83 thoughts on “Monday Message Board

  1. By the way, I don’t hate christians. Its more a case of love the dangerous nutcases, hate the nuts.

  2. @Michael of Summer Hill

    … but who would have thought that in 1937, at the age of 46, Antonio Gramsci accepted Christianity in death.

    Not I. The claim is purely a fascist-catholic exercise in verballing an honest leftist in an attempt to strengthen the Italian state.

    This claim derives from the attempt of the Catholic Church to slander a leftist imprisoned under fascism. Gramsci, muted in prison, cannot speak for himself from the grave.

    The fact remains that the records of the Italian state don’t record any visit from a priest to Gramsci, so Luigi de Magistris’s claim must be a vicious lie.

  3. Fran Barlow, initially there were rumours that Gramsci reverted to Christianity and I have no reason to doubt Archbishop Luigi De Magistris word.

  4. Update, Update, Update, latest reports suggest the mining sector is toning down its tough stance and ready to engage with the Federal government over Resources Rent Tax.

  5. @Michael of Summer Hill

    initially there were rumours that Gramsci reverted to Christianity and I have no reason to doubt Archbishop Luigi De Magistris word.

    This is the wrong way to look at it. In the absence of positive evidence, and especially when one may presume a pecuniary (or as in this case) a political interest in lying you must have an adequate reason to believe someone’s witness. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and Gramsci rejected metaphysics for his entire political life. It seems utterly improbable that Gramsci would wish to be recalled as disavowing his life’s work. This is nothing but a shabby attempt to murder his memory.

    Coming as it does from an officer of a large scale and well resourced criminal syndicate, perhaps the biggest on the planet and in the absence of corroboration from the fascists at the time, there are persuasive reasons for treating this as self-serving mendacity.

  6. Fran Barlow, untill the Italian State opennly denies Archbishop Luigi De Magistris word, then I have no reason to disbelieve the Archbishop for it was known that an elderly nun who cared for Gramsci reported a conversion.

  7. @Michael of Summer Hill

    You are reversing the onus of proof here. An extraordinary claim has been made by those with an ideological interest in slander. Saying that someone unnamed has claimed that some “elderly nun reported a conversion” is non-specific hearsay at several removes. It doesn’t amount to what would be needed to sustain such a slander.

    Either put up robust evidence or admit that it is mere scurrilous rumour spread by the longest standing criminal organisation in human history.

  8. @Fran Barlow

    I’d have to agree with Fran. The self serving word of some delusional elderly nun, a member of an evil cult with a two millennia history of crimes against humanity, and of the cult hierarchy. Not exactly irrefutable evidence.

  9. @smiths

    Landowners are a heterogenous group lacking organisational discipline and executive continuity. There is no central landowners council instructing landowners how to deal with others or appointing new landowners to take over the remits of old landowners, so no, Smiths, while they may as individuals be guilty of crimes against the commons, and conspire to protect those interests they are not a criminal syndicate in the sense that the Catholic Church is.

  10. @Freelander

    Not exactly irrefutable evidence.

    Not any evidence at all. It is not even clear that the nun or the claim exists, except in the mind of MOSH. Why he would be keen on Berlusconi’s witness on anything is also something with which he could amuse us all.

  11. Fran Barlow@#5 said:

    This claim derives from the attempt of the Catholic Church to slander a leftist imprisoned under fascism.

    The ironic thing is that if Gramsci had not been imprisoned he would have fled to the USSR where he would undoubtedly have been Gulaged and shot in quick time. So the fascists probably extended his life expectancy. They were also good enough to give him writing materials so he could continue the long and honourable tradition of political dissidents prison memoirs. Russell, Bonhoefer…er…Hitler. Well, mostly honourable.

    It must be conceded that the Italian fascists were not all bad, excesses of the Abyssinian adventure notwithstanding. They were always more Italian is substance and fascistic in style. They never went in a big way into concentrations camps, secret police, area bombing, ethnic cleansing or mass purges. Such a splendid railway station at Milan.

    My father had some time for them, and he was a partisan. According to him their biggest mistake was allying with the Tedeschi.

  12. Fran Barlow@ #8 & #14 said:

    Coming as it does from an officer of a large scale and well resourced criminal syndicate, perhaps the biggest on the planet and in the absence of corroboration from the fascists at the time, there are persuasive reasons for treating this as self-serving mendacity.

    Whereas we can take the word of Gramsci’s Communist apologists at face value, perish the thought that they would ever bend the truth for political purposes. No “self-serving mendacity” from that quarter, not on your nellie!

    I am interested in your characterisation of the Catholic Church as a “criminal syndicate, perhaps the biggest on the planet…the longest standing criminal organisation in human history”. The comments policy on this blog forbids “racist and sexist” comments, with a rather expansive definition of those classifications. But there is no regulation of religious vilification, which I gather is the intent of your statement. So I guess it passes muster.

    I wonder if you, or Pr Q, would have any objection to describing Islamics as “towel-headed camel-jockeys”, Judaics as “tax-avoiding parasites” or any of the other of the sectarian stereotypes that have been doing the rounds these past thousand years or so. Just askin’.

  13. Jack,

    Can I distract you from your impression of the “it’s only a flesh wound” Monty Python knight for just one second to ask… “Judaics”? And did you just suggest that someone else was indulging in ethnic slurs?

