can argue that the left in this country are fascists, if you use Umberto Eco's criterion. I can easily charge the modern left with 12 of the 14 points.

(1) The cult of tradition. “One has only to look at the syllabus of every fascist movement to find the major traditionalist thinkers. The Nazi gnosis was nourished by traditionalist, syncretistic, occult elements.”

According to the left, everything is the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. They want to be those protestors again, and frame everything that they oppose in those terms. Their entire approach to politics is based on their own traditions of how to fight injustice, with all injustice framed in the same terms as that of the mid-20th century.

(2) The rejection of modernism. “The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.”

The left rejects modernism as well - although they do so for postmodernism rather than for traditionalism.
The Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture recently put up a poster that declared that "objective, rational, linear thinking" and "quantitative emphasis" are "assumptions of whiteness."
https://www.newsweek.com/smithsonian-race-guidelines-rational-thinking-hard-work-are-white-values-1518333
Also, look at this Pomona student petition, declaring that "The idea that there is a single truth--’the Truth’--is a construct of the Euro-West that is deeply rooted in the Enlightenment, which was a movement that also described Black and Brown people as both subhuman and impervious to pain. This construction is a myth and white supremacy, imperialism, colonization, capitalism, and the United States of America are all of its progeny. "https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_2U5RdT-4V25SsocKZdAplOKWcBFabgNiWnuw_DYe78/edit?copiedFromTrash

(3) The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.”

Tear down statues!

(4) Disagreement is treason. “The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge.”

Hm. Which side has declared that any deviation from their orthodoxy proves that you are a Russian agent or a Russian dupe, sent to divide and destroy America? Also, any dissent on issues of sex or race is not tolerated (are women as capable as men at being infantry soldiers? Don't ask that, you bigot!" Do differences in behavior account for less favorable black outcomes? Shut up!)

(5) Fear of difference. “The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.”

You mean like paranoia that any dissension is fueled by Russia?

(6) Appeal to social frustration. “One of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups.”

The leftists appeal to a hatred and fear of lower-class whites, and to the frustration of minority groups that anti-discrimination laws have not produced the equal outcomes they were told would happen.

(7) The obsession with a plot. “The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia.”

Again, Russia. Also, institutional racism and white privilege largely serve as the plots that leftist conspiracy thinkers rail against. I suppose it is not xenophobia per se, but the left frames white men largely as "the other" that is responsible for all societal woes.

(8) The enemy is both strong and weak. “By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.”

Trump is both portrayed as having the skill to manipulate things to his advantage, but also as a complete incompetent who has no idea what he is doing.

(9) Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. “For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle.”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/not-being-racist-isnt-enough-in-america/ar-BB159NTf

(10) Contempt for the weak. “Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology.”

Anyone who apologizes generally gets hated harder. Look at Drew Brees and Coach Gundy.

(11) Everybody is educated to become a hero. “In Ur-Fascist ideology, heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death.”

I'll think about this one.

(12) Machismo and weaponry. “Machismo implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality.”

I'll think about this one.

(13) Selective populism. “There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People.”

Well, were the Washington Redskins forced to change their name because of a popular push against it? Was the push against "COPS" and "Live P.D." driven by popular sentiment? The elimination of unt Jemima? How much of cancel culture is driven by popular rage, and how much by a small group who sees themselves as the saviors of the oppressed?

(14) Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. “All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning.”

Definitely the left is trying to control the language. "Undocumented immigrant." "People who menstruate." Having to specify "cis" women or "cis" men. You are not allowed to use language that does not reinforce the ideology. "Racism" only goes one way.

[GreyICE]

It's really no coincidence that Cardassia was sculpted as a fascist society and Gul Dukat's slogan was "Make Cardassia Strong Again." Literally. Direct quote.

The fascist form of nationalism is different from more traditionally nationalist philosophies, like neo-conservatism.

Neoconservatism is not nationalist. It is imperialist. The goal of neoconservatism is for the United States to rule over a vast empire of client states.

Nationalism is the pursuit of the good (or the perceived good) of your own nation without concern to the welfare of others - and therefore usually to the detriment of others.

Imperialism specifically to enhance your nations power and prowess is one form of Nationalism. It’s certainly not the only one. Isolationists can also be nationalists, even though isolationism and imperialism are diametrically opposed - it’s more about motivation than what particular thing they think is best for the nation (philosophies are all complex and have overlap). And imperialists don’t have to be nationalists although the two often go hand in hand.

As I said the fascist definition of nationalism is bizarre, and very compatible with a cult of personality.

