rest day! THANK GOODNESS!

Can anyone please tell me where I can get rings?

Thank you.

Rest day, ahhh yes. I think I'll go to a yoga class or go for a long walk/bike ride.

#2- www.ringtraining.com

3.2.1. Rest.

Nice....I had lost track, 3 illadvised night league basketball games in 4 nights...and the 32 year old knees need a break!

#2 You can find the rings on the main page of the site under equipment. On the bottom of the page. Power ring training would be a good link to go under!

#2 Try Ebay

You can get rings at againfaster.com for 85 bucks or rogue fitness.com

# 2:

http://www.ringtraining.com/?gclid=CLveuOfwypQCFSQtagodXV-ilQ

http://www.zales.com/category/index.jsp?categoryId=2109179&cp=2071133&clickid=hmp_weddingdrop_5

Why aint my picture up?

I dead hanged on todays wod. Could I have kipped? Or would that have defeated the purpose of thid excercise.

Meat!!

what's that, about 190#?

i just started reading "Lone Survivor", the book about "Murph" for which a hero WOD is named, barely through the prologue and it's going to be a tough read emotionally. Looking forward to the day off.

good video cf vancouver, I miss that gym. You guys your all beasts now holy shit

A somewhat interesting article. I think i will have to bookmark the page to follow up on his next few posts on the subject. I do like the rather off the beat definition of patriotism though.

As one of the commenters to the article put it, quoting Carl Schurz with a twist of Stephen Decatur:
“Our country right or wrong. When right, to be kept right; when wrong, to be put right.”
The patriotism of dissent has its place; at the same time, however, I think the author makes a good point that we have to balance our hopes for the future against acknowledging the things we're getting right. It's time to call loudly for a change in America, but that doesn't involve abandoning the experiment. Also, kudos on calling out Chomsky - can't stand the guy.
Or, as the Freakonomics Blog selected for the new national motto, "our worst critics prefer to stay."

If we have some energy can we work out lightly or should you strictly not exercise on rest day to recover? Let me know. Thank you.

Best video yet! Canadians doin' it right baby! Whooo!

Starting the daily WOD this next cycle...

...can't wait!

Mili,
Generally on rest day I just do my normal activity, with a break from the wod. Play ball with the kids, ride a bike, but nothing really strenuous, cause you do need the break. Hope that helps.

#17, rest on rest day. 3 on 1 off is the max your body can take without increasing risk of injury.

The fundamental point of the author, with which I agree, is that we are poisoned by a self-hatred arising from dissatisfaction with America at present. Rather than celebrate the unqualified right to act on our grievances, certain sects choose to berate the nation that would tease them with such an ability while denying them the utopia to which they feel entitled. But the reality of liberty requires us to sacrifice the comfort of not having any responsibility for ourselves. I am not free if I must let the government choose for me. Americans must once again prefer the dream of liberty with all its sacrifices, to the comfort of an all powerful government rendering us devoid of responsibility.

Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue.
Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice.

damn is that really 190lbs?

===========
TODAY'S FAQ
===========
Rest day. Watch the video, read the article. If you care to, chime in with your thoughts for or against the article. There is an old saying about not discussing religion or politics... that doesn't apply here. If you don't care for the topic, or the supposed bias of the articles, then you have a few choices: a) avoid rest day articles and the ensuing argument, b) jump into the fray and argue your point, c) moan why does this stuff have to be brought up here, this is supposed to be an exercise site. A and B are both valid options in my opinion. As for C, this is Coach's site and it's his dime. If you don't like it, see options A and B.

Hey Brian! Nice pic :)

I loved the video, Crossfit Vancouver setting the pace!

Where did you get the timer with the big read out?

Have Fun, Train Hard,

Billy

BG comment 11, could I have kipped on yesterdays WOD?

Absolutely, you can kip. Be sure that when you blog you state that you did kipping pull ups but hell yes, get your chin over the bar with as much weight as you can, kip, change grips, whatever you need, its all good, just blog what you did.

Mili from Miami number 17, should I strictly rest on rest day or should I do something else?

Rest day is active recovery. If you play a sport, do that on a rest day. If you don't play a sport, a rest day is a good day to discover a new sport. I like to climb at a local rock gym on rest days with my family.

Have Fun, Train Hard,

Billy

Nice.. Tomorrow will be some light climbing

I like this article. Being in the Air Force, patriotism is something I can get behind. I tend to think of American something like a family member. I praise what it gets right, and try to correct what it gets wrong. In no wise do I detest it for what it is, because it's done a lot for me over the years, and I have only the foggiest idea what life would be like without the liberties I have thrown at me left and right. Such as the opportunity to speak out against our government if I see fit.
Granted, there's a lot of red tape to sift through, and the USA has become something of a ponderous, lumbering giant with regards to getting things done, so perhaps some streamlining is in order. But the US government was born with clauses specifically aimed at making any changes down the road that needed to be made. And we've got lots of different cultures and ideas to pull from, right here within our own borders. If you ask me, that makes for a pretty strong alloy.

Interesting read. A couple of comments.

He brushes off Pat Robertson as if his views are unusual. If you go to many parts of the country, right-leaning points of view dominate, to the point where people honestly are fearful that Obama, if he wins, will make America a muslim nation.

8/10 Americans feel the country is going in the wrong direction. I don't think it's surprising that some people who feel this way express frustration at the sentiment, seemingly expressed by many on the right, that being upset and sometimes disgusted with America and it's policies means you are unpatriotic.

My view is this-with all my understanding of America's potential and how it could be, I am frustrated at how I see it is at this point. Pride comes from living up to or beyond expectations, and I don't think we're doing that.

Still, there is nowhere else I'd rather live. I will never stop working to make it a place where patriotism is measured not by wearing a flagpin but by your actions, and where pride comes from a true appreciation of what America is doing for it's own citizens and fellow humans.

I am proud of what America is doing and has done. I expect at least that level of commitment and drive from our citizens and country. True pride will come when we reach beyond what we are doing now, and live up to the ideals of Jefferson, Washington, Lincoln, Taft(thought I'd throw a curveball).

Thank God for the rest, I've been at it pretty hard this week.

Yardwork, playing with my two sons and drinking a few cold beers is my Rx for tomorrow.

Enjoy the day off everyone and thanks for another great week Coach.

Sorry Guys... Gotta post it again for the benefit of the cause:

Hello Crossfit Nation! Please pardon my non WOD commentary, but it is for a worthwhile cause. I am working on behalf of the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society to raise funds for cancer research to help find a cure for leukemia, lymphoma, Hodgkin’s disease and myeloma.

Leukemias represent 27 percent of all cancers occurring among children younger than 20, and about 10,400 children under the age of 15 are expected to be diagnosed with cancer in 2008. The good news is that cancer survival rates for both adults and children have improved significantly during the last several decades due to advances made in treatment methods made possible through cancer research.

Please join me in the fight against cancer by supporting my fundraising campaign through Team In Training on behalf of the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society. Every little bit makes a huge difference. I know for a fact that there are individuals in the Crossfit community who have reaped the rewards from generous donors.

More information on my campaign can be found at:

http://www.board.crossfit.com/showthread.php?t=34236

Thank you sincerely for your consideration!

#29 Kevin

Do you know 12 people who have the belief that "The Rock 'Bama" will turn the USA into a Muslim country? How about one?

I'm going to guess no. It's a common propaganda technique to pray upon the weakness and beliefs of the 'other' always pointing towards another direction of someone who is suffering or misled while this other is never met in person.
I'm sure there are people who do hold this belief. There are still people who believe the lunar landing was a hoax. Should we include a plank at the DNC convention to accommodate these people or will a PSA suffice?

jakers

Where can I get braided climbing rope like the one in the picture?

I like the post-modernist idea that a person can simultaneously be a patriot and libertarian anarchist. I bristle at the term "patriot," especially when someone uses it to describe themselves. When I was on leave I heard the Sean Hannity show. Listeners kept referring to themselves as patriots. What makes them patriots? Putting a bumper sticker on your car or wearing a flag pin doesn't count. If someone tells me they are something, I tend to think they are lying. I call it the Boy George dilemma--if you have to explain what you are, you have problems and probably don't really understand what you are.

Not everyone needs to serve in the military, but everyone should give something, anything to improve the community around them. Especially those who consider themselves patriots. There is an excellent Gordon Lightfoot song called "The Patriot's Dream" that strikes the difference between the enthusiasm of patriotism and those who pay the price for it.

Steven Ambrose wrote a great book about what he learned studying the history of America. It's called "To America" and captures the ideal of loving America for what it is, while still hoping for improvement. That's also the nature of Crossfit, isn't it?

#34-Yes, I do know people who think that. Some in my family think that. That level of ignorance makes me sad. I can only hope that my wife and I raise our son to think more clearly.

