The Nation Review - An American Journal

[johnny9fingers]

Published this, which I quote in full:

President Obama Commemorates the ‘Senseless’ Holocaust
By Eliana Johnson
January 28, 2013 1:18 P.M. Comments150

President Obama issued a statement yesterday to commemorate International Holocaust Remembrance Day. He noted that survivors who bore witness to “the horrors of the cattle cars, ghettos, and concentration camps have witnessed humanity at its very worst and know too well the pain of losing loved ones to senseless violence.” (We noted below how some in Europe chose to mark the day, which takes place each year on January 27, the day Soviet troops liberated Auschwitz.)

The idea that all violence is “senseless” violence is one that has taken deep root on the left; it’s also, unfortunately, one that poses a major impediment to understanding the world.

Nazism may have been an ideology to which the United States was — and to which the president is — implacably opposed, but it is hardly “senseless.” By the early 1930s, the Nazi party had hundreds of thousands of devoted members and repeatedly attracted a third of the votes in German elections; its political leaders campaigned on a platform comprising 25 non-senseless points, including the “unification of all Germans,” a demand for “land and territory for the sustenance of our people,” and an assertion that “no Jew can be a member of the race.” Suffice it to say, many sensible Germans were persuaded.

On September 12, 2012, President Obama also lamented the “the kind of senseless violence that took the lives” of four Americans in Benghazi. That, you may recall, is the day the president supposedly said the murders occurred as a result of a non-senseless terrorist attack carried out by jihadists.

This sanitized version of events, both past and present, is surely more comforting. It’s also truly senseless.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/339003/president-obama-commemorates-senseless-holocaust-eliana-johnson

The reason I quoted this in full is that I suspect that The National Review will take this piece down when they've had a chance to think about it clearly.

It is amazing that some right-wing folk in the US hate Obama so much that when he attacks the Nazis, they will find some way of defending them. They'd rather find common ground with Hitler than Obama. Ye Gods above.

Comments

[clare o'brien (from livejournal.com)]

Yes, the word "senseless" is becoming exactly that.

On a sidenote, my American boss performed at Obama's inauguration ball recently. Some of the comments that ensued on his Facebook page from certain elements were truly, um, senseless. I had no idea that a political leader could be described as a "commie" and then compared to Hitler in the same breath.

Hope you and the growing family are doing well!

Clare

[ericcoleman]

He's a socialist, a fascist, a nazi and a commie all at the same time!

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

Thanks Clare.
Hope you and the family are well and prospering.

[ericcoleman]

"Those who perished as a result of Nazi terror, millions of individual men and women and children whose lives were taken so senselessly, must never be forgotten." —Ronald Reagan, February 2, 1983

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

That's why the article is senseless, I suppose.

[peristaltor.livejournal.com]

I dunno. I actually think the article has a point. Someone else's point may not be "senseless," even though it makes no sense to you.

Now, to use that as an attack on Obama, who was simply rhetorically diminishing Nazi atrocities as those perpetrated by those without sense, that's a dick move, yes.

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

The article may have a point: but the writer moves from Obama's "losing loved ones through senseless violence" to "The idea that all violence is “senseless” violence is one that has taken deep root on the left; it’s also, unfortunately, one that poses a major impediment to understanding the world." Which is a senseless step too far in itself.

[peristaltor.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure it is too far. Again, there is a distinct difference between using "senseless" rhetorically and using it literally. The piece conflates the two.

Then again, about the literal, I've met too many—to be fair, both left and right—who cannot understand the motivations of "the other" side (either deliberately or on a simple cognitive level), and therefore for whom the word "senseless" represents an accurate portrayal of "other" actions.

Now, had the essay author noted that those on the right did just this, I think you might not find fault with the piece; but then again, had the essayist done this there would be no attack on Obama, now would there?

I mention this caveat because there are some on the left who abuse other words in a manner similar to the essay's author accusation, as a means of dismissal (an old piece, but relevant).

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

Not certain that's true, though unlike 'lankers, I haven't called out a chap on the left in the way he called out telemann recently.

The hypocrisy of lauding Reagan (who used the exact same word in similar context) and decrying Obama's usage of it rather gets my goat. But that's by the bye.

This is one of those issues that I think has united many folk on the left and right, perhaps because of the the conflation of a rhetorical flourish, which has admittedly become a cliche, with a singular meaning of the word senseless, which can also mean devoid of good sense.

I shall think more on't.

[peristaltor.livejournal.com]

Lankers called out Telemann? Missed that. Got a link?

[johnny9fingers.livejournal.com]

http://talk-politics.livejournal.com/1655655.html?thread=132405607#t132405607

There you go. :)

[peristaltor.livejournal.com]

Oh, dear. It's like playing road chicken, only not only does nobody swerve, but both still accelerate after impact.

[abomvubuso.livejournal.com]

The knee-jerk hatred of some people could bring them to amazing lengths of stupid.

All the better for all of us LOLs-collectioners:)