[Draco Dracul]

Meh. I think you can argue that the left in this country are fascists, if you use Umberto Eco's criterion. I can easily charge the modern left with 12 of the 14 points.

(1) The cult of tradition. “One has only to look at the syllabus of every fascist movement to find the major traditionalist thinkers. The Nazi gnosis was nourished by traditionalist, syncretistic, occult elements.”

According to the left, everything is the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. They want to be those protestors again, and frame everything that they oppose in those terms. Their entire approach to politics is based on their own traditions of how to fight injustice, with all injustice framed in the same terms as that of the mid-20th century.

That's like saying using a pincer movement on a battlefield is an appeal to tradition. It's the use of tactics that have not only worked in the past, but have been shown to work on a fairly consistant basis for the last 60 years.

(2) The rejection of modernism. “The Enlightenment, the Age of Reason, is seen as the beginning of modern depravity. In this sense Ur-Fascism can be defined as irrationalism.”

The left rejects modernism as well - although they do so for postmodernism rather than for traditionalism.
The Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture recently put up a poster that declared that "objective, rational, linear thinking" and "quantitative emphasis" are "assumptions of whiteness."
https://www.newsweek.com/smithsonian-race-guidelines-rational-thinking-hard-work-are-white-values-1518333
Also, look at this Pomona student petition, declaring that "The idea that there is a single truth--’the Truth’--is a construct of the Euro-West that is deeply rooted in the Enlightenment, which was a movement that also described Black and Brown people as both subhuman and impervious to pain. This construction is a myth and white supremacy, imperialism, colonization, capitalism, and the United States of America are all of its progeny. "https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_2U5RdT-4V25SsocKZdAplOKWcBFabgNiWnuw_DYe78/edit?copiedFromTrash

(3) The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.”

Tear down statues!

Something done largely after years or even decades of trying to go through legal channels were blocked.

(4) Disagreement is treason. “The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge.”

Hm. Which side has declared that any deviation from their orthodoxy proves that you are a Russian agent or a Russian dupe, sent to divide and destroy America? Also, any dissent on issues of sex or race is not tolerated (are women as capable as men at being infantry soldiers? Don't ask that, you bigot!" Do differences in behavior account for less favorable black outcomes? Shut up!)

Which side has torn down basically anyone, even those on their side, that disagrees with their leader?

(5) Fear of difference. “The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.”

You mean like paranoia that any dissension is fueled by Russia?

One, that's a really, really weird one to try and use against side that is signficantly more diverse. Two, actions of a foriegn government and actions of an ethnic group are not the same thing, it's not random Russians that are being blamed it's specifically the government of Russia. Three, it's not paranoia, even with the hamstrung investigation with a censored final report the evidence that there is active interference and psyops being performed by the Russian government.

(6) Appeal to social frustration. “One of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class, a class suffering from an economic crisis or feelings of political humiliation, and frightened by the pressure of lower social groups.”

The leftists appeal to a hatred and fear of lower-class whites, and to the frustration of minority groups that anti-discrimination laws have not produced the equal outcomes they were told would happen.

(7) The obsession with a plot. “The followers must feel besieged. The easiest way to solve the plot is the appeal to xenophobia.”

Again, Russia. Also, institutional racism and white privilege largely serve as the plots that leftist conspiracy thinkers rail against. I suppose it is not xenophobia per se, but the left frames white men largely as "the other" that is responsible for all societal woes.

(8) The enemy is both strong and weak. “By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.”

Trump is both portrayed as having the skill to manipulate things to his advantage, but also as a complete incompetent who has no idea what he is doing.

Not really, the general depiction of Trump is a man badly playing a great hand of cards badly or perhaps a monkey that's been given a gun. He has vast amounts of power from his office, and very few checks on that power due to the GOP backing him to the hilt and the composition of the Supreme Court, but continuously makes unforced errors. I mean we can see that quite clearly in the the past 6 months as Covid-19 is the first crisis the Trump administration has faced that was not of it's own making.

(9) Pacifism is trafficking with the enemy. “For Ur-Fascism there is no struggle for life but, rather, life is lived for struggle.”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/not-being-racist-isnt-enough-in-america/ar-BB159NTf

(10) Contempt for the weak. “Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology.”

Anyone who apologizes generally gets hated harder. Look at Drew Brees and Coach Gundy.

In my experience that's only in the case of back handed apologies. Not only that, but the massive focus on Trump, a man that almost never apologizes, would make it clear that it's not the case. Additionally much of the focus is on people with substantial financial, social, and/or political power.