#36-Amen to that! Crossfit is a great analogy. I am proud of my strength, fitness, etc. Yet every WOD I get pissed when I can't finish that last set, yell at myself when I don't lift a higher PR. The next day, though, I get back and try again. You can extend the metaphor as you wish.

I am a CrossFit-American!

I will tell you that reading lone survivor was very tough emotionally. I hope to one day make it to the teams and reading this book, for an event that happened only three years ago was not easy. You send the best warriors in the world to do their job but tie their hands behind their backs. Every time I do "murph", I think about him, as I am sure millions of you do. I told this to Mr. and Mrs. Murphy and I believe they are glad that their son is not forgotten. Sacrifice is not easy to find these days. As an LT once told me, "Maybe it's not about you". Carpe Diem.

THANK YOU LA CITY FIRE AND CROSSFIT BY OVERLOAD FOR YOUR WORKOUT ON SUNDAY, JULY 13TH. IT IS A WORKOUT WORTHY OF KEVIN'S NAME. HE IS A DEAR FRIEND, A FANTASTIC FIREMAN, AND A GREAT MAN.

HE WILL BE MISSED AND NEVER FORGOTTEN.

Eng Shook.....Newport Beach Fire

Chad Comment 25, where can I get braided climbing rope like the stuff in the picture?

There are a few places on the internet that you can get it, the ones that crossfit recommends are West marine, Jammar and Wolverine sports. here, check out the link:

http://www.crossfit.com/cf-info/faq.html#Equipment1

If you live near the ocean like I do, find a place that fixes netting for fish trawlers. I got the exact rope from a guy named "X" at net systems on Bainbridge Island which is very close to my house and is next to where my family does MMA. I got 100+ feet of the stuff for $50.00 because it was an "offcut". Good luck on your search...

Have Fun, Train Hard,

Billy

#17 there is not anyhting wrong with some activity on a rest day. sure, depending on your age and fitness level you could be increasing the risk of injury. that is why you must listen to your body and perform at the right level of intesity. i am 38, and i just finished a 3 mile run at a moderate pace. feel great.

I love this country for the ideal that it stands for. We live in an imperfect world so there is no use damning America for what is is or is not. Love it for what it can be and work to make it that way. Seeing that "lone survivor" has come up would it be ridiculous to hope for it to be suggested reading for all public schools?

By the way,

Has anyone been watching "Generation Kill" on HBO? Any comments after watching it?

Nice vid from Xfit Van, big shout out boys and girls.
Lotsa love to the barn, but I still hate everyone with a muscle-up.

You people are lucky to have such a healthy attitude towards patriotism. Here in the UK there is a guilty feeling of excluding others. Our union flag is not flown, only on national holidays. My country's flag the cross of St George is not flown at all because there is a perception it has been hijacked by the extreme right and therefore may cause offence. Being patriotic is viewed as blunt jingoism. Multi-culturalism has only caused deeper resentment and further fracture of our union. To be honest I would go the whole way and split the union and be done with it.

Colin 44
we here in Scotland would gladly split the union,but resentment you say multi culturism has caused is not a problem in Scotland,i think that's a problem much more in england.the Scottish flag is flown proudly all round the country, the english should feel the same about the st george,it's your flag not the extremists,but the union flag is generally hated here.

Pedro, you are so right. I was speaking from a English point of view. Much of the problem is caused by an English based central government trying to keep the union going. I have spent time walking in the Cairngorms and it is a joy to see the Scottish pride. I live and work in London, with all its problems, I think that affects my view as well. Any way when I retire I am moving to Scotland and will work hard to become naturalised!

f/36/140

My globo-gym did not have a weight belt available and I don't own one yet. So I made up my own workout yesterday:
100 situps
75 18" box jumps
50 65# push presses
25 burpees with over head clap
for time: mine 19:14

Have a great rest day

f/36/140

My globo-gym did not have a weight belt available and I don't own one yet. So I made up my own workout yesterday:
100 situps
75 18" box jumps
50 65# push presses
25 burpees with over head clap
for time: mine 19:14

Have a great rest day

Just like a lot of things.

We don't love it because it's always good. We love it because it's ours.

45/5 11.5/156

No rest for the wicked

Squats 5x5 (max 200)
Pistols
Romanian dead lifts

Patriotism and Nationalism are a dead horse in the American mainstream today. That is why within our lifetime (I would say 50 years tops) America will no longer be the super power of the world, and we will have no one to blame but our fellow citizens who do nothing but complain, and feel disrespected when they are asked to actually do something for their country.

I think the following quote is appropriate:

"OUR COUNTRY WON’T GO ON FOR EVER IF WE STAY AS SOFT AS WE ARE NOW. THERE WON’T BE ANY AMERICA BECAUSE SOME FOREIGN SOLDIER WILL INVADE US AND TAKE OUR WOMAN AND BREED A HARDER RACE."
-LEWIS BURWELL (CHESTY) PULLER

We are about as hard as the Philsberry Dough Boy's abs.

Enough said...

Whatever I do today, it will not involve my arms. Between the WODs of the past two days and spending all day yesterday on my day off staining my deck, my tris are smoked. (paint the fence, Daniel-San!) My family went to the track last night and I am very proud of my 3 (soon to be 4) year old daughter who ran two laps (1/2 mile) by herself. It gives me hope that she won't be stuck in front of a TV with an Xbox controller in her hand.

As far as the article goes, my hair stands up whenever anybody quotes anything by Howard Zinn. A second rate mind who has published third rate books I encourage people to read first person historical resources independent of people like Zinn who hide behind academic freedom while advancing a progressive agenda. Bringing Chomsky into at the end has sent the sirens wailing.

The article demonstrates a very limited understanding of the nation-state and it's mechanics. A more in depth exploration of the concept of patriotism without throwing in the authors own "isms", ("chauvinism" e.g.) would be helpful as well.

When the author states that "I’m both an American patriot and a libertarian anarchist.I both love my country and would cheerfully abolish its government and many of its laws as soon as practically possible, in service of a higher loyalty to individual liberty." We see the same kind of double speak seen among teenagers just beginning to develop an independent sense of self. It is cute when you're 17, when you're an adult it indicates a sense of intelllectual superiority combined with a superificial intelligence and a veneer of false sensitivity that makes for great sound bytes and quotes but, little more.

cool looking workout. i like the combination of muscle ups and clean and jerks. i'll have to try that sometime.

#2 I just got my rings from Rogue, and they are top notch and so easy to set up. I think today i'll head to the track and run some bleachers.
Get Fit - Get Trained - Or Get Out Of The Way!!

Patriotic dissent is integral to American democracy. If a citizen knew a better way to do something, and didn't speak up, I'd think him less of a citizen. And if the populace doesn't continually demand better, they've become the government's drones. If a government exists by the consent of the governed, then patriotic dissent means that our society is functioning properly.

Re: #49 and Chesty Puller - our country is (and will be) only as soft as we allow it to be. Each one of us daily faces the choice to improve our society or let it languish. Don't like the way things are going? Do something about it. Don't like the government? Vote. (Or better yet, run for office.) Think the kids are soft? Make babies and raise them right. Think we're becoming self-centered? Help your neighbor.

Our country will be what we make of it.

M/40/235#/6'2"
St. John's, NL

Rest Day?

# of rounds in 20 mins of:
24" Box Jump 25 reps
Sit-ups 20 reps

6 rounds in 17 mins
(had to cut it short)

I think esr gets it generally right.

My thoughts on patriotism. I love my country, right or wrong. And by loving my country I don't mean the piece of rock it sits on. I mean I love the fundamental foundation of my country. I love my country because it is "dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal."

Now getting to the right or wrong part. It is called unconditional love. When you have a kid and he wrecks your car, you still love him right? You may ground him for two weeks, or a month, or a year, or whatever, but you still love him. Similarly, when there is something wrong with my country, I do try to fix it, while keeping in mind that it is the best country on the planet and that I love it.

Of course I make a solid distinction between my country and my government. I love my country. I hate my government.

This article is typical of the "armchair patriots" who sit in the comfy confines of their office and write about topics that affects the world out there. The author states, "I both love my country and would cheerfully abolish its government and many of its laws as soon as practically possible, in service of a higher loyalty to individual liberty".
That sounds great, if you live in a world were people are responsible, will take responsibility for their actions, will support themselves, won't prey upon others, don't commit crimes, take pride in their community...must I go on.

Sorry, I work in Los Angeles, and the City - particularly the inner City and the areas over populated with illegal immigarants - can really jade a person. We have anarchy already in LA, it is just called "gangs" "crime" "urban blight".

I love my country, wouldn't live anywhere else. The author is foolish however to think that American Patriotism and the ideal of Liberty is still rooted in anarchy and dissent. Yes, our founding fathers were "dissenters" however is this today what an American Patriot upholds? I think not, I think an American Patriot is someone who is willing to take charge of their own life, take responsiblity for their future and is willing to work hard to suceed. American life affords us many opportunities that we would not have if we were living somewhere else. I know I have "pulled myself up by my own bootstraps" and am proud so say I am an American.

