TheAgitator.com
From the Files of People Who Take Themselves Too Seriously
Tuesday, May 11th, 2004Actually, it’s a pretty clever way for these guys to get themselves some attention. They’re absolutely delusional, of course. They’re pulling conspiracies, coordinated attacks, “Daivd vs. Goliath,” and the “throwing down of gauntlets” out of two blog links, and that the folks at Catallarchy decided to make them actually defend their position.
Just FYI, Cato had nothing to do with it. Cato’s trade guys have more important things to do than coordinate “attacks” in the discussion threads of obscure blogs. Micha, Jonathan and the gang handled themselves well, but they have no affiliation with Cato other than that Micah applied for a summer internship, and that they link to Cato from their site.
It probably goes without saying that the release falsely depicts my position and the position of Cato’s trade folks on a number of issues, darn-near to the point of libel.
I gues “The Agitator” is a particularly good name for your site these days…
Nice job.
I like the part where they refer to you as “the Balko.” Sheer genius.
Near-libelous? What am I missing? Besides calling Cato “one of the nation’s most powerful corporate lobbying forces,” I don’t see where this press release misstates anything (everyone misidentifies Cato — I often see it labeled a “conservative think tank”). It’s full of puffy language, but I don’t see how it misrepresents anyone’s point of view.
As much as I agree with the Agitator’s side here — I was one of the participants in the original thread — I did find some of Micha Ghertner’s anti-nation-state statements a tad offputting, and I don’t see why it was out of bounds for the press release to quote Ghertner.
I like that you have “followers.”
We need to come up with some catch phrase like Rush has “ditto.” My first thought is “Monkey Island Good” (as in: “Radley, that last column is monkey island good.” or “Damn, this whiskey is monkey island good.”) That took me about 45 seconds to come up with though, so surely someone can think of something better.
Libel: A false publication, as in writing, print, signs, or pictures, that damages a person’s reputation.
I’d say that either of the following, were they widely propagated and not just in some rinky-dink press release, could arguably damage the reputation of Cato and/or “the Balko”
“Cato is the epitome of radical one-world corporate special interests”
“They ["powerful lobbying forces like Cato"] no longer believe that America should exist as a country, and they ignore the plight of American communities.”
Do I think it was unfair of them to print quotes? Of course not. Do I think it was unfair to attribute the sentiments of one libertarian to Cato and Radley specifically when neither believes Micha’s controversial position? Absolutely.
If we have wound the protectionists up to the point of libel, I’d say we deserve a cut of any proceeds.
Matt,
I’m an anarchist, so it’s no surprise that you would find some of my anti-nation-state statements a tad off-putting. But if I had known that my admittedly radical views would be misattributed to Cato or Radley, I would have made sure to disavow any association with them, and explicitly state that my views are mine and no one else’s.
At least they could have given us a link
Radley Balko points to a deviously crafty article about him and our own Micha Ghertner, and their exchanges with the AmericanJoblog. It’s amazing how Pete Johnson and cohorts come off as patriotic, freedom loving, community preserving Americans i…
Do I think it was unfair to attribute the sentiments of one libertarian to Cato and Radley specifically when neither believes Micha’s controversial position?
What position are you referring to?
Jonathan: The position that “There is no need for a ‘country’ or borders.”
What position are you referring to?
Ahh, nevermind.
I lost count of how many gauntlets were allegedly thrown.
*looks around*
I think we’re out of gauntlets! Quick! Order more!
So I’m reading this press release and the first thing that came to mind was “wah wah wah”, and I played My Heart Cries For You on my own personal teeny record player. Then I thought, these guys must be feeling mighty vulnerable right now, if they feel the need to pick on li’l ol Radley and Cato.
Excuse me, that’s li’l ol’ Radley THE BALKO and mega Catobucks.
And excuse me again, but since when does a $13 million budget make an organization a Goliath?
And just one more pardon me, but if they see themselves as David, shouldn’t they feel a little less threatened? Just pick up your little rock of a joblog and chuck it over here. Easy.
I’ll retort with a hearty poking of my tongue at them. So nyah.
