Saturday, February 11th 2006
Hello All
Hello All,
My name is Mickey Klein. I am a third year polisci student and have been writing for the Patriot throughout the year. My work can be found here:
I am one of the handful of new bloggers selected by Pat Rodriguez to make fresh posts for the site, and as I never let my poor friends tire of my opinions, neither will I of you.
But before I start ranting, a brief introduction on the context of my opinions is warranted:
I am a White, ethnically Jewish male. I grew up in Berkeley and K-8 went to a Jewish school. Grades 9-12 I was in a Catholic school in Oakland (the area public schools are atrocious). After a brilliant high school performance I attended the local community colleges and transferred to Berkeley.
My political orientation is strongly libertarian. I am a firm believer in Classical economics, restrained foreign policy, and strong personal privacy. In the past this made me a Republican.
Expect my economics posts to focus on small government and the freedom of the markets, my foreign policy pieces to focus on exiting Iraq and containing real threats, and finally my remarks on personal privacy to focus on ending prohibition.
That exhausts what I want to say about myself. I look forward to putting up more substantive posts very soon.
ps. Every post will have a quote of the day:
“Man is an end unto himself”
-Ayn Rand
Did you say “ending prohibition”?
“In the past this made me a Republican.”
That’s harsh.
Comment by Beetle — 2/11/2006 @ 12:18 pm
Prohibition? Didn’t we take of that with one of those constitutional amendment thingies?
Comment by Archangel — 2/13/2006 @ 1:49 pm
No, Archangel, that was Prohibition with a capital P. I’m hoping that Mickey just opposes prohibition in general (small p). That would be a truly libertarian stance.
Comment by Stefano — 2/14/2006 @ 11:31 am
I do. I am in favor of the Dutch model.
Comment by mickeyk — 2/14/2006 @ 7:29 pm
Ee gad! Do you mean you support ending the War on Drugs? But, but…won’t the drug dealers win then?!
Comment by Archangel — 2/14/2006 @ 11:42 pm
Come to think of it, are there any conservative Republicans in BCR, or are all of you generally libertarians? I certainly seems the blogs are dominated by libertarians.
Comment by Archangel — 2/14/2006 @ 11:43 pm
Dude. They’re college students. What college student supports not being able to do things?
Comment by Beetle — 2/14/2006 @ 11:59 pm
Lots of them. Murder. Rape. Genocide. Losing to Stanford.
Comment by Archangel — 2/15/2006 @ 12:27 am
There are at least 2 members of BCR who think that global warming can’t happen because god will stop it from happening, and there is at least 1 member of BCR who, I shit you not, wants to round up gays and place them in their own isolated “communities”.
The club isn’t exclusively libertarian, that’s for sure.
Comment by Donald — 2/15/2006 @ 8:15 am
Wow. That’s fascinating, thank you for that insight. Do you find that the majority of the group though is libertarian, beyond those small uber-conservatives?
Comment by Archangel — 2/15/2006 @ 9:43 am
The 3 people I mentioned are prominent members of the club, but yeah, I would suspect the club as a whole would tend to have a libertarian bent, though that’s more of an educated guess than any actual knowledge. From what little I know of this year’s leadership, most don’t seem particularly paleo, and that’s a good thing.
Comment by Donald — 2/15/2006 @ 10:30 am
I would tend to agree. Again, I very much appreciate this interesting look into the BCR membership.
Do you guys have mini-arguments among yourselves in meetings/dealing with the Patriot, like us Godless liberals as well? Fascinating. Based on this, I would assume so. Do you find it difficult to stomach the Bush administration some times then?
Comment by Archangel — 2/15/2006 @ 10:45 am
Me? Oh god, I’m still lost in the Great Society. I know an obscene number of Republicans through various channels, but I’ve never been affiliated with BCR.
Comment by Donald — 2/15/2006 @ 1:57 pm
Ha! Ok, my apologies. So, you’re not just saying this to make some BCR people look bad are you? ( I don’t think, but to make others feel better, I should ask).
Comment by Archangel — 2/15/2006 @ 3:00 pm
The 2 who claimed god would stop global warming probably wouldn’t deny it in public, though I’d hope the gays in concentration camps one would. But no, these people know who they are, and they are not obscure, at least from the campus personalities perspective.
Comment by Donald — 2/15/2006 @ 4:01 pm
Fascinating, truly. I told some of my peers today and they didn’t believe that what you said could be true. Amazing. Thanks again.
Comment by Archangel — 2/15/2006 @ 5:12 pm
I’m the treasurer of BCR and serve on the Executive Board and I’ve not heard once any of the members on the Board say things like rounding up gays or G-d will prevent global warming. That doesn’t mean they haven’t said it, but I’m just saying that from a personal standpoint, I am exposed to the “prominent” members of BCR more than most and haven’t come across these views.
Furthermore, we have several in house debates. We debated legalizing marijuana, the death penalty, and just recently the NSA spying program (I argued in favor of using the FISA courts, FYI). So there are a myriad of conservative views and opinions in BCR, and on the Patriot (the Feb. issue has 2 point/counterpoints, just as one example). It’s just like the party as a whole (McCain vs. Bush vs. Arnold, for example)
Comment by Ben Chapman — 2/15/2006 @ 5:39 pm
Ben,
I do appreciate someone from the BCR coming on here and giving their experience. Would you say that among the Exec. Board, most people are more libertarian than conservative?
I figured there would be greater variety of opinion among the BCR than your average “Republican,” and I’m glad to know that I was right.
How much cross-over is there from BCR to Cal Pat? Have you guys ever thought of having a liberal/moderate editor/contributor to have a “fair and balanced™” perspective on the magazine?