I don't agree with every law on the books, but I don"t think that dissent and anarchy is what is needed in this country. And although I do disagree with many politicians and the public policies that they enact I don't think I can say "I hate my governement".

#55 and the others that say they hate our government, I am curious why you say this.

m/38/193/70"

Did yesterday's WOD today.

At home on rings. For weights I had my 5 yo boy, my 9 yo girl, and two 5# db.

5 yo boy = 52.5#
9 yo girl = 71.5#

52.5 - 71.5 - 71.5 - 76.5 - 76.5 - 124(f) - 81.5

The attempt at 124 (5 yo + 9 yo) was at the request of the kids. Got to elbows at 90.

Kids and dad had a great time!

The reality of our political situation today is simply a reflection of the people our government serves....by and large, soft, complacent, ignorant, selfish, and lazy. If you are thoroughly convinced this does not pertain to you or your loved ones, CONGRATULATIONS. We have been overtaken by an ACLU mentality that allows the general population to be encouraged to embrace each of the characteristics listed above and if anyones right to embrace those elements is questioned or challenged, the opposition is accused of bigotry, hatred, intolerance, etc. I love America but I am saddened at the ignorance of Americans that live by self-gratification at all costs and 5 minute sound-bites as evidence of their "educated" points of view.

Liberals such as myself are wary of patriotic symbols because they are exactly what Barak Obama said they are: substitutes for true patriotism.

For too many Americans, patriotism stops with the tattered, stained, and abused American Flag fluttering from their car window.

That flag sticker on your car doesn't mean you're a patriot. It means you bought a flag sticker and put it on your car.

The questioning of those who refuse to wear 'patriotic' symbols is not a hallmark of democracy. In fact, it is actively un-American.

Interesting article. Unfortunately, the author confuses patriotism and nationalism. He also makes a specious connection between American patriotism and anarchism. He then uses this specious connection to attempt to prove that he is an American patriot in spite of the fact that he wants to destroy our political system and way of life.

He starts off on the right foot, when he describes American patriotism as a love for our political system (i.e., the government and laws of the United States, specifically the Constitution). In political science terms, this is the (rather narrow) definition of patriotism.

He then goes on to describe "tribal patriotism", which is his made-up term for what is really nationalism. Nationalism and patriotism are very different things. For example, Russians are some of the most nationalistic and xenophobic people in the world (believe me, I used to live there). They have always been that way, from when their country was ruled by a tsar, to the Soviet period, to today, under Putin's sham democracy. Russians are not patriotic, they are nationalistic: the source of their pride is not their political system, but their national identity. This is true for almost every country in the world, from France to Japan to Brazil. Referring to nationalism as "tribal patriotism" is generally pretty stupid.

Later in the article, the author makes the following point: even though he's an anarchist, he's still a patriot, since his ultimate goal is the maximization of personal freedom and a total lack of interference by government in the individual's life:

"I both love my country and would cheerfully abolish its government and many of its laws as soon as practically possible, in service of a higher loyalty to individual liberty; 'Where liberty dwells, there is my country'. Even Americans who disagree strongly with my political stance have no real difficulty understanding how it is compatible with American patriotism."

Here's where I have to raise the BS flag. This argument belies the author's on-again, off-again understanding of what patriotism means. Just as he mistakenly labels nationalism as one type of generic patriotism, so he labels anarchism as a type of American patriotism. His argument that anarchists are American patriots is based on the fact that anarchism and the Constitution strive toward the same goal. (Namely, the idea that people should be able to live their lives without other people telling them what to do.) This is an erroneous argument. It's like saying that Globo-Gym meatheads and CrossFitters are one and the same, since we're all trying to get more fit.

The author writes, "I’m both an American patriot and a libertarian anarchist." This actually is a defensible argument to some extent. I think we are all libertarian anarchists in one sense, in that we would like to live in a world in which there were no laws, because none would be necessary. People would treat each other with decency and respect, and there would be no murders, theft, rapes, or other crimes. However, most of us are sane enough to realize that this world will only exist in our dreams. There is an obviously huge difference between wanting to minimize the government's role in your life (with the vision of a world with no laws as the shining Utopian ideal), and actually attempting to destroy the government itself.

Here's the truth: an American patriot, by definition, is someone who supports the Constitution of the United States of America. The statement, "I both love my country and would cheerfully abolish its government and many of its laws as soon as practically possible", is therefore completely asinine. Hats off to the guy for stimulating a discussion, but I hope nobody takes his crackpot ideas at face value.

S/F

#2 Rings here: http://tinyurl.com/5ckas7

#25 big format timer: http://tinyurl.com/6o3boe

keep these articles coming

i like em'

Been traveling for work all week, had lousy hotel gym with barely enough room for the 3 treadmills there. Good time for a recovery week, though.
Did yesterday's WOD. Had to sub lat. raises for push press (I know not nearly equal, so did some GU's after). Tweaked shoulder playing softball, so trying to strengthen stabilizers with rehab exercises. Doesn't it kill you (being as competitive as most of us are) having to "take it easy" at the gym?

I was just reading "Black Swan" by Taleb last night and he discussed the ideas of nationalism and patriotism in Chapter 6, pg 75:

"'National traits' might be great for movies, they might help a lot with war, but they are Platonic notions that carry no empirical validity - yet, for example, both the English and non-English erroneously believe in an English 'national temperament'. Empirically, sex, social class, and profession seem to be bettr predictors of someone's behavior than nationality."

He's referencing "National Character Does Not Reflect Mean Personality Trait Levels in 49 Cultures" by Terracciano et al (2005), http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/310/5745/96

"Most people hold beliefs about personality characteristics typical of members of their own and others' cultures. These perceptions of national character may be generalizations from personal experience, stereotypes with a "kernel of truth," or inaccurate stereotypes. We obtained national character ratings of 3989 people from 49 cultures and compared them with the average personality scores of culture members assessed by observer ratings and self-reports. National character ratings were reliable but did not converge with assessed traits. Perceptions of national character thus appear to be unfounded stereotypes that may serve the function of maintaining a national identity."

I haven't settled on an opinion either way, but I think this is an interesting addition to the debate.

#40, Nathan--

Yup, watched Generation Kill last Sunday and was sure to Tivo it to watch the first episode again tomorrow before the second one airs. I really enjoy it, and I think it is going to end up being up there with Band of Brothers in that they seem to focus so intently on the individual unit, its emotions, problems, etc.

While stationed here at Texas A&M, I have had the pleasure of befriending many active duty Marines that work with me on the Navy side of the house. I plan on inviting a few of them over tomorrow to see it and get their responses to it, since most have spent time in the sandbox, while i have been underwater the past few years.

But yeah, overall, I am very excited for the series and (unless the rest of it sucks tremendously) will likely get it as a Christmas present for myself later this year (cause I bet it will be released November time frame)

Anyone know of a dumbell to barbell conveter? Say you can do 80# dumbell flat bench (160 total) for 14 reps, what is that in barbell pounds?
Feels the same as about 225#'s but I don't know of any site or formula that can be applied.
Thanks

#50 & 61,
I think you all missed the author's very distinction between patriotism and nationalism. He seems to argue that the American patriotism rooted in liberty is wholly distinct from the idea of the nation state as expressed in western Europe. In fact, most of those nation states were 19th century late-comers (e.g. Germany & Italy). They are inextricably tied to a cultural unity, just as the author points out is the case in France. America is (or was, depending on your point of view) rooted in the ideal of individual liberty: the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This contrasts starkly with a bond centered on wiener schnitzel or crepes.
Lastly, we should not confuse libertarian anarchism with plots to violently bring down the Republic. It is hyperbole used to express the idea that government must limited to the greatest extent possible. It should defend the shores, deliver the mail, and get the hell out of the way.

#64 - aesthetic musculature is based on phenotypes, the observable expression of your genetics. Everyone will be different. Because our overarching goal is "increased work capacity across broad time and modal domains," the resulting aesthetic is merely a beneficial side effect. Most interesting of all, the phenotypal difference between CrossFitters and regular folk is the mathematical equivalent of a different species. Why? I have no idea, but it tells us the human body was designed for much more than we currently use.

Correction: sorry about the numbers being off, not sure what happened.

#65 GAC

What?
I just wanted a simple conversion from dumbell weight to barbell weight dude?
80# dumbell (160# total) flat bench is equal to ??? barbell flat bench?

#58 you wrote
"Liberals such as myself are wary of patriotic symbols because they are exactly what Barak Obama said they are: substitutes for true patriotism."

Tell that to the numerous people where I live who have sons and daughters in the military and who have flags on their cars; or to the Costa Rican guy next door who came here and built a contracting company from his original position as a day laborer. He flies a flag in front of his house and has expressed his gratitude numerous times for whaat this country has enabled them to achieve.

