<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &#8220;can you parody someone who was a parody in the first place?&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://habitablezone.com/2015/12/08/can-you-parody-someone-who-was-a-parody-in-the-first-place/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://habitablezone.com/2015/12/08/can-you-parody-someone-who-was-a-parody-in-the-first-place/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2026 01:30:43 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: ER</title>
		<link>https://habitablezone.com/2015/12/08/can-you-parody-someone-who-was-a-parody-in-the-first-place/#comment-34515</link>
		<dc:creator>ER</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2015 13:36:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.habitablezone.com/?p=53496#comment-34515</guid>
		<description>I know it has a history stretching back a lot further, probably all the way to the turn of the century, culminating in the Red Scare and Joe McCarthy.  But that&#039;s when I first noticed it, probably because I was just becoming politically aware as a senior in high school.

No doubt the Civil Rights movement kicked it off, particularly in the Deep South where I lived.  But it came to my attention in the form of the John Birch Society, and later in the candidacy of Barry Goldwater.  The philosophy was laid out in a popular screed of the time &quot;None Dare Call it Treason&quot; by John Stormer.

Conservatism used to be a movement which argued for lower taxes, less government, a strong national defense, free enterprise, law and order and personal self-reliance.  Nothing wrong with that, it was an ethos anybody could feel comfortable with and which was never really in question.  Only where one drew the line, and how strongly one leaned across it, was an issue.  Conservatives used to want the same things we did, they just went about it differently.  Our differences were one of degree, not kind.  

But starting in the 60s, that started to change.  Maybe it was Civil Rights, maybe it was the Beatles, maybe it was just because that was when I started paying attention.  But now, I feel my Vulcan-like detachment severely challenged.  I keep on fishing for metaphors in early twentieth century fascist European politics, and I keep on seeing parallels.

I used to think I would be too old when the catastrophic change of state you alluded to came to be affected by it.  Now I&#039;m not so sure.  Thanks for the ghost story, but please don&#039;t put out the fire.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I know it has a history stretching back a lot further, probably all the way to the turn of the century, culminating in the Red Scare and Joe McCarthy.  But that&#8217;s when I first noticed it, probably because I was just becoming politically aware as a senior in high school.</p>
<p>No doubt the Civil Rights movement kicked it off, particularly in the Deep South where I lived.  But it came to my attention in the form of the John Birch Society, and later in the candidacy of Barry Goldwater.  The philosophy was laid out in a popular screed of the time &#8220;None Dare Call it Treason&#8221; by John Stormer.</p>
<p>Conservatism used to be a movement which argued for lower taxes, less government, a strong national defense, free enterprise, law and order and personal self-reliance.  Nothing wrong with that, it was an ethos anybody could feel comfortable with and which was never really in question.  Only where one drew the line, and how strongly one leaned across it, was an issue.  Conservatives used to want the same things we did, they just went about it differently.  Our differences were one of degree, not kind.  </p>
<p>But starting in the 60s, that started to change.  Maybe it was Civil Rights, maybe it was the Beatles, maybe it was just because that was when I started paying attention.  But now, I feel my Vulcan-like detachment severely challenged.  I keep on fishing for metaphors in early twentieth century fascist European politics, and I keep on seeing parallels.</p>
<p>I used to think I would be too old when the catastrophic change of state you alluded to came to be affected by it.  Now I&#8217;m not so sure.  Thanks for the ghost story, but please don&#8217;t put out the fire.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert</title>
		<link>https://habitablezone.com/2015/12/08/can-you-parody-someone-who-was-a-parody-in-the-first-place/#comment-34513</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2015 07:37:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.habitablezone.com/?p=53496#comment-34513</guid>
		<description>Geez, that just popped up from about 55 years ago. Civil War ditty or something?  [edit: How&#039;s this for a better title: &quot;Shriekin&#039; Goober Pleas!&quot;]

But that&#039;s not my point. I think I&#039;m saying generally the same thing when I say it&#039;s not Trump personally, rather he&#039;s currently the key that best fits the lock of the pounding hearts of America&#039;s right wing authoritarians; and that Trump could be replaced by an approximation in the same demagogic ballpark.

But the incremental process of radicalization is interesting, and probably a good description of what we&#039;ve seen over the last few decades as the Republican Party&#039;s been driven ever-rightward. It proceeded by degrees, one degree of right rudder making possible the next. They built their mob on the shoulders of midgets, politicians and pundits panderers all.

There&#039;s no better illustration of your incremental thesis than to hearken back to long ago May, just before Trump jumped in. The Rest of The Pack was yipping and snarling like junkyard dogs, pandering just as viciously, back then attacking gays and gay marriage and voting rights and Iran, with bombs. In their heads. All of them, Katie.

We do live in interesting times. Try for Vulcan-like detachment when you ponder 2016: You may well have a ringside seat at a momentous historical event, watching a chaotic society making the sudden transition from one metastable state to another, radically different state.

We&#039;ve seen a lot of those over the course of more than half a century. With 20/20 hindsight, I realize that these epochal events have been getting closer and closer the whole time. Catastrophic change may yet turn out not to be something that just happens to other people, and other countries. I&#039;m hearing footsteps behind us, getting closer.