Comment by Archangel — 2/15/2006 @ 5:45 pm
and how long has this been going unnoticed?
http://www.patriotradio.org/
Comment by HB — 2/15/2006 @ 5:48 pm
For the Patriot, at least, the majority of the editors are self-described libertarians, including myself.
Comment by patr — 2/15/2006 @ 5:52 pm
HB: way to blow the surprise… I don’t think they’re officially launching for another couple of weeks.
Comment by patr — 2/15/2006 @ 5:53 pm
In response to Archangel: on the exec. board we have about half and half I would say. I tend to follow more closely with the libertarian (social moderate) side. I know some people on there who are very conservative and tow the common party line. Cross over between BCR and the Patriot is the norm, though we have a lot in BCR who are not in the Patriot, and a few in the Patriot who are not in BCR.
as for having a liberal/moderate editor on the Patriot, we have libertarians on there, but no outright Democrats. Democrats tend to lean towards the Cal Dems and the Smart Ass.
Comment by Ben Chapman — 2/15/2006 @ 5:53 pm
Hi, BCR member here, and like Ben I’m in a position to know a lot of people in the club(I’m the secretary). Not only are your comments unfounded, Donald, they are innapropriate. The club does have a rather libertarian bent, but we have a lot of conservative members, like myself.
Archangel, why would we have a liberal editor for the Patriot for “balance” when we are daily surrounded by the left?
Comment by funsize — 2/15/2006 @ 6:00 pm
Ben and Patr: Thanks again, useful and interesting information
Oh, I’m sure that as an organizational/club matter, a liberal would be more likely to join the Cal Dems or the Smart Ass (Which, I think is pretty flippin’ bad. My 2 cents).
As for why you would want a liberal editor for “balance”, a couple of reasons: 1) Hasn’t Fox News proved that “Fair and Balanced” delivery is more popular =o) 2) You’re magazine would be much better if it were checked over by someone with a radically different view.
More honestly Fuzsize, I think you’re daily surrounded by the indifferent more than the left (Scary thought about being surrounded by lefties eh?). Though I’d be willing to bet that the average Berkeley student, as a whole, is far more political than your average person on the street, I’d still guess that more people than not could care less about politics that don’t affect them personally. People may think they are “conservative” or “Liberal,” but I wonder how many have truly strong political beliefs.
Conservative Talk radio on campus? Interesting!
Comment by Archangel — 2/15/2006 @ 6:08 pm
And just to comment at the discussion at hand.
I don’t know why Donald is happy that there are no paleoconservatives in BCR. Not going into Iraq, or being trigger happy with Iran, balancing the budget, support of the bill of rights against the imperial presidency…. aren’t those good things? In any case, I seriously doubt that anyone in BCR would say something about gays as you mentioned. They probably allow them to marry if Bush said it was ok, because I’ve seen more loyalty to him than to the nation.
Most (not all) of those economic conservatives/libertarians are just a bunch of rich kids with a “let them eat cake” attitude. Maybe they are too young to remember what the party actually (half)stood for back in the 90s, however, no one question the lack of restraint when it comes to racking up debts or support for outrageous policies that hurt America. Today’s republicans have gotten comfortable with power and toole-o’tools in BCR are the prime example why.
Not a shocker though; these are the same people who will gladly spread anti-Islamic messages, yet will wholeheartedly buy into George Bush’s “noble faith” rhetoric.
Comment by HB — 2/15/2006 @ 6:18 pm
I’m assuming I know who Donald is referring to in BCR, but I’d argue that the individual(s) who think God would stop global warming don’t believe in global warming anyway, so it’s a stupid thing for him to bring up.
About gays being rounded up, give me a break. I know more than 1 member of Cal Dems who is anti-gay and would say the exact same thing. And I’m talking current members, as well.
As far as Donald hating paleocons, HB is right, Donald might agree with paleocons a lot more often than he would neocons (which is actually what BCR is mostly made up of). Donald, for whatever reason, associates paleocons and theocons, so of course he hates them.
patr, I also saw the PatriotRadio a while ago. There’s a MySpace page for it too.
ArchAngel, the club is very strongly made of people who identify as Republican but have few strong beliefs…or know why they “believe” something. When the chips fall, most end up being party-line neocons.
Comment by cw — 2/15/2006 @ 7:02 pm
You’re right, Pat, most people are indifferent. Apparently not those who choose to comment here: “little rich kids”? This sounds like more of a readiness to discount others with insults rather than debate them.
Comment by funsize — 2/15/2006 @ 7:58 pm
funsize: That wasn’t me actually.
HB: we question Bush & present day Republicans all the time, if you’ve been paying attention.
Comment by patr — 2/15/2006 @ 8:21 pm
“I’ve not heard once any of the members on the Board say things like rounding up gays or G-d will prevent global warming”
I assure you that you personally know all 3 people I’m talking about, but its not a surprise that they wouldn’t announce their views in meetings, as they are rather extreme positions to take. For what its worth, most people I’ve met in BCR are much closer to Ben than to these people. My only point was that there are extremists of influence in BCR, even though most are not. And I consider 2 of the 3 to be casual friends.
“Not only are your comments unfounded, Donald, they are innapropriate.”
It’s an unproveable claim, but I have no reason to lie. You can believe me or not; it doesn’t really matter. It WOULD be inappropriate to reveal who they are (thus making it founded), and I won’t.
“About gays being rounded up, give me a break. I know more than 1 member of Cal Dems who is anti-gay and would say the exact same thing. And I’m talking current members, as well.”
It’s a very extreme position to suggest the forced round up of gays into private communities. It’s shocking that someone in BCR holds that position (though to be fair, the said person has never been on the board to my knowledge); it would be infathomable to me that such a person could become a leader in CalDems.