  14. @Jack Strocchi

    For someone who claims to understand nuance, your response above is embarrassing. I have not vilified individual adherents of catholic doctrine as criminal in virtue of their doctrine or religious affiliation as yanyone folowing your references to Jews and Muslims would have been.

    It is my view that the Catholic Church is a criminal organisation regardless of its ostensible doctrine. The doctrine is an artefact of their organisational solidarity and their need to recruit new foot soldiers.

  15. Neil@ #19 said:

    Can I distract you from your impression of the “it’s only a flesh wound” Monty Python knight for just one second to ask… “Judaics”?

    If “Judaic” is now considered an “ethnic slur” then I guess we may as well walk around in sack cloth and eat ashes for everything we do is a sin. Political correctness gone mad.

    Neil said:

    And did you just suggest that someone else was indulging in ethnic slurs?

    I did not “suggest that someone else was indulging in ethnic slurs”. I quoted Fran Barlow’s multiple uses of a sectarian stereotype. One that is now pretty common on Left-liberal web sites and media. Which would not be tolerated if directed at Muslims or Jews. But apparently Catholic Christians are fair game. Some religions are more equal than others, it appears.

    It should go without saying, but does not in the wilfully obtuse world of blogging, that I quote these sectarian slurs in order to deplore, rather than deploy, them. But liberal use of “scare quotation marks” would not stop a reader bent on disingenuity.

  16. Enough! I haven’t got time to police things as closely as I would like, but can everyone please steer clear of religious and ethnic disputes, and stop the inter-commenter slanging matches.

    In particular, regardless of where it started, please stop the discussion of Gramsci, Catholicism etc.

    For any further comments in this thread, please indicate the topic you are talking about and avoid anything that might be construed as criticism of other commenters. If you can’t make your point with reference to the issues alone, please save it for later.

  17. ‘Judaic’ is an adjective. It is commonly insulting to use adjectives as nouns. Ask an autistic or a schizophrenic. I shouldn’t have responded to this, and I won’t again. It is so dispiriting. I shouldn’t even read the comments (ditto). I should add that Jack is far from the worst of it.

  18. Fine with me PrQ. Now that the initial vicious slur has been refuted and its etiology established, we can and should move on.

  19. My first blog for today

    It seems these politcal Sites purpose is abused as a front for zealot Christan-hating Athiests to blog , and whose sole claim to infamy is intolerant slur posts attacking religon

    How shalow , a branch of Athiest religion which solely beleives in no religion sort of a “Claytons religion” & needs to vent its hate

    I supose given per latest Polls 81% of aussies say tyhery’re culturaly religious , and a further 8% hav no opinion either way , it leaves remaining 11% feeling impotent , and so i guess there frustration at there irlevanse is vented in blogs

    Amusing that this pitiful branch of Athiesm is usualy th fringe left liberal progresives Grouping… Yet th stark contradiction is they claim to be ‘left’ , but concurently display lack of toleranse and then furthermore happily vilify (yet claim vilifying aginst othr Groups is indecent)

    Michael of Summer Hill #49

    Libs Assylum Agenda
    “Ron, I am only querying Tony Abbott’s convictions and not those of others”.

    Michael I do not query his convictons at all Tony Abbotts Assylum polisy and indeed that of majority Lib Party MHR’s in total , is obviously not influencd one iota that some ar religious and a few ar Athiests

    This Lib polisy simply reflects a combination of 1/ consevative Lib beliefs for oz security & harmony that far more harm than good will happen unless tough deterent measures ar taken to stop a ‘flood’ , and 2/ polital benefits in holding there votin base plus gaining swing voters thru scaring them/appeal to prejudise

    Now point 1/ Lib beliefs is ALSO adopted over many Lib polisy areas so no suprise
    Whereas Labors polisy on Assylum as with many Labor polisy areas from Taxation shares to IR Workchoises to Schools to Hospitals etc conflicts because it is influenced by sosial equity , humane , and a non privilege fair go

    I am not sure as a rsult whether my judgement of Abbott & Libs Party ‘convictions’ for there indecent assylum seeker polisy is more or equaly harsh as yours seeimg ypu question th ‘convictions’ whereas I dont question th convictons but dont like th ‘convictions’ philosphy core logic

  20. Oops sorry JQ – Im not responsible for this ugliness here (not me this time) but I posted two posts on the one thread heading in one day on the early retirement thing. So sorry.

  21. Fran Barlow & Freelander, I now ask you to provide primary evidence whereby the Italian State has refuted Archbishop Luigi De Magistris claim.

  22. Update, Update, Update, the Rudd government will be pleased to hear Australia has recorded the first trade surplus in 13 months whereby exports jumped by 11 per cent in April and positive contribution tothe trade balance of goods and services surplus worth $134 million.

  23. Update, Update, Update, according to the latest reports Petro Giorgiou ripped into the neo-conservatives arguing that “The emergence of the pernicious influence of Hansonism stirred racial prejudice; multiculturalism, one of Australia’s exceptional accomplishments, was denigrated; asylum seekers were subjected to increasingly harsh measures. Our civil liberties came under challenge after September 11, and the proud Australian tradition of inclusive citizenship was, without sound justification, reversed’. Thumbs up Petro.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s