Which ones are the false patriots?

Are the only true patriots the ones who read the latest OP-ED in the NYT, L.A. Times,the Guardian (U.K.), about the evil American empire and lost promise of our nation and nod in self-righteous agreement?

The person who claims that the only true patriotism is dissent is akin to the guy who beats his wife and says it's because he loves her. Dissent tempered by respect for our Constitution, our government, our fellow citizens, and it's laws is patriotic. Dissent and the belief in elimination of a system while simultaneously using that same system to hide behind is cowardly at it's best and seditious at its worst.

Brian,

Looken' good! We'll see you in a couple weeks. Peace bro!

Cara

I can't figure out if I agree or disagree with the article... which means I like it.

Let me say I am vary weary of the Obama Bandwagon. One poster asked another if he knew people who are worried about an Obama Muslim Conspiracy... if you don't think these people exist, get west of the mississipi and and east of the rockies... I spend half my time defending each candidate from slander.

Anyways, I think it is slightly presumptious to label Obama as subscribing to conditional patriotism for the reasons mentioned in the article (his lapel pin).

I HIGHLY encourage EVERYONE to follow up today's article by this on on the NYTIMES from last week. I think they mesh on subject but are at odds.

"Cause For Alarm"
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/05/opinion/05herbert.html

wooo hoo!!

That Grace meets Zoe WOD was kick ass!

http://www.odmp.org/officer/19451-police-officer-joshua-t.-miktarian

GAC--

With all due respect, I don't think you understand the points I was trying to make.

I just reread the article, and I really don't think I "missed his distinction" between patriotism and nationalism. In fact, I can't find the word "nationalism" anywhere in the article. The author uses the term "tribal patriotism" (which as he defines it essentially means nationalism) in his argument as part of his efforts to conflate patriotism with a bunch of things that it is not--like his goal of destroying the American government and establishing anarchy in the U.S.

I agree with your point that, "we should not confuse libertarian anarchism with plots to violently bring down the Republic." Please reread the second-to-last paragraph of my original post, where I make this very argument.
However, also note that it's one thing to make the theoretical point that there should be as few laws and as little government interference as possible; it's another point altogether to actually state, as the author does, "[I] would cheerfully abolish [America's] government and many of its laws as soon as practically possible." That might not be a plot per se, but it's certainly a very clear statement of intent, and it's certainly not compatible with American patriotism.

Respectfully,

Dan

Trent (65,58),
Sorry, that was a response to some post that magically disappeared, asking why girls on the videos seem to look more ripped than the guys.

I don't know of any conversion formula, but I agree that 80# dumbbells feel like more than 160 on the bar. The difference is the added "stabilizer" muscles you have to use. If you're trying to convert for dumbbell bench as a substitution, I would say don't convert, just do the same weight on dumbbells. Check the message board threads too. You might find something there. Hope that helps.

On another altogether different note, my triceps are KILLING me from Thursday's WOD....even worse today than they were yesterday. Anyone else??

exercise related question.
i watched a video where coach was talkin about GHD-situps. he said doing them straight legged would emphasize the iliopsoas.why is it important to work the soas? i could see that working every muscle is important but we do a lot of GHD situps. i just dont know why there is such an emphasis

I love america. find a recruiter and enlist

Woke up with some extra energy, so I banged out a Tabata This, subbing box jumps for my ailing Erg:

Squat - 19
Pushup - 12
Pullup - 3
Situps - 12
Box Jumps - 8
Total - 54

Posts #50 and #60 are well thought out and insightful. I echo the thought that the article smacks of a 17 yr old still trying to synthesize various viewpoints into a personal political outlook.
I won't comment on the article, but I would like to play the defendant for Chomsky, since the article and some people here seem to agree that his stance, however construed, involves hating America, and even could tolerate having an -ism placed after it. I think Chomsky hates unquestioning submission to ideology. Americanism, he has pointed out, is a term we use frequently. "Anti-American" is a frequent criticism that is used (on Obama, on Chomsky, on people in this forum..) But go to Norway and speak of Norwegianism, or Mexico and accuse someone of anti-Mexicanism, or Italy and call for a renewed commitment to Italianism (which once might have worked...when it was a fascist state). You'll be laughed at by thousands of Norwegians, Mexicans, and Italians. The only historical antecedent of terms like that come from hugely repressive states (Nazism, communism). Why, in a free country, do we have a term like that which gets seriously used in intellectual discourse? This is a springboard for arguments about the acceptable range of political discourse in the media, and the agenda behind it. I won't get into that here. But, regarding patriotism, I'll let the man speak for himself:
"The questions are serious and important, and merit reflection and analysis.

To begin with, we have to be more clear about what we mean by patriotic feelings. For a time when I was in high school, I cheered for the school athletic teams. That's a form of patriotism — group loyalty. It can take pernicious forms, but in itself it can be quite harmless, maybe even positive. At the national level, what "patriotism" means depends on how we view the society. Those with deep totalitarian commitments identify the state with the society, its people, and its culture. Therefore those who criticized the policies of the Kremlin under Stalin were condemned as "anti-Soviet" or "hating Russia". For their counterparts in the West, those who criticize the policies of the US government are "anti-American" and "hate America"; those are the standard terms used by intellectual opinion, including left-liberal segments, so deeply committed to their totalitarian instincts that they cannot even recognize them, let alone understand their disgraceful history, tracing to the origins of recorded history in interesting ways. For the totalitarian, "patriotism" means support for the state and its policies, perhaps with twitters of protest on grounds that they might fail or cost us too much. For those whose instincts are democratic rather than totalitarian, "patriotism" means commitment to the welfare and improvement of the society, its people, its culture. That's a natural sentiment and one that can be quite positive. It's one all serious activists share, I presume; otherwise why take the trouble to do what we do? But the kind of "patriotism" fostered by totalitarian societies and military dictatorships, and internalized as second nature by much of intellectual opinion in more free societies, is one of the worst maladies of human history, and will probably do us all in before too long.

With regard to the US, I think we find a mix. Every effort is made by power and doctrinal systems to stir up the more dangerous and destructive forms of "patriotism"; every effort is made by people committed to peace and justice to organize and encourage the beneficial kinds. It's a constant struggle. When people are frightened, the more dangerous kinds tend to emerge, and people huddle under the wings of power. Whatever the reasons may be, by comparative standards the US has been a very frightened country for a long time, on many dimensions. Quite commonly in history, such fears have been fanned by unscrupulous leaders, seeking to implement their own agendas. These are commonly harmful to the general population, which has to be disciplined in some manner: the classic device is to stimulate fear of awesome enemies concocted for the purpose, usually with some shreds of realism, required even for the most vulgar forms of propaganda. Germany was the pride of Western civilization 70 years ago, but most Germans were whipped to presumably genuine fear of the Czech dagger pointed at the heart of Germany (is that crazier than the [Islamic extremist] dagger pointed at the heart of the US, conjured up by the people now playing the same game today?), the Jewish-Bolshevik conspiracy aimed at destroying the Aryan race and the civilization that Germany had inherited from Greece, etc."
-Noam Chomsky
Note: I [edited] this old quote. The original text read "Nicaraguan or Grenadan" in that spot. The fact that I can replace one foreign threat at one time with another at a later time shows that the formula is the same, only the threat has changed. A threatened populace is a compliant populace.
I hasten to add that obviously, the threat of Islamic extremism isn't "conjured." At the same time, the way it has been framed by the administration hasn't exactly accurately or honestly described the threat, its motives, and the best tactics for dealing with it either.

Took a rest day yesterday. Did sprint 1:20 on, 40seconds off X5, then 15 pushups, 5 ring muscle ups and 9X30lb kettlebell swings, 5 rounds in 11 minutes.

F/36/132

Ran 6K 31:55 split 15:24. Running. I do not love it.

Colin, when you come to Scotland you will see that the Scots embrace all cultures openly[of course there are always some who try to ruin our reputation,but that's the same the world over]and try to make everyone who comes feel part of the pride in being Scottish.hopefully the English can feel the same way soon without the engerland mob etc,stopping people feeling true pride in their country,cheers.

"Embedded deep in the American model of patriotism is the notion that it may be expressed by a passionate determination to reform or even completely upend American institutions in service to the ideals behind them."

Shouldn't the author give some examples substantiating this claim?

Half an "Angie"

I feel like a snail. It's so hot and sticky!

10 minutes

I'm including the 50 push-up in my 100 for the day.

Started the 100 day burpee challenge today. I did 1! :)

Re Lazarus Long on patriotism:

Excellent article, except for the silly bits about libertarianism. Libertarian anarchist is redundant. A system of government against governments is self-contradictory. It can't happen. We've been through this libertarian thing on this site before, and could come to no conclusion. Like democrats, who want a strong central government, organize a strong, central, talking-point-driven party. Like Republicans, who want a weak, decentralized party, organize their national party with more planks than participants. Libertarians reject government, so organize their diffuse party without even a definition of itself.