(11) Everybody is educated to become a hero. “In Ur-Fascist ideology, heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death.”

I'll think about this one.

(12) Machismo and weaponry. “Machismo implies both disdain for women and intolerance and condemnation of nonstandard sexual habits, from chastity to homosexuality.”

I'll think about this one.

(13) Selective populism. “There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People.”

Well, were the Washington Redskins forced to change their name because of a popular push against it? Was the push against "COPS" and "Live P.D." driven by popular sentiment? The elimination of unt Jemima? How much of cancel culture is driven by popular rage, and how much by a small group who sees themselves as the saviors of the oppressed?

Where

(14) Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. “All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning.”

Definitely the left is trying to control the language. "Undocumented immigrant." "People who menstruate." Having to specify "cis" women or "cis" men. You are not allowed to use language that does not reinforce the ideology. "Racism" only goes one way.

Ironically Illegal Immigrant is itself an example of very successful newspeak as it is not a legal term, which has always been either undocumented immigrant or removable immigrant. People who menstruate was used in an article specifically about menstrual health as not all women menstruate (the majority of whom are post menopausal women) and some non-women do so as well. You don't really have to specify outside perhaps a medical context as trans and cis people have different needs in some areas.

[Rocketboy1313]

It's really no coincidence that Cardassia was sculpted as a fascist society and Gul Dukat's slogan was "Make Cardassia Strong Again." Literally. Direct quote.

The fascist form of nationalism is different from more traditionally nationalist philosophies, like neo-conservatism.

Neoconservatism is not nationalist. It is imperialist. The goal of neoconservatism is for the United States to rule over a vast empire of client states.

Are you familiar with the term "Lebensraum"?

[Rocketboy1313]

Meh. I think you can argue that the left in this country are fascists, if you use Umberto Eco's criterion. I can easily charge the modern left with 12 of the 14 points.

This is either the most deliberate or dumbest misreading of this material I have ever seen in my life.

[GreyICE]

Meh. I think you can argue that the left in this country are fascists, if you use Umberto Eco's criterion. I can easily charge the modern left with 12 of the 14 points.

This is either the most deliberate or dumbest misreading of this material I have ever seen in my life.

Hanlon's Razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity
Heinlein's Correlary: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity, but also don't rule out malice
Grey's Law: Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from malice.

Have you ever noticed how whenever one of these internet nuts wants to declare "the left wing is fascist" they have to quote student groups, facebook accounts, and random blog posts? While when the rest of the world points out fascism in the American right wing they point out figures like the President of the United States, the Republican Party Platform, the Republican leader of the house, Republican cabinet members, prominent businessmen with close working relationships to the Republican party, and other figures that are closely tied to positions of power?

It's like "the president is literally deploying federal forces to a city, over the objections of the mayor, in order to kidnap and terrorize people." And the response is "oh yeah? Well there's a student group at the University of Delaware with 14 members, your point is invalid!"

As Pauli put it, “It’s not right. It’s not even wrong.” His post would have to improve significantly to even be wrong.

[G-Man]

Ironically Illegal Immigrant is itself an example of very successful newspeak as it is not a legal term, which has always been either undocumented immigrant or removable immigrant.

I believe the leal term is "illegal alien."

Show me where undocumented immigrant is a legal term.

[GreyICE]

Ironically Illegal Immigrant is itself an example of very successful newspeak as it is not a legal term, which has always been either undocumented immigrant or removable immigrant.

I believe the leal term is "illegal alien."

Show me where undocumented immigrant is a legal term.

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/who-is-undocumented-immigrant.html

Theoretically yes, but “illegal alien” is not a technical term–it’s the popularly used jargon, nowhere found in the U.S. immigration laws.

There’s a good breakdown.

The fact is there’s no one term used in law. What we do know is that a large number of businesses benefit from hiring migrant and undocumented workers, and such businesses are rarely charged with any crimes or assessed any fines for that.

I find it hilarious you want to quibble over this rather than discuss your inane ramblings like “Russia never interferes with US politics!” (Oh wait, you didn’t say that, you said something so stupid it’s not even wrong)

[G-Man]

Okay, let's deal with some of this.

First, I am not calling the left "fascist." I am simply saying that they do many of the things that they would call "fascist" if their opponents did them.

(1) That's like saying using a pincer movement on a battlefield is an appeal to tradition. It's the use of tactics that have not only worked in the past, but have been shown to work on a fairly consistent basis for the last 60 years.