And that&#039;s your ghost story for tonight. Time to douse the campfire. [zip]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Geez, that just popped up from about 55 years ago. Civil War ditty or something?  [edit: How's this for a better title: "Shriekin' Goober Pleas!"]</p>
<p>But that&#8217;s not my point. I think I&#8217;m saying generally the same thing when I say it&#8217;s not Trump personally, rather he&#8217;s currently the key that best fits the lock of the pounding hearts of America&#8217;s right wing authoritarians; and that Trump could be replaced by an approximation in the same demagogic ballpark.</p>
<p>But the incremental process of radicalization is interesting, and probably a good description of what we&#8217;ve seen over the last few decades as the Republican Party&#8217;s been driven ever-rightward. It proceeded by degrees, one degree of right rudder making possible the next. They built their mob on the shoulders of midgets, politicians and pundits panderers all.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s no better illustration of your incremental thesis than to hearken back to long ago May, just before Trump jumped in. The Rest of The Pack was yipping and snarling like junkyard dogs, pandering just as viciously, back then attacking gays and gay marriage and voting rights and Iran, with bombs. In their heads. All of them, Katie.</p>
<p>We do live in interesting times. Try for Vulcan-like detachment when you ponder 2016: You may well have a ringside seat at a momentous historical event, watching a chaotic society making the sudden transition from one metastable state to another, radically different state.</p>
<p>We&#8217;ve seen a lot of those over the course of more than half a century. With 20/20 hindsight, I realize that these epochal events have been getting closer and closer the whole time. Catastrophic change may yet turn out not to be something that just happens to other people, and other countries. I&#8217;m hearing footsteps behind us, getting closer.</p>
<p>And that&#8217;s your ghost story for tonight. Time to douse the campfire. [zip]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ER</title>
		<link>https://habitablezone.com/2015/12/08/can-you-parody-someone-who-was-a-parody-in-the-first-place/#comment-34512</link>
		<dc:creator>ER</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 2015 04:32:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.habitablezone.com/?p=53496#comment-34512</guid>
		<description>I cannot stress this too much.  We must not react too gleefully at our discovery of Trump&#039;s flaws, or even at the realization of his own party of his contradictions and inconsistencies.  Whoever follows him will not only be servicing the same constituency (with the same ultimate goals in mind) but he will be equipped with the knowledge of exactly where Trump went too far.  

Trump has shown them the way through the minefield, Those who follow won&#039;t make the same mistakes, and they will get much further than he did. There may even be other Trumps to step on more mines.  And when you see their program, you&#039;ll see it only stops just short of his.  Rubio, Cruz and Carson have already made statements regarding Muslims that were just short of what Trump proposed.

No, I&#039;m not claiming there&#039;s an organized conspiracy to conduct a coup d&#039;etat and Trump was the point man.  That would actually be easier to guard against than what is actually happening.  This is an evolutionary process, a form of natural selection, as each successive candidate presses the Conservative agenda as far as he can until it hits an insurmountable obstacle or bitter resistance.  The next one will stop just short of that point.   The final result will be the maximum reactionary program that the political process and the electorate can tolerate.  The campaign has a year to go before the nominee is picked.  That&#039;s plenty of time to fine-tune their side, while Hillary waits for the other shoe to drop.

We are one health issue, one economic crisis, one military reverse, one political scandal, perhaps even one natural disaster away from someone just short of Mr Trump in the White House, and he will have majorities in the House and Senate.

I have a very bad feeling about 2016.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I cannot stress this too much.  We must not react too gleefully at our discovery of Trump&#8217;s flaws, or even at the realization of his own party of his contradictions and inconsistencies.  Whoever follows him will not only be servicing the same constituency (with the same ultimate goals in mind) but he will be equipped with the knowledge of exactly where Trump went too far.  </p>
<p>Trump has shown them the way through the minefield, Those who follow won&#8217;t make the same mistakes, and they will get much further than he did. There may even be other Trumps to step on more mines.  And when you see their program, you&#8217;ll see it only stops just short of his.  Rubio, Cruz and Carson have already made statements regarding Muslims that were just short of what Trump proposed.</p>
<p>No, I&#8217;m not claiming there&#8217;s an organized conspiracy to conduct a coup d&#8217;etat and Trump was the point man.  That would actually be easier to guard against than what is actually happening.  This is an evolutionary process, a form of natural selection, as each successive candidate presses the Conservative agenda as far as he can until it hits an insurmountable obstacle or bitter resistance.  The next one will stop just short of that point.   The final result will be the maximum reactionary program that the political process and the electorate can tolerate.  The campaign has a year to go before the nominee is picked.  That&#8217;s plenty of time to fine-tune their side, while Hillary waits for the other shoe to drop.</p>
<p>We are one health issue, one economic crisis, one military reverse, one political scandal, perhaps even one natural disaster away from someone just short of Mr Trump in the White House, and he will have majorities in the House and Senate.</p>
<p>I have a very bad feeling about 2016.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