Long's bits about the “patriotism” of the left was positively perspicacious.

The slogan of the left is "We support the troops", which means, "We don't support the mission". We support our troops, but don't you dare recruit on this campus, or in this town! The slogan is a sham, resulting from the left marginalizing itself by abusing the returning GIs after Vietnam. So it repaired itself with a slogan. Unfortunately, the slogan got preempted by middle (muddled) America who took it at face value, and plastered the decals all over their SUVs.

The new slogan of Germany is “das Land der Dichter und Denker, und Schuldt” (poets, thinkers, guilt).

The new slogan of France is “Liberté, égalité, fraternité, couardise.” That is, none of the other three is worth actually fighting over. Obama apparently is French.

Now Obama's new slogan for America is "Change". That is exactly what new left patriotism means, and what the left wants. Of course, we're patriotic: we love America for what we're going to make of it.

Where Obama wants to go he keeps secret, and for the general election, even denies. The cover of the New Yorker rather over-played his Muslim connection, and underplayed his true connection. The cover should have had Obama's conscience sitting on his shoulder: a tiny, agitated, arm-flailing, America-hating, sing-songy, race-bating, Jeremiah Wright, whispering the principles of tribalism, this time Black Separatism, in Barack's ear.

Obama clapped his conscience under a Mason jar until November 5. Where Obama is headed is called reparations. His price tag runs about 10 to 11 figures, as near as we can tell, to be extruded from the War on Terror and the all-purpose, infinitely rich.

What solves the riddle of patriotism is the recognition of it as a virtue. As a virtue, patriotism doesn't come into play while you're in agreement with what your country is doing. Patriotism comes into play when you disagree with what your county is doing, but unequivocally support it.

What motivates our left is virtueless. It's been cut loose by the death of Communism. It's the helplessness of lack of control, of self or state. It will deny America what it would admit is best for America, so long as Bush supports it. E.g., pacifying and preempting Islamic terrorism. If Bush wants to fight on Thursday, he's wrong - he should fight on Tuesday. It's the politics and patriotism of raw power. The American left a la Berkeley and Pelosi and the other Ladies in Pink and Chomsky is political pus, just to end on a positive note.

How do you question someones patriotism?

I believe that a patriot is simply a person that places the "interests" of the nation above their own. To me all the people in the military that swear to defend the constitution and country are patriots. Most (not all) politicians are patriots even if you do not agree with their positions on issues. In their eyes they are trying to make the country a better place and are to me patriotic. They are willing to stand up for what they believe is best for the country. We cannot ALL agree with what constitutes the best "interests of the nation" but that is what makes this country the greatest nation. However, ANY of us can do something about it and to me if you are willing to commit yourself to working for the betterment of the country (in whatever way you see fit)- you are a patriot.

It is easy for anyone to claim patriotism (pins, flags)but ask yourself this question: When have you placed the interest of the nation above your own? There are many forms this action can take: a teacher that educates children, a police officer who protects the community, a farmer who produces our food supply, a person who runs for office (McCain,Obama) etc. To me these people are all patriots and need do nothing else to prove it.

Thanks for posting the video in mv4. It opens right up on the iPhone nicely.

29/f/113

weighted pull-ups

20-25-30-23-40-45-50

no kip

pre: 5 mile run, wux1
post: gdh sit-ups 3x25, ohs pistol practice 1x5 with 20#

Patty & the Boys... I'm all over that one. What happened to Popey's time?

Where was Shep?

Jeff can you clarify this statement please:
"What solves the riddle of patriotism is the recognition of it as a virtue. As a virtue, patriotism doesn't come into play while you're in agreement with what your country is doing. Patriotism comes into play when you disagree with what your county is doing, but unequivocally support it. "

Are you saying that patriotism requires supporting without question? Even something you disagree with?
Thanks, Carl

did the pull up WOD today (traveling home from vacation in VT with my husband and 3 girls)

50, 55, 60, 70 (fail), 65 (fail), 65 (gave myself a little jump and did it), 60

To All-

Yesterday, 7/18/08 was my one year anniversary of being in cancer remission. I had a double mastectomy at the ripe 'ol age of 36. I didn't truly realize the severity of the surgery (ripping my chest out to be blunt) until it was all over. I then spent the Fall going through physical rehab and the reconstruction portion and completed the reconstruction on 11/19/07.

I had always been in decent shape. My husband, Russ (who did the level 1 certification in Maine in June '08) got me hooked. I dabbled with some of the exercises and then when I felt strong enough from 2 surgery recoveries I took the leap of faith and got serious with CrossFit beginning of April '08.

I enjoy the videos, reading people's motivational comments and genuine good nature towards their peers succeeding!

I have also linked up with the Zone diet as well and seen great results...it also ties in very well with nutrition talk regarding cancer patients.

Cancer is like a lion's fight. Let it hear you roar.....My husband, family, many friends, and CrossFit helped me find my roar!

bmac

Miss ya bro

You going to come by and say hi sometime Cf vancouver is a little less intersting without ya

:)

Carl #89,

What I said was that patriotism only exists when you disagree with what your country is doing.

Unequivocal means not unquestioning, but not speaking out of both sides of your mouth. Like: saying I support the troops, and protesting recruiting or dissing the mission for which the troops are risking all. Or, just admit you’re not being patriotic.

Question away, but don’t take it public. The worst examples are criticizing (questioning) your country overseas, as Clinton and Pelosi have done. Write letters. Telephone the White House. But stay out of protest demonstrations. That’s what patriotism means.

As long as I’m back on-line, I’d like to add that Obama got where he is by being a blank slate. What he actually turns out to be is a dry-erase board.

Dan #75,
Right there with you! I couldn't even lift my 8 month old daughter this morning, my tris were screaming. My wife has been laughing at me all day.

Took a 4 mile run this morning, should have done it before the sun came up. Heat and humidity definitely beat me up and took my lunch money.

What's the 100 day burpee challenge?

Dear Crossfit,
I have been doing your program for about a year now and I hardly ever post results and stuff like that. I hardly post anything at all. However, last monday (5 days ago) I received my pair of rings in the mail. Now, I have seen huge improvement in all my numbers in terms of lifting, but I got on those rings to do dips and I was ashamed. But I hammered away at them until finally today I did my first muscle up. I was so thrilled I tried to do the 30 muscle ups for time work out.... i got to 15 in 30 minutes and decided to stop and just do some pull ups and dips instead. This stuff is legitimate. i went from 5 days ago shaking on the rings to a few days ago being able to do 6 rounds of the push ups, ring dips and push press work out. I thank you all for always pushing fitness to the next level. Thanks. I don't know if anyone will see this, but anyone new comers or old timers alike... never stop
-Luke 18yo M 195lb

Didn't to the weighted pull ups yesterday because my friend took back his weight belt that I usually use, so today I did the workout from the Vancouver video:

5 rounds:
6 muscle ups
6 clean and jerks- 135 #

Time: 12:15

Jeff #92,

If a military member, who has put his/her life on the line for their country multiple times, returns from war and chooses to attend a public protest or speak to a reporter voicing their disagreement with the government's actions are they no longer patriotic?

Had some friends over to workout. We each chose what we wanted to do. For me:

"Worm"
4 rounds, for time:
Weighted Pull-up, 25% bodyweight, 15 reps
Overhead Squats, 50% bodyweight, 15 reps
Run 400m
Maniac Muscle-ups, 5 reps (1 MU with 2 additional dips at the top)

33:58 fun times, fun times.

My take away from the article is that patriotism revolves around the Constitution. Rallying around Liberty as an ideal is fine but the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are what separates the American Revolution from the Liberty inspired French Revolution.

The lefts view of Patriotism can't be based on anything. If you believe the Constitution can mean anything you want it to mean on any given day and that words have no meaning then your Patriotism can mean anything you want it mean on any given day and has no real meaning either.

To quote the author "An influential minority of Americans now behave as though loving their country as it might be in the imagined future, where everything they don’t like about it is fixed, excludes loving their country as it actually is!"

#29 Kevin says "My view is this-with all my understanding of America's potential and how it could be, I am frustrated at how I see it is at this point. Pride comes from living up to or beyond expectations, and I don't think we're doing that.

...True pride will come when we reach beyond what we are doing now, and live up to the ideals of Jefferson, Washington, Lincoln, Taft(thought I'd throw a curveball)."

I'm pretty sure that is not the definition of Patriotism.

Jeff #84

Are libertarians by definition strictly anarchists? Laissez faire policy still relies on the rule of law and police power, yes?

What tea leaves do you have that suggest Barack is angling for reparations? Would he be any more successful than the Clinton's health care plan?

Love your comment about him being a white board. I'm going to borrow that.