It's not the use of protests per se. It is the fact that every issue is put on the same level as the 1960s fight against Jim Crow. Basically, the Left desperately wants to re-live the 1960s and will go to any lengths to make the current cause the moral equivalent of ending Jim Crow, with the need to use the biggest hammer they can find to get their way.

(3) The cult of action for action’s sake. “Action being beautiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, any previous reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation.”

Tear down statues!

Something done largely after years or even decades of trying to go through legal channels were blocked.

So if they do not pass the laws you want removing the statue, you get to take it down on your own?

But that's beside the point. Tearing down a statue because of anger over policing policy does seem to reflect action for action's sake.
In fact, a lot of the "defund the police" seems to be more about striking back and getting revenge rather than looking at solving the issues that cause deaths at the hands of police.

(4) Disagreement is treason. “The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge.”
...
Which side has torn down basically anyone, even those on their side, that disagrees with their leader?

I don't think that disagreeing with Trump is what people who lay the charge of "Trump Derangement Syndrome" are objecting to. The problem is the complete inability to ever credit Trump with good faith and the need to portray every action and policy that you disagree with as "evil for evil's sake" rather than considering the reasons for the policy.

In any case, though, the point is that cancel culture is essentially the epitome of "disagreements must not be in good faith." The left is completely unwilling to have any of its assumptions challenged. For example, the entire trans movement has been characterized by people submitting because any dissent causes people to be labeled "bigoted" and unpersoned.

(5) Fear of difference. “The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition.”

You mean like paranoia that any dissension is fueled by Russia?

One, that's a really, really weird one to try and use against side that is significantly more diverse. Two, actions of a foreign government and actions of an ethnic group are not the same thing, it's not random Russians that are being blamed it's specifically the government of Russia. Three, it's not paranoia, even with the hamstrung investigation with a censored final report the evidence that there is active interference and psyops being performed by the Russian government.

The point is, the left has its own bogeyman, and dissent is blamed on him. It's not that Russia has never interfered. It is that the impact of Russian interference has been exaggerated, and is used as an excuse not to deal with the issues that the other side brings up.

As I point out later, the left may be more diverse ethnically, but the "appeal against the other" is very strong, only it is reversed with whites, especially white males, being seen as "the other," with all minorities united under the banner of "people of color." Whites are seen as "the other" who threaten all and must be punished. Moreover, America is re-defined so that whites are the intruders, who represent oppression against the multicultural paradise that America was supposedly always envisioned as. Basically, the real America is everyone except for the historical majority and the historical majority are the intruders.

(10) Contempt for the weak. “Elitism is a typical aspect of any reactionary ideology.”

Anyone who apologizes generally gets hated harder. Look at Drew Brees and Coach Gundy.

In my experience that's only in the case of back handed apologies. Not only that, but the massive focus on Trump, a man that almost never apologizes, would make it clear that it's not the case. Additionally much of the focus is on people with substantial financial, social, and/or political power.

Trump's lack of apology is how he survives. Anyone who apologizes winds up getting destroyed. And "back-handed" apologies are how every apology is looked at by the left. Blood in the water.

(13) Selective populism. “There is in our future a TV or Internet populism, in which the emotional response of a selected group of citizens can be presented and accepted as the Voice of the People.”

Well, were the Washington Redskins forced to change their name because of a popular push against it? Was the push against "COPS" and "Live P.D." driven by popular sentiment? The elimination of Aunt Jemima? How much of cancel culture is driven by popular rage, and how much by a small group who sees themselves as the saviors of the oppressed?

Where

Generally speaking, a number of activists manage to shake down corporations to get the changes they want.

(14) Ur-Fascism speaks Newspeak. “All the Nazi or Fascist schoolbooks made use of an impoverished vocabulary, and an elementary syntax, in order to limit the instruments for complex and critical reasoning.”

Definitely the left is trying to control the language. "Undocumented immigrant." "People who menstruate." Having to specify "cis" women or "cis" men. You are not allowed to use language that does not reinforce the ideology. "Racism" only goes one way.

Ironically Illegal Immigrant is itself an example of very successful newspeak as it is not a legal term, which has always been either undocumented immigrant or removable immigrant. People who menstruate was used in an article specifically about menstrual health as not all women menstruate (the majority of whom are post menopausal women) and some non-women do so as well. You don't really have to specify outside perhaps a medical context as trans and cis people have different needs in some areas.