Well Amy, I’m not saying I agree that Cato “ignores the plight of American communities” — I’ve donated (what piddling amounts I can afford) to Cato — but if you’re a blue collar worker in a place where your jobs have been outsourced, that’s probably what you think. I think that point of view misses the larger picture, but it’s Dawn Teo’s opinion, and it’s not anywhere close to being libelous.
Whether Cato is “one-world” or doesn’t believe “that America should exist as a country” is quite debatable, but I suspect a lot of policy analysts at Cato harbor views that come somewhere in the area of this; at the very least, there are some open-borders folks at Cato, which I don’t really get; open mass immigration is the one point where I break with libertarian orthodoxy. But again, if this is libelous, then any opinion-giver on FOX News or CNN commits slander when they fudge an opponent’s position.
An anarchist, Micha? Well that’s charming.
“We are just regular Americans, and Cato is the epitome of radical one-world corporate special interests with a multi-million dollar annual budget and millions more in the corporate pockets where that came from. But we have faith that we will prevail. ”
Regular Americans. Radical. One-world. Corporate. Special Interests. Dollar. Corporate. Faith. Prevail.
Lots of buzzwords.
Faith is a sin.
What does the Eye command…
It appears that the Buchananite protectionist blog that we linked to before is crying foul at the Minions of Sauron Cato descending upon their poor hapless abode, with the fearsome Micha leading the way (though, apparently in drag, as they…
Pretty pathetic and thin-skinned to put out a press release bitching about being confronted by people who disagree with you.
In a confrontation that took place in the comments section of a blog, no less.
That’s monkey island good.
Micha Ghertner: I’m an anarchist, so it’s no surprise that you would find some of my anti-nation-state statements a tad off-putting.
I would have thought that a genuine â??Anarchistâ? would be able to precisely define the term â??Anarchyâ?.
You canâ??t â?¦ so I would say you are more of a â??religious fanaticâ? then I would say you are an â??anarchistâ?.
“Catoâ??s analyst, Balko, threw the gauntlet down after an author on the American Joblog criticized an article written by Balko on Fox News”
Wait, did you throw down your gauntlet first, or did the guy who criticized your article? Or did he throw down his gauntlet and then you threw down your gauntlet?
What a waste of Beer.
This debate seems to consist largely of straw-men on both sides. Both Balko and the American Joblog people share a premise that just ain’t so: that the present neoliberal regime has anything at all to do with free trade. Both sides are ignoring the extent to which the present scale of foreign trade and investment result from state capitalist subsidies to those activities. Under the present mercantilist regime, the state absorbs many of the disutilities and inefficiency costs of foreign trade, so that American capital engages in a lot more of it than it would in a genuine free market.
Here is what I posted on a comment board at American Joblog:
As a genuine free trade ideologue, I think if you’re going to call neoliberals “free trade ideologues” you should put the term “free trade” in quotes. Because what they want is not by any means free trade–it’s government subsidized and protected trade.
I am pretty much a free market fundamentalist. But to me, the free market means that those engaging in foreign trade should absorb ALL the costs and risks of their activities.
But what do we have, instead, in the state of affairs that intellectual whores like Tom Friedman like to call “free trade”?
1) massive government subsidies to the export of capital, in the form of World Bank loans and foreign aid to build the utility and road infrastructure without which Western capital cannot be profitably invested overseas;
2) massive subsidies to airports, railroads, merchant marines, and highways, which allow big business to externalize the costs of shipping their goods into the country from the other side of the world;
3) government enforcement of so-called “patent rights,” really an anti-market monopoly privilege, to enable Western capital to maintain a permanent monopoly on modern productive technology and permanently lock Third World countries into a position of providing sweatshop labor and raw materials;
4) government national security policy to protect Western capital investment overseas against nationalization, and to prop up anti-labor and pro-corporate regimes. It’s no accident that sweatshops have gravitated toward places like Central American banana republics where labor organizers and peasant activists are tortured, murdered, and disappeared. Not to mention “workers’ paradises” like China, where independent union organizers are incarcerated in mental hospitals.
If this, what Friedman and his ilk call “free trade,” is free trade, I’ll eat Jeffrey Sachs’ curriculum vitae with ketchup.
If you want to know what REAL free trade is, check out Joseph Stromberg’s archives of old columns over at Antiwar.Com.
What a bloody joke!