“Donald might agree with paleocons a lot more often than he would neocons”
I have 10,000 times more respect for Paul Wolfowitz than I do Pat Buchanan, and I find the isolationist trend of the Left disturbing.
Comment by Donald — 2/15/2006 @ 8:24 pm
didn’t mean to say I did not believe you Donald, only to say that I have not seen it during my extensive experiences with BCR. doesn’t mean there are not people who have said those things about global warming or gay people, just that I have not seen it.
as for people holding those radical beliefs being in prominent positions, you admit that one of them was not a board member (to your knowledge) so you are going to have to explain what you mean by “prominent.” again, I don’t mean to say I don’t believe you, I only ask for clarification.
seriously, I am shocked that there may be people in prominent positions in BCR like that, mostly because I know most of the prominent members (and by prominent, I mean the people who attend the meetings and activities the most) very well and none seem like they are *that* radical, though I do know some who are very conservative (more conservative than me anyway) and who tow the party line completely.
there have been very radical people in our club in the past, but they were few in number, not popular, and certainly not “prominent” by any stretch of the imagination. in my experiences with BCR, extremists are marginalized, though we tend to have a more open atmosphere than you would expect (our in house debates on various issues, the Patriot point/counterpoints are just a few examples I can point to)
Comment by Ben Chapman — 2/15/2006 @ 9:01 pm
Prominent could be defined as holding a title.
Comment by Donald — 2/15/2006 @ 9:08 pm
I think we all know who this prominent, yet unelected person is.
Comment by Dick N. Cider — 2/15/2006 @ 10:31 pm
I hope not. I don’t think its neccessarily obvious.
Comment by Donald — 2/15/2006 @ 10:34 pm
And I never said unelected. I have no idea how appointments work in BCR.
Comment by Donald — 2/15/2006 @ 10:35 pm
nepotism
Comment by Dick N. Cider — 2/15/2006 @ 11:05 pm
General radio comment: Well, the radio portion hasn’t really been finally launched, yet, and the page is still in the process of if its final construction (though, it was shown to the general BCR audience at our last meeting). If there are any features that you think would be of use that are not yet on the site (or will not be), I’d encourage you to contact us via links provided on the site.
With regards to the “Prominent Members”, well, frankly, live and let live. I’ve never actually heard *anyone* say that G-d would stop Global Warming [talk about getting a mouthful from me…. well, I have a lot to say on the subject in general], or that we should round up gays or anything, and I also have a fair level of involvement with the prominent BCR community, both in a professional (webmaster) and personal (many I consider good friends) sense. Honestly, though… who cares? I do know several people that are quite conservative, and not necessarily libertarian, but nevertheless. Furthermore, our internal disparities aside (as Ben aptly points out, we often have in-house debates), the few ‘fringe’ members often find themselves ostracized for their extremist views. Whether this is a good or bad thing is a whole different story, and no doubt somethign worth debate, but I won’t go into it here.
By the way, as a point of information, I consider myself a capitalist, in that I’m a moderate social conservative as well as a strong economic conservative. This is often tempered by my very science-biased view on many things, but overall, I do tend towards social and economic conservativism.
Comment by TigerhawkVok — 2/15/2006 @ 11:06 pm
Honestly that’s such bullshit. There are extreme views (like holocaust denial) and plain old liberal views (secular Christmas) within the club; all that is needed to be accepted is to be a total pushover or kiss-up to people higher in the hierarchy. (aka tool) And that’s all.
Comment by HB — 2/15/2006 @ 11:19 pm
Well, I’m jumping in this one late. A couple points:
For those who know me, I know this club very well. I was Vice President last year. This year I’m the Opinion Editor for the Patriot, and I’m sort of in charge of the Radio endeavor (we’re still in the launching process - we don’t even have official titles quite yet).
We’re a pretty libertarian group. Thinking about the current Patriot editorial board, for example, there are 5 main positions, and I’d say 3 of us would call ourselves libertarian. The other two are both socially and economically conservative.
The BCR board I was on was much the same (hell, its much the same people).
As to the claims that BCR members have extreme views - some do. I’ve never heard anyone in my 2.5 years in this club say anything about global warming and G-d, but I have heard one or two people say some rather…extreme…things about homosexuality - but without giving out names, they aren’t influential people in the club. There was actually a club member who could charitable be called “racist and anti-semitic” (that’s charitable, mind you), but you always attract an extreme, often unwanted element.
You deal with it.
HB - who in BCR has ever denied the Holocaust? Or in the Cal Dems? Or anywhere on this campus?
So, that’s my two cents for now. I am in charge of the Patriot Radio thing, though, so if any of you have any ideas - or want to be involved at all, please drop me a line.
producer@patriotradio.org
Comment by Morbo — 2/16/2006 @ 2:00 am
Just like you said this is the Berkeley campus after all. lol.
Comment by HB — 2/16/2006 @ 8:33 am
“I find the isolationist trend of the Left disturbing”
I never took you for an imperialist, Donald.
Comment by HB — 2/16/2006 @ 4:31 pm
Back when Morbo was giving his speech for VP of BCR, I was in the back of the room holding up a sign that said “Burn Jew!”
Comment by Fresh Prince — 2/16/2006 @ 4:34 pm
Kevin, do you really think that’s funny? I may have laughed at the time at the mere shock you’d do that - but it really wasn’t funny.
You crossed a line, there. And its not easy to cross a line with me.
Comment by Morbo — 2/16/2006 @ 5:55 pm
Morbo, most everyone in the club who saw the sign laughed. I didn’t see it, (since I was busy collecting votes) but found out afterwards that it was what everyone was laughing at. I also remember another member (who ran for treasurer) saying that she wouldn’t horde money like a Jew in her speech. Several very prominant members of BCR laugh and tell racist jokes. It’s no surprise that people laughed at those jokes, and it’s stupid to be ashamed of laughing at racist jokes if they are actually funny.
