tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2840508226007630755.post2398257998308588178..comments2023-04-16T23:43:11.235+08:00Comments on Mirror Signal Move: Nathan NovakMike Faganhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08745281285031316740noreply@blogger.comBlogger18125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2840508226007630755.post-46691542616086403932010-09-25T23:49:13.987+08:002010-09-25T23:49:13.987+08:00Yeah, that sounds about right. I used to live in t...Yeah, that sounds about right. I used to live in that area as well.Nathan W. Novak (李漢聲)https://www.blogger.com/profile/09142094539803664003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2840508226007630755.post-67080755504466044472010-09-25T12:59:45.033+08:002010-09-25T12:59:45.033+08:00Apology accepted. As to whether we've met at t...Apology accepted. As to whether we've met at the Casbar, the answer is probably yes, but my memory is vague - nothing to do with alcohol, just that it was what, two years ago, maybe? I used to live in Niaosong and I would hang out with Eric there from time to time.Mike Faganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08745281285031316740noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2840508226007630755.post-37637749273071103442010-09-24T22:06:05.939+08:002010-09-24T22:06:05.939+08:00Responded, but it won't post. Tired of writing...Responded, but it won't post. Tired of writing. Anyway, please don't mistake my discussion of racial superiority with my support for it. I reject it, too. That, however, was not part of my comment.<br /><br />I probably am thin-skinned, at least when I feel I'm being accused of stealing your thunder or whatever when my reason for mentioning your letter in my own letter was merely to point out that I thought it was worth mentioning. I hope you think better of my intentions in the future. <br /><br />I think we've met at the Casbar (or what used to be the Casbar) near Cheng-qing Lake. <br /><br />Oh, and I don't think you are uneducated. I could only say "seem" because I don't know exactly what your education is. But note that I did respond to you and not to Mark Rawson since I thought your comments would be far more interesting to _TT_ readers than his. <br /><br />I do appreciate criticism. I think this is more of a misunderstanding than anything (you may have misunderstood my intent, and I certainly misinterpreted your tone). For my part in that, I apologize.Nathan W. Novak (李漢聲)https://www.blogger.com/profile/09142094539803664003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2840508226007630755.post-28983641412952892432010-09-24T20:02:41.705+08:002010-09-24T20:02:41.705+08:00This comment has been removed by the author.Nathan W. Novak (李漢聲)https://www.blogger.com/profile/09142094539803664003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2840508226007630755.post-3602769665195991982010-09-24T19:18:12.218+08:002010-09-24T19:18:12.218+08:00Leaving your apparent animosity toward me aside, I...Leaving your apparent animosity toward me aside, I'll respond to your substantive comments...<br /><br /><i>"Tell that to individuals and groups targeted by the Nazis and the Japanese."</i><br /><br />Sure, but speaking to victims of Imperial Japan or Nazi Germany is a very different context with different values in play to writing in the Taipei Times to make public your views on China's political economy. <br /><br /><i>"Fascism is a political ideology which has nationalist socialism or heavy state investment in the economy as a characteristic. Communism is also a political ideology with socialism as a characteristic. I'm getting the feeling you are conflating political ideology with economic systems. One can have a socialist economy without, say, a communist political system."</i><br /><br />For how long? You are absolutely right that I am conflating political ideology with economic system; I believe that focusing attention on the intersecting principles of political and economic action as <i>political economy</i> carries far more import to acting for the value of freedom than does dawdling about with taxonomic distinctions. <br /><br /><i>"This state investment in the Japanese economy has never been abolished, yet Japan is no longer considered fascist today."</i><br /><br />No longer considered fascist by whom? For myself I do indeed consider it fascist, though if called upon to distinguish it from the Japan of the 1940s, I might modify my description of today's system in Japan as "soft" fascism. (But I am not overly interested in Japan).