Illegal alien was codified into U.S. law with the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which uses it 6 times.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-100/pdf/STATUTE-100-Pg3445.pdf

I am unaware of "undocumented immigrant" being used in any Federal Law, although "undocumented alien" and "undocumented criminal alien" are used in the 1996 law.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-104publ208/pdf/PLAW-104publ208.pdf#0-0-0-1217

"You don't really have to specify [cis or trans] outside perhaps a medical context "

You do if you intend for "woman" to mean what people traditionally mean by "woman."

The point is, the left wants to transform the language to force everyone into its value system.

Have you ever noticed how whenever one of these internet nuts wants to declare "the left wing is fascist" they have to quote student groups, facebook accounts, and random blog posts? While when the rest of the world points out fascism in the American right wing they point out figures like the President of the United States, the Republican Party Platform, the Republican leader of the house, Republican cabinet members, prominent businessmen with close working relationships to the Republican party, and other figures that are closely tied to positions of power?

These people are the people who wind up running the H.R. departments of major companies and who push their ideology, mainly unchallenged, in the entertainment media, and through the vast majority of the news and events media. "Oh, that's just a few silly students with no power," is not a valid point when that is exactly what one would have said 20 years ago about someone espousing the current trans ideology. This ideology is what is being pushed on the culture, this ideology is the ideology behind the current wave of civil disruption (including both protests as well as riots and looting).

It's like "the president is literally deploying federal forces to a city, over the objections of the mayor, in order to kidnap and terrorize people." And the response is "oh yeah? Well there's a student group at the University of Delaware with 14 members, your point is invalid!"

You have mayors who allow rioters to burn and loot property, to deface public monuments and buildings, in one city (Seattle) they were allowed to take over a police station. In Portland, the rioters set fire to a police station. To look at the feds restoring order in one of these cities when the rioters began threatening federal buildings as "kidnapping an terrorizing" is warped. I think the bigger outrage is that the mayors objected to the feds after refusing to restore order themselves.

And these student groups reflect the ideology that is going to be forced upon the public in the next twenty years or so - actually, given the acceleration, in the next five years or so.

So no, you are the one who "isn't even wrong," i.e. you completely misunderstand the context of the fight.

[GreyICE]

Okay, let's deal with some of this.

First, I am not calling the left "fascist." I am simply saying that they do many of the things that they would call "fascist" if their opponents did them...These people are the people who wind up running the H.R. departments of major companies and who push their ideology, mainly unchallenged, in the entertainment media, and through the vast majority of the news and events media. "Oh, that's just a few silly students with no power," is not a valid point when that is exactly what one would have said 20 years ago about someone espousing the current trans ideology. This ideology is what is being pushed on the culture, this ideology is the ideology behind the current wave of civil disruption (including both protests as well as riots and looting).

So your example of the student union you quoted being relevant to fascism is that they'll later join the HR department, and to prove that you use... trans rights?

Wow, that's really. Something. Lets see if we can lay it out:

1) A student union from a random school does something you don't like
2) In 20 years that student union will be running the HR department
2A) As proof of this, trans people are accepted!
3) Therefore the left is fascist.


Ooookay. So first, I can fill out twelve of the points on the list using the head of the Republican Party and current leader of the United States, Donald Trump. Not a random student union. So I think it's very correct to say fascism is mainstream to the right wing, while you're flailing around trying to say that Russia's well-documented election interference is overblown, therefore fascism!

Second, what the fuck do you have against trans people? Is this just random "I haven't fulfilled my quota of bigotry this week" shit?

You have mayors who allow rioters to burn and loot property, to deface public monuments and buildings, in one city (Seattle) they were allowed to take over a police station. In Portland, the rioters set fire to a police station. To look at the feds restoring order in one of these cities when the rioters began threatening federal buildings as "kidnapping an terrorizing" is warped. I think the bigger outrage is that the mayors objected to the feds after refusing to restore order themselves.

And these student groups reflect the ideology that is going to be forced upon the public in the next twenty years or so - actually, given the acceleration, in the next five years or so.

So no, you are the one who "isn't even wrong," i.e. you completely misunderstand the context of the fight.

Wow, this is incredible. Your argument is that "the left" isn't using more government power against the protesters, and therefore they're fascist. The only way they could not be fascist is use more government authority, and when they demanded absolute police control of the city with no oversight, that'd be the least fascist thing they could do.

Well, I'll admit, you graduated from "not even wrong" to "so wrong it's hilarious". Never have I ever heard the argument "they give the people too much freedom, and that's fascist!"

That's right up there with your intellectually amazing point "post-modernism is even more modern than modernism (a 70 year old movement) and is therefore traditionalist" which I thought would be the single most inane thing said in this thread.