Come to think about it, even Jews in BCR make fun of Jews.
Comment by cw — 2/16/2006 @ 6:39 pm
Oh and I’ll point out a bit of recent history, since it seems that no one has mentioned it: there have been “moderate” Editor in Chiefs of the Patriot. One that comes to mind is John Cise.
Comment by cw — 2/16/2006 @ 6:41 pm
From my experiences, I don’t think half the people in BCR could even talk extensively about the difference between conservative and libertarian. Most of these people were “libertarian,” but actually thought they were conservative.
If they still support all of George W. Bush’s policies, they’re neither.
Comment by Fresh Prince — 2/16/2006 @ 7:01 pm
If you’re interested in reading more about why, I’d recommend chapters 6 and 7 of pat buchanan’s book - Where the Right Went Wrong: How Neoconservatives Subverted the Reagan Revolution and Subverted the Bush Presidency
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0312341156?v=glance
Basically the main points are
1. Lack of fiscal conservatism
2. trade deficits
3. outsourcing jobs
4. big government a-la FDR style
the 18.6% increase in non-defense discretionary spending for the 107th congress, in 8 adminstrations (http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110004579 )
and I NEVER heard anybody talk about this at a meeting. most members probably dont’ even realize the lack of conservatism republicans have these days.
Comment by Fresh Prince — 2/16/2006 @ 7:13 pm
“we question Bush & present day Republicans all the time, if you’ve been paying attention.”
Beltway Boys?
Comment by HB — 2/16/2006 @ 7:16 pm
Hahaha. True, HB. Many meetings I attended in my last two years seemed like a dumb-down version of the Beltway Boys. It’s funny, during my first two years attending BCR meetings there was plenty of debate. I think the more recent administrations of BCR have castrated the club (at least in comparison to previous years) and driven away the type who would come to meeting prepared to talk policy.
Comment by cw — 2/16/2006 @ 7:22 pm
Listening to any of them talk about policy is like listening to Dick Cheney tell someone about how to aim a gun.
Comment by Fresh Prince — 2/16/2006 @ 7:26 pm
“We” = this blog and to a lesser extent, the magazine. Even you have to admit that, HB.
Comment by patr — 2/16/2006 @ 7:35 pm
I agree with patr about the blog questioning Bush. Though, until recently, the blog=patr. The magazine has been a shame. It disagrees with Bush along the accepted lines (an article or two about the budget/spending) but rarely [if ever] disagrees with Bush on other conservative issues without rebutting in a counter-point. The magazine differs from the blog, though, as it seems patr doesn’t have the editorial constraints that writers have. The editors (in my experience) tend to care most about being partyline Republicans in order to not disappoint donors. I’ve often said that the Patriot should stop claiming to be a conservative publication and just admit that they are a Republican publication.
Comment by cw — 2/16/2006 @ 7:40 pm
amen
Comment by HB — 2/16/2006 @ 8:11 pm
well this year we have people talking policy. good God how many debates have we had? we ask people who want to speak about a certain topic to come prepared with information. I did the NSA spying thing against John. we had one about the death penalty. we had one about marijuana, we had one about fiscal constraint and government spending, and we are having one on stem cell research. and it’s pretty much open; anyone at the meeting can talk about poicy, share information, or just opine. HB, cw, whoever, if you want a substantive debate, come to next week’s meetings, raise your hand, and share your information. no one on the board is stopping you.
what more do you want?
Comment by Ben Chapman — 2/16/2006 @ 8:33 pm
Eh, I don’t think I claimed that the BCR board stopped me from going to meetings…though, I think you know I’ve graduated and have less opportunity to go these days. I think it would be a vast improvement over the last two years if BCRs now talks policy. Considering the leadership, I’m a bit surprised…many of those same members wanted a more social, less political club in the past. Good job to whoever convinced them to change that position.
Comment by cw — 2/16/2006 @ 8:44 pm
I second Ben. Honestly. Your idea of policy talk is agreeing with what you say and what you want, which is precisely the standard Berkeley outlook on policy. We engage in discourse over a range of topics, agree on some, and disagree on others. I’m glad Calabasas banned smoking. Oh, no, I said it. Big deal.
And instead of rhetoric, I encourage anyone to actually discuss with us at the table and find out who agrees with all of Bush’s policies. We have all sorts in the club, and to pretend otherwise is foolish.
Try to remove yourself from your narrow view, and try to be properly immersed. Then you will have grounds on which to comment critically. Until then, acknowledge that you lack information which others possess, and stop complaining about it.
~The atheist Christmas-loving [in all its religoiusness] conservative.
Comment by TigerhawkVok — 2/16/2006 @ 8:47 pm
Not sure who TigerhawkVok is addressing, but up til last May (when I graduated) I was in BCR.
I know what talking policy means…it means actually discussing policy. This is something the club failed to do (and actively avoided doing) during the last two years I was in the club.
As for the rest of your comments: boring and don’t seem to apply to me.
Comment by cw — 2/16/2006 @ 8:51 pm
“I never took you for an imperialist, Donald.”
Given the choice of an empire or chaos, I would choose empire, but that’s of course a false dichotomy.
Comment by Donald — 2/16/2006 @ 9:16 pm
Comment by Morbo — 2/16/2006 @ 9:31 pm
I’m not sure what actions/words you are referring to since current and past leaders in BCR have been known to make racist jokes for a long time on par with anything I’ve ever seen anywhere.
Though I do recall you jokingly telling Amaris about the situation where a sign was held up that said “Burn Jew” during your speech. So I’d suspect you’d taken a few too many ethnic studies classes since then to become offended.