First, “The Balko” writes an article on outsourcing that, in my opinion, was quite convincing.
Then, Pete Johnson at American Joblog lays down a blog entry in response, along the lines of “this garbage will make you puke”, without actually rebutting or arguing any of The Balko’s points.
Then, The Balko links to Pete’s post, and says “I guess not everyone agrees with me.” A wet-n-wild blogument ensues @ American Joblog. Again, Balko points it out, and says “wow, this is what we’re up against.”
Then, these “rescue american jobs” people feel the need to write up this massive “press release” whining about how they were all of a sudden pitted in a david-goliath battle with CATO.
First, it ain’t true. Second, it seems to be to be a massive waste of time to write up a bigass press release all because some CATO analyst linked to a blogument. Third, how many fucking times can you say “throw down the gauntlet” in one statement? It’s like Dawn Teo just heard that term yesterday, and now she’s so excited about it, she’s using it in every paragraph. Furthermore, as another commenter pointed out, Pete Johnson was the one that initially did the throwing down of the gauntlet, with his pathetic little “this garbage will make you puke” line. If the joblog and Ms Teo didn’t want the gauntlet thrown down, then they shouldn’t have cast the first gauntlet. hehe.
Kevin, what you say is interesting. What I would say is that though Radley makes no specific mention of the effects of subsidy in this particular he has specifically railed against such subsidies in others. You’re right that there are artificial supports for foreign trade as well as artificial barriers but I’d say you’re wrong if you believe that Radley is a proponent of either.
Kevin, patents are an “anti-parasitism” protection for innovation.
Without them, there would be a lot less incentive to turn new ideas into products, for a competitor could save his money, wait for an innovative product to appear, then effectively steal the profits from the innovator by cloning the product through avoiding the (often massive) R&D investment needed to reduce an idea to practice, and therefore able to undercut the innovator on price.
Innovation would become a sucker bet in such a market.
The Serpent sayeth:
“I would have thought that a genuine â??Anarchistâ? would be able to precisely define the term â??Anarchyâ?.
You canâ??t â?¦ so I would say you are more of a â??religious fanaticâ? then I would say you are an â??anarchistâ?.”
Oh great Serpent, what IS the precise definition of “anarchy” and why doesn’t Micah qualify?
-sed
I like how they link to the American Joblog website twice, but don’t bother to provide a link to The Balko’s website, instead wrapping the name in quotes, as if “TheAgitator” is so distasteful that they have to keep it in someone else’s mouth.
As for an Agitator catch phrase, how about the succinct “woot”?
seditious nick: Oh great Serpent, what IS the precise definition of “anarchy” and why doesn’t Micah qualify?
I guess you could say that I lack-o-belief in â??anarchyâ? the same way that an Atheist lacks-o-belief in â??Godâ?.
I think â??Anarchyâ? is a fantasy. I donâ??t believe that it exist in the manner that self-professed â??Anarchistâ? (like Mr. Ghertner) describe. I would argue that the entire concept is logically inconsistent.
The most common definition I hear is that â?¦
Anarchy = the absence of a Government (a â??Stateâ?).
Of course I would respond that â??animalsâ? definitely lack a â??Governmentâ? or â??Stateâ?. So would you consider animals as Anarchist? Is â??the law of the jungleâ? what you are really (genuinely) advocating?
I donâ??t perceive that animals exist in a better (superior) state than homo sapiens do. Is that what you are suggesting?
Because if animals (collectively) are not Anarchist, then obviously there is something more to Anarchy than the mere â??absence of a Governmentâ?.
Rich, quite right. In addition, but starting from the other direction, the protection of intellectual property is no different in essence to the protection of physical property. Once people accept that there is good reason to defend a person’s right to own something tangible, there is no ideological barrier to their right to own something intangible either.
Bernard: Once people accept that there is good reason to defend a person’s right to own something tangible, there is no ideological barrier to their right to own something intangible either.
hehehe â?¦ you seem to be assuming that some memes are more solid (tangible) than others.
I would love to hear how you came to that conclusion?
how about we double the “woot”
woot woot
Serpent, you misread.
Physical property is tangible.
Intellectual property is intangible.
how about banning serpent again?
posted over there – let’s see if they leave it up:
Heh. Heh.