<br /><br />Because I think in conflated terms of political economy with a very narrow focus on the principles of action, it is not necessary to me to submit my understanding of any particular country to the names commonly attributed to its' system (or not) by others. Words like "communist" or "fascist" mean things to be sure and there are distinctions to be drawn between them, but those distinguishing aspects become more or less salient depending on the context of action. So although I believe Japan to be under a kind of fascism, I have no need to go around trumpeting that view to the world. <br /><br /><i>"the state is the government is the Party is the country is the people. This is done with a purpose in China. This can be said of communism in general. It can also be said about fascism in general."</i><br /><br />Sure. I don't disagree, I just consider this obvious, i.e. anyone surprised at that or taking exception to that (e.g. Mark Rawson) wants their head examining.<br /><br /><i>"I'm not a fascist, a communist, a social-democrat, a liberal democrat, or any of the sort."</i><br /><br />Nor have I actually accused you of being any of those things - I merely questioned.<br /><br /><i>"I apologize if you find my topic of study and work "[un]interest[ing]." I will cease commenting on your blog if you do so long as belittling statements such as "Some people, eh?" no longer appear in reference to me personally."</i><br /><br />I want no apology from you for <i>that</i>. But getting back to the subject of your strange and unwarranted animosity toward me, I do have an adjective just for you. Are you ready? Brace yourself...<br /><br />"Thin-skinned."Mike Faganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08745281285031316740noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2840508226007630755.post-71722356152973899712010-09-24T17:48:50.460+08:002010-09-24T17:48:50.460+08:00Where do I start with you...?
First it was strang...Where do I start with you...?<br /><br />First it was strange that you thought I was upset by your letter, but that you seem to have become upset yourself when I explained to you that <i>I</i> wasn't upset is even stranger still; I haven't yet said a word in hostility, arrogance or sarcasm to you. The questions I put to you earlier - even the stuff about your name - are genuine questions to which I am somewhat curious to know the answers. <br /><br />Anyway, for what it's worth...<br /><br /><i>"...you bypass some issues as worthy of simple "reject[ion]" without explaining why you "reject" them..."</i><br /><br />My purposes in writing are my own - until I accept writing as a form of paid employment, I do not owe anybody explanations for my opinions. That stricture on expression may exist in the Universities, but this isn't a University. And as it happens I am surprised that you would want an explanation for why I reject any notion of "racial supremacy" - I don't give a damn about anyone's "ethnic identity" because it just doesn't have any a-priori import to my thinking and action vis-a-vis other people (e.g. exchanges of value). <br /><br /><i>"However, telling others that their discussion topics are essentially below you, passing their points as worthy of a mere "reject[ion],"...</i><br /><br />To reject an argument, premise or value held by another just means to disagree with it. <br /><br /><i>"...snide comments about how someone makes reference to how his own name is used..."</i><br /><br />They weren't snide comments, they were questions. What's the matter with you?<br /><br /><i>"...if you are as educated as you seem and as educated as you'd like everyone to believe you are..."</i><br /><br />I have long been resigned to the fact that most people will think I'm a "stoopid redneck" or some such, so I don't actually care an awful lot. <br /><br /><i>"You can call others "stupid," as you do Mark Rawson, but for others to simply no longer wish to comment or be raked through the mud on your personal blog is also unacceptable.</i><br /><br />Oh, but Rawson is stupid - and you know, he apparently doesn't think too highly of you. Whereas I on the other hand have shown you nothing but courtesy, albeit perhaps a little too austere to your tastes; I am not "raking you through the mud" and if you do not want to comment, you are perfectly free to refrain from doing so. <br /><br />I may comment again later, but I have things to do.Mike Faganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08745281285031316740noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2840508226007630755.post-14333790073761399712010-09-24T13:25:52.792+08:002010-09-24T13:25:52.792+08:00It could be said that racial issues--although you ...It could be said that racial issues--although you "reject" racial issues from the beginning (with no explanation, although you accept cultural issues likewise with no explanation)--were not a major issue in Soviet Russia or Mao's China. That's debatable. If they were, however, what does this say about the relationship between fascism and communism? If they were not, what does this say about China's system today? You can go to xinhuanet.com or chinadaily.com (both can be accessed in English) and see the blending of the Communist Party, the Chinese state, and Chinese society there: the Party would have most people believe it does not exercise control over the state apparatus, but it does; the state is the government (i.e., the state is the government is the Party), and that the state is the government is the Party is the country is the people. This is done with a purpose in China. This can be said of communism in general. It can also be said about fascism in general.