Comment by cw — 2/16/2006 @ 9:43 pm
Is that all you got to fall back on, anti-semitic accusations? It’s the same thing when DAAP calls people (the Patriot) racist. Baseless, paranoid, convenient smear.
Comment by Barry McCociner — 2/16/2006 @ 9:44 pm
Actually I was going to bring that up but forgot to. This is the same sort of accusation campus leftists use against BCR/Patriot. It’s also the same sort of idiotic thing Republicans said when Democrats began objecting to Rice’s nomination to Secretary of State. The race card always gets pulled when someone has a hard time defending themself because it automatically makes their opponent go on the defensive.
Comment by cw — 2/16/2006 @ 9:48 pm
Kevin is a lot of things that I’m strongly opposed to, but I never got the impression that he was anti-semitic.
Comment by Donald — 2/16/2006 @ 9:50 pm
By the way, Morbo, remember that time me, you, CW, RepBlast1984, and a certain member of BCR who I won’t name since he doens’t use an alias, were in public at the super DC telling racist/jewish jokes last year for nearly three hours?
Comment by Fresh Prince — 2/16/2006 @ 9:53 pm
Fresh Prince said: “By the way, Morbo, remember that time me, you, CW, RepBlast1984, and a certain member of BCR who I won’t name since he doens’t use an alias, were in public at the super DC telling racist/jewish jokes last year for nearly three hours?”
I remember that.
Comment by cw — 2/16/2006 @ 9:58 pm
And by the way, the fundamental assumption behind those jokes that they were just that
JOKES
Comment by Fresh Prince — 2/16/2006 @ 9:58 pm
They were also very funny.
Comment by cw — 2/16/2006 @ 10:00 pm
Thanks, Donald btw.
Comment by Fresh Prince — 2/16/2006 @ 10:04 pm
“Actually I was going to bring that up but forgot to. This is the same sort of accusation campus leftists use against BCR/Patriot.”- cw
Well when they read or hear that someone held up a sign saying “Burn Jews” then they are spot-on correct. Did that ever cross your mind? The point is if you’re going to talk-the-talk then be prepared to walk-the-walk. (To anyone who supports this type of public exposure?).
On another topic – how many Republicans are actually in BCR? Should it not be renamed to BCL owing to a real party-line survey?
Comment by what — 2/16/2006 @ 11:14 pm
I think we’re all registered Republicans, or at least Republican-leaning independents. But that doesn’t say a whole lot since we could be anything from a moderate, neocon, paleocon, libertarian, or whatever ideology.
Comment by patr — 2/17/2006 @ 12:00 am
Based on what I’ve read so far, it appears that magazine is composed of mainly libertarians and that the leadership of the BCR is also mostly libertarian. Perhaps you guys should remain yourselves Berkeley College Libertarians?
Is that sort of trend common among other prominent college “Republican” groups?
In all honesty (and I ask this to anyone who can speak on this), what percentage of people do you think joined BCR for the social aspects v. the political shop talk?
Comment by Archangel — 2/17/2006 @ 1:13 am
One would hope. A small bit by Andrew Sullivan on this new generation of conservatives.
There’s already a Libertarian club on campus, affiliated with the actual Libertarian Party. They’re pretty inactive at the moment. But I personally think that trying to make the Republican Party a more libertarian one is the way to go.
Comment by patr — 2/17/2006 @ 1:39 am
what said: “Well when they read or hear that someone held up a sign saying “Burn Jews” then they are spot-on correct. Did that ever cross your mind? The point is if you’re going to talk-the-talk then be prepared to walk-the-walk. (To anyone who supports this type of public exposure?).”
Re-read previous comments, this was already addressed.
Comment by cw — 2/17/2006 @ 10:38 am
The problem with naming them the Berkeley College Libertarians is that it would associate them with the Libertarian party. Nobody likes the Libertarian party.
Comment by Beetle — 2/17/2006 @ 10:47 am
Just for everyone’s clarification, Theta Chi has Chinese, Koreans, whites, blacks, Indians, Armenians, Jews, Hispanics, mixes of Hispanic and Asian, pot-smoker white guys, Filipinos, immigrants, so we’re a very broad diverse group of people. And yes, we’re a jolly group that likes to joke around.
Most peopel in BCR rally around the President which is why I stopped being an active member. It’s hard to be a paleocon while your President does many things you disagree with and still cast the ballot for the President. I now tend to just vote against the party that pisses me off the most, which usually tends to be Democrat.
Comment by RepBast1984 — 2/17/2006 @ 11:09 am
Ethan it makes me angry that you bring up Theta Chi and suggest that we make racist jokes here all the time because it is not true. I have heard people say jokes like that and it was always involving members of BCR. I personally don’t like racial humor , although its funny, and my friends will confirm that I get mad when I hear that. So please be careful with generalizations.
As to holocaust deniers. I know people at BCR who have claimed that holocaust is exagerrated and defend the famous people who hold that view.
Comment by Yuriy Pasko — 2/17/2006 @ 11:44 am
I remember in the fall of last school year some current board memembers were making fun of a black sorority during general meeting. Then they suddenly realized that there was a black girl there and once they saw her they stopped laughing. It was really awkward for them. lol
Comment by HB — 2/17/2006 @ 11:56 am
My comments have been misinterpreted, and that’s likely my fault for not explaining myself well. So let me try again:
I have no problem with people telling racist/jewish/ethnic/any jokes. Doesn’t bother me in the slightest, and as cw and Kevin can attest, I laugh when they’re funny. And they often are.
But, there is a line. And I don’t think its hypocritical or wrong to say “yes, I laughed at it then, and although I admit I see the humor in it, in retrospect, that was over the line.” That’s what I’m saying about Kevin’s joke.