RE #2 and responders -

Thanks for the advice to all; even #9...Zales? LMAO

Ordered from ringtraining.com

Looking forward to 1000's of muscle-ups & ring dips.

3-2-1 Go!

Carl, that depends. Is this person still a member of the military? If so then they are completely in the wrong regardless of their reasons for doing so. UCMJ covers this as does the USC.

If not and they have been discharged:

Are their words and actions making it more difficult for their fellow warriors to accomplish their mission? Are they endangering the lives of other soldiers by creating an environment or atmosphere favorable to those against whom they are engaged?

These things need to be considered otherwise, the veteran is de facto and de jeure giving aid and comfort to the enemy. If they are voicing their opinions as private citizens, (that means they make no mention of their status as veterans), then they have the same freedom to protest as anyone else.

Am I the only married guy who has noticed a marked improvement in his love life since doing Crossfit? Nice added benefit to the broad shoulders and flat stomach :-)

3-2-1...go to the bedroom!

M/29/190/6'
Getting back into things dealing with a shoulder injury. Did the deadlift 5x5 from the other day, 255# for all.
Warm up w/o dips, pushups instead. Practiced OHS w/ bar, 3 x 10-15 reps.

M/29/190/6'
Getting back into things dealing with a shoulder injury. Did the deadlift 5x5 from the other day, 255# for all.
Warm up w/o dips, pushups instead. Practiced OHS w/ bar, 3 x 10-15 reps.

Had to post this. I just finished my first 5K in 23:02. I am not a runner. The longest distance prior to this was a 4K run with a 40# vest one of my athletes made me do on my 40th B day (16:05) last month). I realize these are not runners times but they do illustrate the trickle down effect there is from CrossFit (intensity) to cardio ability.

weighted pullups

178 bwt

60, 65, 75, 75, 80, 80, 85

i definitely could see myself pulling alot more then this. I used a 20lb weight vest, 50lb dumbell, and 15lbs of weight in my pockets... very uncomfortable. I need to get a belt and chain to do this right.

then i did 30- 50lb dumbell squats cleans not for time, more for practice and to get a little sweat going to get all the beer out of me from the night before.

GRAND OPENING of Crossfit Rehoboth Beach in Delaware.
Great workout this morning! Thanks for the coaching Josh.

You've got lots of hard work ahead of you but you're off to a good start. Train 'em hard.

"Dissent is not disloyalty"

Thomas Jefferson

Jakers #100,

You ask,

>> Are libertarians by definition strictly anarchists? Laissez faire policy still relies on the rule of law and police power, yes?

As I wrote, Libertarians can’t define themselves. “Strictly”? Doubt it. In part? T’would seem so. And at the moment, I can’t think of a single regulation or policing action necessary to effect laissez faire economics, so the answer is, No.

Here are my tea leaves per your request:

7/24/07 Democratic debate:

>>COOPER: Senator Obama, your position on reparations? (APPLAUSE)

>>OBAMA: I think the reparations we need right here in South Carolina is investment, for example, in our schools. I did a... (APPLAUSE) I did a town hall meeting in Florence, South Carolina, in an area called the corridor of shame. They’ve got buildings that students are trying to learn in that were built right after the Civil War. And we’ve got teachers who are not trained to teach the subjects they’re teaching and high dropout rates. We’ve got to understand that there are corridors of shame all across the country. And if we make the investments and understand that those are our children, that’s the kind of reparations that are really going to make a difference in America right now.

Short form: OBAMA: Yes. Blah, blah, little children, blah, blah, blah.

Will reparations be any more successful than Clinton’s health care plan? Indubitably, given enough Democrats. Can’t be too many or too expensive federal entitlements.

Jeff #110 It's worth interrogating Klein's work on laissez faire economics, in particular the form pursued by the Chicago School. She argues that it has required tough policing, to put it lightly and strong government regulation. Kinda straying off todays 'patriotism' topic slighltly, but would be interested to hear your critique of her account since you state above that it doesnt require any form of governance/policing.

Carl #98,

>>If a military member, who has put his/her life on the line for their country multiple times, returns from war and chooses to attend a public protest or speak to a reporter voicing their disagreement with the government's actions are they no longer patriotic?

See Anthony #102.

Patriotic is not something earned, like veteran status. You might have asked “are they no longer being patriotic?”, in which case the answer is probably, “Yes, they are no longer being patriotic.”

As Anthony says, legality or acceptability is a matter of degree. If your hypothetical refers to an act like Kerry’s 4/12/71 Congressional testimony, the military member is a turn-coat – despicable, and far beyond unpatriotic. That is a lifetime stain.

TC #79 good post. I suspect the reason Chomsky gets so little love is because he forces people to think with nuance. Personally, I think blind patriotism is indefensible. Our country has significant, glaring faults in its history and at present, and it would be dishonest to pretend that wasn't true.

The right has been playing the "you either love it or get the f out" card a lot lately. But look at this article (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1295/is_n1_v60/ai_17963632) from 1996. Right-wingers were shouting themselves hoarse calling Clinton a war-monger, accusing him of putting our troops in an impossible situation, etc... Of course, Bosnia remains the only war in the history of the US we have fought and won without losing a single life. And in the process we stopped a genocide. But you didn't hear Rush Limbaugh singing America the Beautiful then did you? These are the best quotes from the conflict (from: http://www.americablog.com/2005/08/republicans-speak-out-against-war.html)

"If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy."
--Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of George W Bush

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."
--Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)

"Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?"
--Sean Hannity, Fox News,

"You can support the troops but not the president."
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

Patriotism, by itself, is an empty virtue. As the duplicity behind the above quotes indicate, it is very easy to abuse it to advance an agenda that has nothing to do with love of country. Sean Hannity can blab about how much he loves America day in and day out, but that doesn't benefit anybody but himself. On the other hand, I might burn American flags in my back yard, but if the next day I go out and serve honorably in the military or teach a kid to read or fight to keep our country's air clean, I've contributed far more to society than the real estate speculator with the American Flag on his SUV. All the isms in the world can't stand up to even the simplest of actions.

This was my first WOD week and I'm totally addicted!

Played golf in a tournament on rest day...shot 80...PR! (I don't know how many of you play golf...but i'm betting not many)

Tomorrows WOD looks wicked! I'm looking forward to it!

25/M/69"/188 lbs/3 mile 33lb. pack run in boots and utes/33 minutes

m/14/6'0"/143

Ran mile on day off after about 2 weeks of more WOD's. Improved time from 5:56 to 5:23. Felt so good to be improving in that time and by that much. Everything from here is an uphill battle and I cant wait to do it. Filthy 50 is a not so nice way to start off the new week though. ;)

OHS broomstick for WU

Day four of four day Affiliate WOD

Cleans
21-15-9, Loads: 95#, 105#, 115#
Time by Round:
1: 0:46.39
2: 0:33.93
3: 0:22.41
Max HR: 164

Thanks Coach!

Rick #112,

Your post is salted with code words of the far left, i.e., blind patriotism, speculator, SUV. You left out “profit”. Then you say, “Patriotism, by itself, is an empty virtue.” For evidence, you cite quotations like “You can support the troops but not the president”, utterly out of context, and call them “duplicity”. No meaning can be gleaned from this naked quotation, much less anything even remotely duplicitous.

Two other of your citations, one from Bush’43 and the other from Karen Hughes, refer to the necessity of an exit strategy in war. Your quotes are a thinly veiled accusation that we are in a war with no exit strategy, a left tenet. But when the Administration expresses its exit strategies on the two fronts, the mainstream media ignores him only to ask the same question over and over. This is propagandizing, to which you have succumbed. The exit strategy for Iraq, for example, is a stable, democratic government able to defend itself against terrorism, and one in which the benchmarks have been substantially met.

Apparently you value the good “fight to keep our country’s air clean”. Are American environmentalism and leftism, then, your core values? Ban DDT! Go al Qaeda!

So, why is patriotism empty? Is it a roadblock to a Marxist America?

BrightonGeoff #111,

By Klein surely you mean Naomi Klein. And for her work on laissez-faire economics you must mean “The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism.”

For a studied response, I refer you to the review of this tome by Jonathan Chait, a senior editor at the New Republic, available now on the Internet for upcoming publication on 7/30/08. I adopt all his reasons, and in fact, find his criticism understated.

You might also want to see Kline’s video on the subject posted on E Pluribus Unum. It has the title Naomi Klein: The Shock Doctrine. She is not a writer; she’s a propagandist. Move over Goebbels.

No one stands to the left of Kline, living or dead. Move over N Chomsky, and move over K Marx. She is the poster child for the left, against whom conservatives rail, and the perennial enemy of America. Her writings are an insult to the intellect and objectivity. She has little regard for facts, and in good liberal arts style, selects facts and pseudo facts to support her own fantastic world theory. We have Chait to thank for having the intestinal fortitude to wade through her tripe.