“And now for the story”
Please. How about “And now for our self-serving press release wherein we will obscure the difference between Radley’s work for Cato, and his hobby (?) as a blogger to make us look like the tiny little underdog.”
This is hilarious. You give these silly bastards 2 links on a personal blog and they issue a press release? I’m a little jealous, frnakly.
I think it’s great and I think I’ll do press releases on Radley and Micha from now on instead of just blog entries. And I’m definitely going to work Cato’s $13 million budget into every release.
Does anyone have a press release blog template for pMachine or MT?
Matt,
“As much as I agree with the Agitator’s side here — I was one of the participants in the original thread — I did find some of Micha Ghertner’s anti-nation-state statements a tad offputting, and I don’t see why it was out of bounds for the press release to quote Ghertner.”
Um, Micha can be called to task for his expressed views, sure, but don’t you find it a little ridiculous that his views are offered as newsworthy because he’s applied for an internship with Cato?
Radley,
To say it’s damn near libel is way over the top. If knuckleheaded political debate were libel…
How many time did you actually throw down the gauntlet anyway? The press relese implies you threw it down at least twice. Do you plan to throw it down again?
Bernard: Physical property is tangible.
Intellectual property is intangible.
No, I heard you right the first time.
Then I said:
You seem to be assuming that some memes are more solid (tangible) than others.
I would love to hear how you came to that conclusion?
Well, if your hearing isn’t askew then it must be your comprehension. That isn’t an assumption I’ve made, nor one which can be traced back intuitively through anything I’ve said.
I find it hilarious that saying “not everyone agrees with me” apparently constitutes “complaining about criticism” in their eyes. Then again, since they seem to be patently incapable of being criticized themselves without squealing about what victims they are…
(note to American JobLog people: I am not, nor have I ever been, affiliated with the Cato Institute. Nor can you hold my opinions against my employer because I don’t have one. Thanks!)
HEY!! I want a gauntlet to throw, though I think I’d rather keep it. Guantlets are expensive these days.
And, as for Monkey Island Good, I like it. Since Rush gets Ditto-heads, Radley should get fish-wielders. I’ll wave a fish for Radley.
Radley,
“Cato’s trade guys have more important things to do than coordinate “attacks” in the discussion threads of obscure blogs. Micha, Jonathan and the gang…”
…obviously don’t. Yeah, we read you loud and clear Mr. Backhand, Mr. $13 Million, Mr. TV Star….
Well its true, JTK.
But we still love you.
You’re damn near monkey island good.
Be careful … the suggestion of “fish-wielder” as a label, juxtaposed with “Dittohead” in the same sentence , might inspire warped minds like mine to hybridize the two labels into another possible descriptive term …
( … classic song by Barnes & Barnes starts).
I think the fact that Radley was identified as a policy analyst at Cato and blogmeister at the Agitator led some to believe that the two are tied together. They failed to see that Radley’s blog has an audience of anarchists and libertarians unaffiliated with Cato. Though, I enjoyed referring to some of you as “catotonics” and “Radley’s posse”. As for the quality of argumentation at American JoBlog, you have to recall that most of the posters there are not heavy readers of political and economic treatises. They are primarily middle class workers turned anti-outsourcing activists. And American JoBlog is not the only gathering point for anti-outsourcing opinion. The Kerry Forum has long been one of the best sites for outsourcing & guest worker discussion.
As for the quality of argumentation at American JoBlog, you have to recall that most of the posters there are not heavy readers of political and economic treatises.
“It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a “dismal science.” But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.”
- Murray Rothbard
The Great Serpent spaketh:
I guess you could say that I lack-o-belief in â??anarchyâ? the same way that an Atheist lacks-o-belief in â??Godâ?.
I think â??Anarchyâ? is a fantasy. I donâ??t believe that it exist in the manner that self-professed â??Anarchistâ? (like Mr. Ghertner) describe. I would argue that the entire concept is logically inconsistent.
I think “democracy” is a fantasy and is logically inconsistent. Anarchy makes more sense to me. Prove how I am wrong, great philosopher.
The article is sloppy. e.g. Micha’s a male.
http://www.ringtones-dir.com/get/ ringtones site. Best free samsung ringtones, Cingular ringtones and more, Ringtones for free. From website .