Also, Kevin, I don’t think you’re racist at all. There are some people who have been in BCR and/or OX who I would categorize that way, but Kevin isn’t one of them. It wasn’t intended to come off as such an accusation.
My point was that due to some events that occurred last year and some information I learned, I have become more wary of racist jokes, especially from the OX house. Yuriy, I totally understand you not liking that and defending your friends - that’s fine. I actually know you don’t like racist/ethnic jokes, and I don’t mean to group all of OX together. But without naming people specifically, I just mean to say “some people who live there.” Not everyone.
But (and I don’t think anyone will deny this), there has been an almost complete break between BCR and OX, and it’s because we have mutual difficulties.
I didn’t think the “Burn Jew” thing was offensive, really. But in retrospect, it probably wasn’t a great idea.
PS: I’ve grown very tired of the Jew jokes in BCR (and undeniably many come from Jews) and wish they’d just go away. I don’t find them offensive, just ingratiating.
PPS: I’ve never heard anyone in BCR deny the holocaust - its a discussion I’d like to have, quite frankly.
Comment by Morbo — 2/17/2006 @ 4:50 pm
Comment by Morbo — 2/17/2006 @ 4:51 pm
I have no idea how to use this html stuff apparently…
Comment by Morbo — 2/17/2006 @ 4:52 pm
Ethan said: “Also, Kevin, I don’t think you’re racist at all. There are some people who have been in BCR and/or OX who I would categorize that way, but Kevin isn’t one of them. It wasn’t intended to come off as such an accusation.”
I can’t think of a single person I could seriously justify calling racist who was in BCR and OX. That said, there actually were VERY racist people in BCR and those people were more unwelcome at OX than they ever were at BCR.
As for the board member and the black sorority…I overheard more conversation about the incident at the BCR table than was apparently said at the meeting, and it wasn’t the board member being made fun of.
Comment by cw — 2/18/2006 @ 11:42 am
“Re-read previous comments, this was already addressed”.
Comment by cw — 2/17/2006 @ 10:38 am :
Excuse me, I didn’t mean to direct blame at you cw.
Does anyone else see a difference between “Burn Jew” and lets say a joke like – “big nose/air/free Jew?” I see a big difference. I’m not sure how this was funny? Do the terrorists who also hold up this message “Burn Jew” also think this is just a playful spite? I think this type of behavior should ‘not’ be condoned.
Comment by What — 2/18/2006 @ 3:49 pm
“What” -
It was funny at the time. I laughed at it, and it was directed at me. When your in a group of good friends, and everyone knows your joking, people will laugh.
The only reason its ok if your friend does it is that you know he’s not being serious.
But in retrospect, I think it was too far.
Comment by Morbo — 2/18/2006 @ 4:33 pm
terrorists? lolz
In any case the fact that it is shocking makes it humorous. Dave Chapelle or South Park or most other comedy these days strives to be as offensive as possible, there is no such thing as too far.
Comment by HB — 2/18/2006 @ 4:37 pm
When boundaries are washed away law and order decay.
Comment by what — 2/18/2006 @ 5:58 pm
No I agree, South Park is a bad show, I wish it didn’t exist.
Comment by HB — 2/18/2006 @ 6:41 pm
here is a perfect fucking example of a questionable BCR member.
http://www.myspace.com/bohan
Heroes: “Adolf Hitler”
and on his facebook one of his heroes is David Irving, a HOLOCAUST DENIER.
Comment by reality hamr — 2/19/2006 @ 1:26 pm
HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.
Oh man, that’s funny.
Comment by Fresh Prince — 2/19/2006 @ 1:39 pm
You know, it’s funny, I recently came across an old article by Frank Miele in Skeptic about Holocaust Revisionists that places the issue in an interesting ethical context. That article can be found here.
As for Irving and other revisionists, such as David Cole, it seems that their goals are very much in line with the goals of conservatives in academia and all across the nation; they fight a battle against an opposition that discredits them largely by enforcing political correctness. Whether right or wrong, Holocaust revisionists fight a parallel battle to what I’m sure BCRs fight daily in the classrooms and discussion sections.
Comment by cw — 2/19/2006 @ 5:14 pm
There is a clear difference. Holocaust denial is the abject rejection of a well recorded event.
Classroom liberalism usually takes the form of adopting one opinion over the other unilaterally, and rarely takes the form of denying the existence entire periods of history and against a pile of documentation.
Comment by Anonymous — 2/19/2006 @ 6:23 pm
Anonymous, I suggest re-reading my comment. I clearly showed which parallel exists. And I spoke of revisionism, in general, not Holocaust denial. The questioning of “Jewish soap” for example would have levied some serious anti-Semitic charges, though there’s a near consensus that it never happened.
Let me further clarify that my comment in no way is an endorsement for any position. It’s just an observation that I noted due to someone else’s mention of the subject.
Comment by cw — 2/19/2006 @ 8:16 pm
Thanks for linking to the myspace of that BCR member.
I’ll say it this way: I know Greg Ge (bohan) personally. I consider him a friend, and he’s a great kid. He’s a recent immigrant to America, and is learning to understand the social stigma against Hitler, especially quoting him and admiring his good qualities (as few as I think there may be, the man had something admirable in a Machiavellian political sense)
Greg is in no way anti-Semitic or a Holocaust denier. I will admit that the profile doesn’t look good. I can only tell you that knowing him personally, he’s a very good guy, and a wholly admirable person. His profile is just poorly reflective.
Comment by Morbo — 2/20/2006 @ 1:56 am
Uh, he should learn pretty fast. And including David Irving with Hitler doesn’t exactly bode well for a non-Holocaust denier.
It would be interesting to count the millions killed in his list of heroes.