<br /><br />I'm not advocating anything in particular. I'm not a fascist, a communist, a social-democrat, a liberal democrat, or any of the sort. I'm simply attempting to find some form of clarity when it comes to approaching Chinese politics and economics. This is what I do. I apologize if you find my topic of study and work "[un]interest[ing]." I will cease commenting on your blog if you do so long as belittling statements such as "Some people, eh?" no longer appear in reference to me personally.Nathan W. Novak (李漢聲)https://www.blogger.com/profile/09142094539803664003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2840508226007630755.post-57349858479158409482010-09-24T12:58:43.138+08:002010-09-24T12:58:43.138+08:00"The common aspect to both National Socialism..."The common aspect to both National Socialism and Soviet Socialism to make both salient and radiantly clear there is not the racial nonsense, but the Socialism so often apparent even under constitutional and/or democratic government." <br /><br />Tell that to individuals and groups targeted by the Nazis and the Japanese. Fascism is a political ideology which has nationalist socialism or heavy state investment in the economy as a characteristic. Communism is also a political ideology with socialism as a characteristic. I'm getting the feeling you are conflating political ideology with economic systems. One can have a socialist economy without, say, a communist political system.<br /><br />As mentioned very early on, the goal of the articles was to compare aspects of fascism--political ideology, of which nationalist socialism is a characteristic--to the current political status of China. You can find it uninteresting. That does not bother me one bit, actually. But how political ideology becomes synonymous with a particular economic system is beyond me. Imperial Japan, although often characterized as fascist, was not socialist, although a great deal of its heavy industry was nationalized or invested in by the state. This state investment in the Japanese economy has never been abolished, yet Japan is no longer considered fascist today. I think it is very difficult to equate fascism with any particular economic system, although the tendecy is for a fascist state to either have a state socialist economic policy or to have heavy state investment in the market economy as a characteristic. This was my argument from the beginning. That is evidently not so "salient and radiantly clear," as you say, evidently.Nathan W. Novak (李漢聲)https://www.blogger.com/profile/09142094539803664003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2840508226007630755.post-25548844520200522692010-09-24T12:44:46.467+08:002010-09-24T12:44:46.467+08:00This comment has been removed by the author.Nathan W. Novak (李漢聲)https://www.blogger.com/profile/09142094539803664003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2840508226007630755.post-91143312775912210462010-09-24T12:11:05.925+08:002010-09-24T12:11:05.925+08:00Some people, eh?Some people, eh?Mike Faganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08745281285031316740noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2840508226007630755.post-33916499478774771362010-09-24T08:43:32.674+08:002010-09-24T08:43:32.674+08:00On the contrary, there is not a single trace of ar...On the contrary, there is not a single trace of arrogance, sarcasm or hostility in my comment to you at all.Mike Faganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08745281285031316740noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2840508226007630755.post-69596462387930139532010-09-24T08:24:14.553+08:002010-09-24T08:24:14.553+08:00I see my mistake: thinking I'd be met by anyth...I see my mistake: thinking I'd be met by anything but arrogance, sarcasm, and hostility. You deserve "a polite applause" for your "fireworks," but such things go poof and boom and then are gone forever. This is simply not worth anyone's time.Nathan W. Novak (李漢聲)https://www.blogger.com/profile/09142094539803664003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2840508226007630755.post-68988414642096168552010-09-23T23:37:36.818+08:002010-09-23T23:37:36.818+08:00I guess you had some technical glitches commenting...I guess you had some technical glitches commenting there (Blogger spammed your two comments for some reason - if there was a third, it's nothing to do with me). <br /><br />OK first off, I didn't take offense at all to your mention of me - rather, let's say my <i>interest</i> was piqued by two rather different things, the first being the apparent irrelevance of the content of your letter to the content of mine; it seems to have the form of an argumentative response but it doesn't really respond - at least not in a way I could readily grasp (though perhaps you can enlighten me on that score). The second thing was your apparent advancement of premises which I often commit myself to refuting - online (e.g. Turton's joint), in the Taipei Times and in person (in Tainan and Kaohsiung). Perhaps you could further refine future efforts at elucidating the premises advanced by others in China without appearing to do so youself...<br /><br /><i>"The point I attempted to make is that as China celebrates its "victory," it does not--or, rather, cannot--grapple with the idea that extreme leftist and extreme rightist political ideologies are, when put into practice, quite similar."</i><br /><br />Sure - you can have a polite applause for that, but I would suggest to you (and your choice of "attempted" seems to be an implicit admission) that you had failed to make the point clearly. The common aspect to both National Socialism and Soviet Socialism to make both salient and radiantly clear there is not the racial nonsense, but the Socialism so often apparent even under constitutional and/or democratic government. <br /><br />As to the people at the Taipei Times, I believe the only reason they publish me at all is because they like fireworks. <br /><br /><i>"No one using my name has ever directed any negativity at you.</i><br /><br />You let other people use your name? Is "Novak" your 'nom de guerre'?Mike Faganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08745281285031316740noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2840508226007630755.post-60153470387054148912010-09-23T21:40:52.466+08:002010-09-23T21:40:52.466+08:00Conflating race and culture, Mr. Fagan, is not wha...Conflating race and culture, Mr. Fagan, is not what I have been doing. If you read any mainland newspapers, you will see this front and center. (Indeed, sociologists often reject "race" in favor of "ethnicity." But Hitler had no problem conflating the Aryan "race" with German culture.) It's not mine to conflate.<br /><br />The point I attempted to make is that as China celebrates its "victory," it does not--or, rather, cannot--grapple with the idea that extreme leftist and extreme rightist political ideologies are, when put into practice, quite similar. These are two things, again, I myself do not "conflate." I apologize if that is uninteresting to you. Some political scientists find it quite interesting. <br /><br />Moreover, no part of either article was directed in any negative way towards you. I made sure--you can ask the "Timid Times" yourself--that the editorial staff there took pains to make it as friendly as possible. I mentioned you as someone offering input on the subject. I thought your input deserved mention. I don't see why that is offensive to you. You can find my article "not especially interest[ing]"; that's not a problem. But you could be a bit more "civil" on your own blog from time to time. No one using my name has ever directed any negativity at you.Nathan W. Novak (李漢聲)https://www.blogger.com/profile/09142094539803664003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2840508226007630755.post-29665662359182779922010-09-23T20:46:45.149+08:002010-09-23T20:46:45.149+08:00This comment has been removed by the author.Nathan W. Novak (李漢聲)https://www.blogger.com/profile/09142094539803664003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2840508226007630755.post-64077317908595926682010-09-23T20:42:44.656+08:002010-09-23T20:42:44.656+08:00This comment has been removed by the author.Nathan W. Novak (李漢聲)https://www.blogger.com/profile/09142094539803664003noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2840508226007630755.post-60555670847723559012010-09-17T16:51:16.288+08:002010-09-17T16:51:16.288+08:00Well certainly for some supposedly civil instituti...Well certainly for some supposedly civil institutions and businesses, there are parallel operations run by people connected to the temple gangsters.Mike Faganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08745281285031316740noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2840508226007630755.post-57679195319332226242010-09-17T10:40:51.678+08:002010-09-17T10:40:51.678+08:00I sometimes think that there is something to the n...I sometimes think that there is something to the notion that China is a civilization, masquerading as a nation-state.The Sanity Inspectorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04808433661634318393noreply@blogger.com