Kline is the daughter of activists, and the grand daughter of an activist. This suggests the existence of a left gene instead of an infectious agent. Perhaps its on the stupid gene. She has been accused of having organizational responsibility for the Seattle riots against the World Trade Organization.

Kline has no more idea of economics than Marx did. She is unaware that the hated capitalism is the child of liberty, and is blind to the fact that it has brought, on balance, immense good to the world and far beyond its boundaries, from disease to health and clean air, from starvation to prosperity, and from slavery to liberty. What I gleaned from a couple of reviews of her work, is that she imbues laissez faire economics with the traditional left, anti-capitalist, populism politics of rich-get-richer, poor-get-poorer, and from this faux premise imagines laws and policing necessary to defend capitalism, or maybe to defeat it. One can’t be sure.

She is a lunatic. Hence, the following.

Now I’m convinced. Laissez faire is perfected to the extend the government does nothing.

I did an easy 3 miles today.

Totally agree with the fact that if you have to tell someone you are something, you probably really aren't.

Though not a patriot myself, I am a Proud American. I envy the patriotism of soldiers I work with in law enforcement. I should have served now looking back, but as a dumb stupid kid, I chose not to. But I would do anything to protect the freedom that my wife and kids have and I gewt choked up at Lee Greenwood's " God Bless the USA."

Tomorrows workout looks awesome. As a 2 week crossfitter, looking forward to it. And I know it will kick my butt. Thats what makes it so awesome.

Rick,

I agree that actions speak louder than words and simply sitting idle (left or right) and complaining about things achieves nothing-just like a sticker on your car.

Jeff,
"The exit strategy for Iraq, for example, is a stable, democratic government able to defend itself against terrorism, and one in which the benchmarks have been substantially met."

What you have stated is not not an exit strategy, it is an end point and that is why the media asks the same question over and over-What is the exit strategy?. A strategy would include the plan to get to these end points and meet the benchmarks. For example, "The Surge" (which got plenty of mainstream media attention) was a strategy that helped us meet some benchmarks like decreasing violence and increasing security in Iraq.

Rest day. yeah right.

did RIT drill at work
50lbs of equip and 25 lbs rip bag to drag around on all fours, blacked out and through obstacle maze on air. Felt great even though going into it my back shoulders and arms and thighs were burning, they came through did great. Even attempted a few pull ups. Cant wait to try the filthy fifty tomorrow.

Carl #120,

OK. What I proposed was an end point. The strategy then is to keep doing what we're doing until the end point.

The Democrats in Congress have proposed what they call an exit strategy and it's a schedule for retreat.

Representative Duncan Hunter (R), said

>>“There is an exit strategy, and it's the shoring up of the Iraqi guard and a military force capable of protecting Iraq and its people," he said. ''That cannot be fitted to a precise calendar."

But that's pretty much my first offering, isn't it?

The term “exit strategy” doesn't seem to be used by the military, as in war college training.

Your citations demanding an exit strategy for Clinton was from Bush and friend. So maybe the Republican definition a la Duncan Hunter is the best interpretation.

That exit strategy was not being successful enough, pre-surge. So beyond Hunter's "shoring up", we also

• expanded our securing of neighborhoods and holding them, relaxing the Rules of Engagement for going into hostile neighborhoods

• strengthened our pursuit of al Qaeda and foreign fighters

• strengthened our killing and capturing of al Qaeda leaders

• added disruption of attacks from Syria and Iran

• added interdiction of supplies from Syria and Iran

• added seek out and destroy networks providing weapons and training

and by the way, put more boots on the ground and another aircraft carrier in the Gulf.

So there, with the endpoint, is your exit strategy today. It just baffles the media.

Dear America,

Today I woke up from a good nights sleep. I had plenty to eat today and no one tried to kill me. When I go to bed tonight I won't be hungry, nor will I feel unloved. Though every day is not always good, I have learned that just like really good times, really bad ones don't last either. So when times are good I thank God. When they are bad, I trust He is still on His throne and press on in His strength.

You see, I live in a country where I am free. Free to complain and criticize, or free to enjoy my portion of life as it comes. Today I chose to enjoy it. :)

Thanks,
Gar

#120 Carl

What is our exit strategy in Japan, Germany and Korea?
Understandably winning is not an exit strategy because when we win we stay (expect in France).

So is your real question how are we going to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory and manage to exit with out tail between our legs and any other answer just isn't really an exit?

#123 Jakers


Nothing I have said implies we should accept defeat and exit with our tail between our legs. Don't know where you got that idea from? You definately got the wrong guy here.

"What is our exit strategy in Japan, Germany and Korea?
Understandably winning is not an exit strategy because when we win we stay (expect in France)."

We remain in these countries because of the stategic importance of their locations. We are not still fighting with them or keeping the peace (except maybe the DMZ). Personally, I think strategically we will have to keep a long-term military presence in Iraq but that is not what I was discussing.
To clear some other things up. We never won the war with North Korea-thats why troops are still guarding the DMZ in South Korea. We dropped the A Bomb on Japan and never occupied the country so obviously there was no need for an exit strategy there. We fought in all of WWII for a total of about 4 years and had the majority of our military home shortly there after. And France, well we never fought the French in France. We only fought the French for a very short time in Northern Africa but a cease fire was reached and they quickly joined the allies. We did fight the Germans in France but the French fought along with us.

great photo, great video. too bad I'll be missing this wod today. Unfortunately a calf strain from Thursday is currently preventing any jumping so out goes 4 of the 10 exercises.

Jeff #121

Thanks for the Chait article info. I'll read it today. I read Shock Doctrine a few months ago and immediately searched for rigorous critiques online. I'll check to see if Chait proves that her facts are few as you state.

Re yr points: Her short film is propoganda if someone can identify how partial the evidence or inaccurate the evidence presented in it is. Associating it and her with Goebbels is specious.

'No one stands to the left of Klein, living or dead' you state. I recall her being fairly Keynesian in her conclusions and expectations.
I'm certain that Antonio Negri for starters would disagree with her radically.

Yes she is a granddaughter and daughter of activists... I'm guessing yr thoughts on the genetic link with politics and stupidity is satire.

She was accused of Seattle protest responsibility.
Anecdotally I knew a dozen people who went to this protest, none of which had read Klein's previous book No Logo or ever discussed her as an author or journalist. Crossfit has been accused of negative health impacts. I don't believe either. If it is true, the issue regarding Seattle is the accuracy of the arguments made against the WTO at the time and/or the lack of arguments.

'Klein has no more idea about economics than Marx'. Paul Farrell, former vice-pres of the Financial News Network,Morgan Stanley investor and current mutual funds investor/analyst says Shock Doctrine, "may be the most important book on economics in the twenty-first century".

And John Gray, now retired from the London School of Economics and once intellectual/economic supporter and associate of Margaret Thatcher says, "There are few books that help us understand the present..."

From what I recall from her book it argues for a "politics of rich-get-richer, poor-get-poorer" in specific countries where Chicago school economic policies were applied. I have read no critique yet that disproves her data. I hope that your position labelling her a lunatic who, "imagines laws and policing necessary to defend capitalism" will be borne out by Jonathan Chait's article.

"Libertarian-anarchists", i.e. anarcho-capitalists, don't believe there should be no laws. They believe that police, courts, and military are achievable by the free market.

Those three things, instead of gaining resources through taxation, i.e. coercion, would compete for resources in the market place by offering their services for the voluntary exchange of money.

Because these three services receive money (claims to resources) through voluntary transactions rather than taxation they could not be defined as government entities. Government is a group of individuals that have a monopoly on the use or threat of violence. For example, if policing (i.e. protection agency/company) was done in the free market a protection agency could not tax (i.e. forcefully extract money from an individual). They would have to receive money by convincing others that the relationship between the service and price of their protection agency is better than the offer of competing protection companies.

So, an anarcho-capitalist can be defined as someone who believes that ALL services can and should be provided by the free market. In other words, they believe that all individuals should abide by the "non-aggression principle," that one should never use or threaten violence except in defense against the threat or use of violence. Another term for anarcho-capitalist would be "voluntarist." This follows from the definition of free market as, "the sum of all voluntary transactions in society."

I was listening to the Rolling Stones "Sympathy for the Devil" today, and the following is for me emblematic of the "patriotism" of the hard Left.

"Every cop's a criminal, and all the sinners saints".

The United States, as the single nation most responsible for the peace the world is enjoying, and has largely enjoyed for the last half century, is a criminal. And the Chinese, and Cubans, and Venezuelans: saints.

I will focus more on Chomsky--I think today's author really should call it Leninism, which is what it is, not Chomskyism--but would like to first post a link to a paper I wrote discussing the man I view as the Patron Saint of the radical Left, the Marquis de Sade.

http://www.lulu.com/content/3189099

We recently had a near perfect Sadeian crime in China, where the son of a local Communist official raped and murdered a 17 year old girl. Her uncle, insisting that the crime be investigated, was beaten to death. The region rose in protest, and was beaten down, no doubt with many imprisonments, physical beatings, a little torture, possible one or two more murders.