Comment by Donald — 2/20/2006 @ 2:32 am
he can think what ever the fuck he wants, especially since in China you can be as insensitive as you like, probably
Comment by HB — 2/20/2006 @ 6:52 am
Of course he can think whatever he wants, but if he truly isn’t a Nazi sympathizer/Holocaust denier, the combination of Adolf Hitler and David Irving as idols isn’t doing wonders for his cause.
Comment by Donald — 2/20/2006 @ 9:53 am
why are people hunting individual BCR members online?
Comment by Ben Chapman — 2/20/2006 @ 10:21 am
A tribute to the 5 month anniversary of the passing of Simon Wiesenthal?
Comment by Donald — 2/20/2006 @ 10:49 am
Well I certainly don’t approve, but looking at the rest of his heroes it just seems very naive. Though it is scary, I know, but he’s not a very critical thinker. Looking at his heroes
Goldwater: he seems to be his biggest fan. Funny. If Gold water was elected the Immigration act of ‘65 would probably not go through and he would not be able to come here to America. Ah the irony.
Yuschenko: hah what a bunch of crap
Teddy: Just read the descriptions
no really, I would not hold Hitler or Irving against him, cause it’s just so ridiculous. He seems well liked in BCR, he’s probably a very good footsoldier of the club. He’s still too innocent.
Comment by HB — 2/20/2006 @ 11:21 am
Footsoldier? More like tool, HB.
Comment by ktp — 2/20/2006 @ 11:42 am
I’m not a fan of Greg Ge and I don’t defend having Hitler as a hero, but at the same time, why are people hunting individual BCR members online? do they mean to prove that BCR is a racist organization? or do they mean to prove that BCR has many racists in it? why not, then, hunt other members of other political organizations? the Cal Dems and the Berkeley Stop the War Coalition have some ridiculous members, why not post their online profiles in this blog?
I realize that all people are doing is looking for information online that people stupidly post in their profiles anyway, but still …
am I crazy, or this inappropriate?
Comment by Ben Chapman — 2/20/2006 @ 11:45 am
ok ok. can I ask everyone reading this blog a big favor, man to man?
no personal attacks here, ok? especially against people who have nothing to do with this blog beyond being a regular member of BCR. honestly, if you have to resort to posting peoples profiles here and calling BCR “racist” to prove something, you are out of good ideas anyway.
but even beyond that, let’s act like men, not children.
Comment by Ben Chapman — 2/20/2006 @ 11:48 am
double sssssssssssstandard
“nothing happened, everyoen was on vacation” lolzz
Comment by HB — 2/20/2006 @ 11:50 am
Adolf Hitler used to have a facebook profile at Berkeley, but it must have gotten canceled. Liberals and conservatives were friends with him, so it was almost like a bipartisan coalition.
Comment by Fresh Prince — 2/20/2006 @ 12:29 pm
“but at the same time, why are people hunting individual BCR members online”
What just happened here is hunting in the same way a canned quail hunt with quails in a cage is hunting. Nobody crossreferenced his IP address 7 times removed. No one resorted to hijacking his e-mail. The man posts public profiles on 2 obscure websites known as facebook and myspace. I think its a little useful to know who the resident fans of Hitler are, if only to know to avoid them. If Greg holds a position of import in BCR or ever holds a position of importin BCR, then this will be deserving of more discussion than random banter in the comments section. Until then, let the roosters roost where they lie or whatever hokey phrase you want to use.
“no personal attacks here, ok?”
As if the Patriot has always held that standard.
“calling BCR “racist””
I don’t think anyone has made that claim.
Comment by Donald — 2/20/2006 @ 12:45 pm
Also, I must have missed the memo where posting public profiles is equivalent to a personal attack.
Comment by Donald — 2/20/2006 @ 12:46 pm
It is a personal attack. I admit Greg Ge has only himself to blame for making this public, but regardless, do you really need to call more attention to it? what purpose does that serve? FYI, he does not hold any position in BCR, he’s just regular member.
Comment by Ben Chapman — 2/20/2006 @ 1:35 pm
Ben:” in my experiences with BCR, extremists are marginalized”
Tirgerhawk: “our internal disparities aside (as Ben aptly points out, we often have in-house debates), the few ‘fringe’ members often find themselves ostracized for their extremist views.”
you’ve been beat, just admit it
Comment by HB — 2/20/2006 @ 3:11 pm
From the poor guy’s facebook profile:
Hardly the words of a Nazi sympathizer… I also assume that he respects Hitler solely because of his speaking and leadership skills, not the terrible acts that he accomplished with them. I personally cannot separate a person from his or her qualities. If I respect someone’s ability in something and then find out that he’s a major asshole, then the guy’s dead to me. Some people don’t have this difficulty, I guess.
In any event, the Holocaust-denying historian has been sentenced to 3 years in prison.
Comment by patr — 2/20/2006 @ 3:31 pm
Furthermore, maybe he is just respecting Hitler in the same way the paleocon Pat Buchanan has in the past:
Not my cup of tea, but people are free to believe what they want (at least in America).
Comment by patr — 2/20/2006 @ 3:43 pm
HB: one person does not contradict a general trend. i can point to many other extremists who have been marginalized, but out of respect for them, i wont name them here
Comment by Ben Chapman — 2/20/2006 @ 3:49 pm
I’m going to ask one last time: why are we talking about Greg Ge’s political opinions, and what point does that make, what purpose does that serve, what does it prove? I find this incredibly inappropriate, and this is the last comment I’m going to make on the subject.
Comment by Ben Chapman — 2/20/2006 @ 3:51 pm
that just seems like historical analysis
Comment by HB — 2/20/2006 @ 3:51 pm
yeah I’m sure you can Ben, but make sure you also mention all the mainline republicans, moderates and other centrists who have been marginalized….and that second list will be much longer.
Comment by HB — 2/20/2006 @ 3:55 pm
oh man Irving did get thrown in jail, speak of the devil, hahaha that guy got pwned
Comment by HB — 2/20/2006 @ 4:24 pm
HB: I like how you laugh when someone’s fundamental human rights are violated.
Comment by patr — 2/20/2006 @ 4:39 pm
Irving being thrown in jail is ridiculous. What’s more ridiculous is the fact that so many countries actually have these laws prohibiting any questioning of the Holocaust.
Also Patr, I think what Greg Ge and Pat Buchanan have seemingly said is fine. I fully acknowledge qualities in people/policies I despise all the time, it’s part of being able to analyze complexities in people and events.
Comment by cw — 2/20/2006 @ 5:08 pm
hi everybody!
Well, I have never realized how much of an impact my stupid facebook profile could possibly make. Well, I guess I have learned it the hard way. However, I must take the responsibility of what I have written, and explain why I put the picture of David Irving in my profile.
If you take a look at my list of “heroes”, you might notice that two of them are members of the Chinese Communist Party. Zhou En Lai is probably one of the most influential and the second most popular Chinese Communist of his time. I admire him not because what he believes, but because of his character and diligence. In fact, I determine my “heroes” not because because of their political ideologies, but because of their characters.
The only reason why I put David Irving’s picture in that album is because I am tired of the intellectual intolerance over extremist ideas. The very idea that someone should be put into jail because of his or her believes sickens me.
I cannot disagree more with Irving. He is a neo-Nazi, and personally, I think he is a very evil man. However, he has the courage to stick to his ideas. That is something I truly like. In fact, that is the only reason why I put him in my album of “my heroes”.
And I will repeat myself: “Even though I do not agree with what he says, I will fight to death to defend his right to say it.”
If any of you have any question regarding my beliefs, please e-mail me, call me, or facebook me directly. I do not often go on to the Patriot Blog, and it would be nice if you can challenge me directly, and I will try my best to explain my actions.
Comment by Greg Ge — 2/22/2006 @ 8:54 pm
Well said, Greg.
Comment by cw — 2/22/2006 @ 9:30 pm
“In fact, I determine my “heroes” not because because of their political ideologies, but because of their characters.” -Greg Ge
Hi Greg, I guess you are not a big fan of Deng Xiaopeng or Jiang Zemin?
Comment by what — 2/22/2006 @ 9:56 pm
Well, I am not “a big fan” of either of them, but that does not mean that I don’t like them.
I do admire Deng. He is a brilliant general and an amazing reformer. The fact that he went to jail for his political beliefs is quite inspirational for me.
As for Jiang… I am not sure how politically significant he is. I did spend most of my childhood under his leadership, and I have always failed to see his political genius or his dedication to the country. In fact, when I was in China last summer, I have heard a lot of debates about his character, and his patriotism.
If I put down everyone I like on the facebook, the album “my heroes” would be really, really long.
Comment by Greg Ge — 2/22/2006 @ 11:00 pm
I admire Deng too for the same reason as you. And yes, I have heard about the political debates lately in China, but I have to side with pro-Jiang crowed for his significance in China’s history. He was very instrumental in foreign affairs with the United States (‘90s) – more then most people in China or the US will ever realize. Most of it was secret. I guess Chinese are debating about domestic and regional significance in which I have no understanding and they may have a point there, but I wouldn’t know. He was a genius IMO in US-Sino relations.
Comment by what — 2/23/2006 @ 12:06 am
“If I put down everyone I like on the facebook, the album “my heroes” would be really, really long”. -Greg Ge
lol.
Comment by what — 2/23/2006 @ 12:07 am
Well, I cannot disagree with you on that. He did do a lot for China, and he is “the engineer” of Chinese economic reforms.
However, I cannot agree with two of his acts:
First is his suppression of Falun Gong. I value freedom of religion very highly, and I cannot tolerate his violent suppression over a reglious belief. In fact, one of my middle school teachers was incarcerated for being a follower of Falun Gong, after the police took away all of her possessions.
The second is his pact with Russia. If you look at the map of Northeast China, where Russia, North Korea, and China meet, there used to be a port for the Province of Jilin. That is the only port Jilin has. In 2000, Jiang signed a treaty with Yeltson, and gave that port away to the Russian Federation. (sorry, I only know the name of the treaty in Chinese, that’s why I cannot put it down here) You see, I am a native son of Jilin, and I was very upset that he gave our only port away.
I do recognize Jiang as a powerful political leader, but he came to power only because of the 6/4 political riots, and his entire political platform was pretty much made by Deng.
I know that he is a great politician, but I believe in terms of leadership, Zhao Zi Yang would have been a much better leader than Jiang Ze Min or Lee Peng.
Comment by Greg Ge — 2/23/2006 @ 12:34 am
Please explain how a raw port deal is grounds to remove one from a list of heroes, but mass murder, senseless warmongering, and manipulations of history to pursue a bigoted agenda are not.
Comment by Donald — 2/23/2006 @ 8:25 am
Well, I never really took any interest in Jiang in the first place, and I have never intended to put him in my facebook profile. So I am not sure using the word “remove” is quite correct. As for David Irving, I think I have explained why I put him in my facebook profile in the first place in previous comments.
Let me make myself clear: I am in no way a Nazi, a Nazi sympathizer, or an Anti-Semite. I lack some basic qualifications of being a Nazi/Nazi sympathizer – remember, I am not White – I am Chinese. I do not belong to their “Indo-European” race. In fact, according to Nazism, I am the inferior polluting the face of the earth by my mere existence. If Nazism ever triumphs, you would probably find me either in one of the concentration camps in my hometown, or a slave for the “Aryans”.
Comment by Greg Ge — 2/23/2006 @ 10:51 am