Peace was retained. What makes it perfect, is it is a perfect example of injustice. No claim was made that the crime benefited the people, and only the innocent were punished. Read my paper, and you will see the perfect harmony of this, as seen from the true perspective of the inner core of Leftism.

In my own view, Chomsky, Lakoff, and their fellow travellers have to be understood as Marxist apologists. They are not interested in reforming America in gradualistic, and principled ways. They want a revolution. They know they can't get it, so they have both worked patiently and persistently their entire careers to weaken us morally.

To get at their real project, you have to know about the concept of "hegemony", as developed by Antonio Gramsci: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramsci

His basic conception is that power inheres in social institutions that favor one group over another. The Church, for example, asks you to follow it by behaving in a certain way that tends to discourage revolution by cultivating acceptance and contentment in all circumstances.

The path to revolution is to overturn conventional morality, and attack the principles and basis of the dominant culture. This can be done through any means necessary, since morality itself is a "hegemonic narrative", and thus can safely be rejected.

Both Chomsky and Lakoff are linguists. Chomsky's own contribution to linguistics is to point out that there appears to be a language forming part of our brain. Before him, it was thought that learning language was a function of repetition and purely environmental. He showed that regardless of how much or how little different cultures speak to their children, they start talking about the same age. Linguistic structure is an "artifact" of the brain.

I have not studied him carefully--he annoys me--but the obvious extension is to show how hegemonic narratives and native organic linguistic structures coalesce to form "reality" in ways that favor some over others.

Logically, then, "reality" is a figment of your imagination. You are being lied to. Iraq was about oil. Afghanistan was to build an oil pipeline.

Whatever the dominant "narrative" is, you insert something--anything--else, whether it makes sense or not, since you can assume you are being lied to.

One common, multipurpose narrative they like to insert is that of the Other. This is very mainstream in the Humanities, or used to be.

We in the West define those in other parts of the world as exotic "Others". In so doing we create a dichotomy of in the fold/outside the fold. It is acceptable in Western hegemonic narratives to dominate "Others", since they aren't like us.

The solution, of course, is a multicultural ethic in which the Others are equal to, or superior to us, usually superior. They would logically be superior since they don't have a hegemonic narrative which hypocritically combines concepts of liberty with the domination of others. Not being hypocrites, they can do whatever they want--including murder, torture, and every crime the mind of man can imagine--and still be better than us. That's why Chomsky blames the US for the Cambodian Killing Fields (the existence of which he denied for as long as he plausibly could), and places no blame at the feet of Pol Pot.

The thing to understand about hegemonic narratives, is they are understood in a very rigid, "wax museum" sort of way. What you will always see in Leftism is an abstract understanding of social structures that does not permit gradualistic reform from within the system.

Since Chomsky, for example, finds linguistic structure to be fixed in the brain, he likewise believes that social forms are fixed. The Power Elite will always be the power elite, unless there is a complete break with the past through a revolution.

In other words, to use another academic term, they "essentialize" Power. By this, I mean that they use a process of defining themselves in contradistinction to "the Man", and so betray the fact that they themselves are the primary users of dichotomous thinking. They themselves think of the world in terms of opposed pairs. They think of America as evil, and everywhere else as good. They think of Republicans as evil, and leftists like Obama as good.

Then, on forums like this, they accuse people who are developing rational arguments about our national self interest of being polarizing, and that if we were truly inclusive we would include their opinions as equal.

But, ultimately, an extended argument about what you could believe, or what you could say, does not conjure facts or logic out of the dark. Facts and logic are either there or they are not, or they are present in a mixed form that needs to be sorted through.

I believe in continuums. I believe in gradualism. I believe in preserving what is good, and what has worked in the past, and in assessing dispassionately any and all sincerely motivated suggestions for improvement.

I do not believe in countenancing radicals whose entire Weltanschauung is oriented around the eradication of the very good world we have built here in America, and are developing steadily around the world. Chomsky wants Lebensraum for himself and his fellow travellers. He cares not at all for anyone else, including members of the developing world he has done so much to damage.

People that genuinely want to create, and are willing to expose their views to rational and public spirited criticism, those are patriots.

People that want to destroy what is good in this nation, without any ideas as to what would be better, those are traitors. Jane Fonda encouraged the North when they were on the ropes. John Kerry did likewise. They are traitors, and it is symptomatic of the propaganda successes of the radical Left that neither has ever really been exposed generally for what they did. Most people still think John Kerry was "swift boated". That is the power of the media, the dominance of which was a key objective of Gramsci, and presumably his modern adherants.

Surfed 2 hours at Upper Trestles

One thing I forgot. I was a fan of a French literary critic--Rene Girard--in Graduate School, since he seemed to at least be trying to solve problems. In discussing him with a Stanford graduate, he shrugged him off by saying he attended one of his lectures, and heard him say "The rejection of the rejection of the Other has begun". It sounded BS to him, so he figured the guy was full of it.

But this is the essence of the multicultural project. You either accept the Other or you reject him (or her). In practice, this means other nations can do no wrong.

How, for example, would one judge Saddam Hussein? To judge him would presume the use of standards, and standards--on the Marxist account--can only be expressive of hegemonic narratives that favor the elites. Therefore, if he is judged evil by mainstream America, he must be good. Likewise, terrorism, as a counterpoint to our dominant narratives of "liberty" and "freedom", must be good, since it is opposed to the narrative by which America retains power. For this reason, the terrorists must have been expressing an equal but opposite view, which on its own account is equal to our own.

It is no wonder that intelligent college graduates, exposed to such a muddle of intellectual and spiritual mediocrity, cannot create cogent arguments to support the views they were taught by implication in four or more years of higher learning. Boiled down, reduced to its foundational principles, it is indefensible

Barry I know the rest day is well and truly over, but since I'm here just before bed...

"Since Chomsky, for example, finds linguistic structure to be fixed in the brain, he likewise believes that social forms are fixed. The Power Elite will always be the power elite, unless there is a complete break with the past through a revolution."

Where does he say social forms are fixed et cetera et cetera? If he didnt "annoy" you perhaps you would email him and find out. He will reply to you swiftly as he has with queries I've made about his arguments in the past.

#136: I detest the man and everything he has done and stood for--or stood against. I have perused many of his writings, and one thing that is quite clear is that like Rush Limbaugh he simply lies when the facts don't suit him. The back and forth between him and Alan Dershowitz is priceless. Alan may have helped get OJ off, but I will never accuse him of not having thought through his positions.

In this particular case, I am making an educated guess. I may be wrong. If so, please correct me.

Since my access to this site will be hit or miss due to some work I have to do, I thought I might post a bit of the "patriotism" of some of our tenured radicals. These are from the book "The ProFessors", by David Horowitz, and except for the last selected essentially at random from 101 entries.

Professor Nicholas de Genova (Columbia, Anthropology).

Called for a "million Mogadishu's", then said that "Us Patriotism is inseparable from imperial warfare and white supremacy. U.S. flags are the emblem of the invading war machine in Iraq today. They are the emblem of the occupying power. The only true heroes are those who find ways that help defeat the U.S. military."

As was done, I will add, in Vietnam, resulting in millions of deaths. He wants the same in Iraq. Any amount of foreign blood can be spilled, provided he can blame U.S. imperialism.

Professor Gregory Dawes (North Carolina State University, literature). Believes communist China and Cuba have been "successful in instituting political and economic democracy."

Professor Robert Dunkley (University of Northern Colorado, Criminology):

Gives final exams that require students to "make the case for gay marriage" and to explain why the United States liberation of Iraq is "criminal".

One student taking the exam answered the question by writing that Saddam Hussein was a war criminal. She was flunked, appealed, and wound up with a B. Prof. Dunkley, contrary to school regulations, destroyed all the tests.

Prof. Noam Chomsky (MIT, linguistics):

Believes that the "so-called War on Terror is pure hypocrisy, virtually without exception".

Like Jane Fonda, he travelled to Hanoi during the Vietnam War, and made speeches there condemning America.

In 1967 he wrote that America "needed a kind of denazification".

"Professor Chomsky has denounced every president from Wil and FDR to Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton as the front men is 'four year dictatorships' by a ruling class (Professor Chomsky has in mind American corporations and their directors which he has described as 'evil'). In his view, the United States, led by a series of lesser Hitlers, picked up where the Nazis left off after they were defeated (primarily by the Soviet Union, of course) in 1945."

To be clear, the murder of 65,000 civilians in South Vietnam was not evil. The murder of millions in Cambodia was not evil, or it was the fault of the US. The murder of 10's of millions in China and the former Soviet Union were nothing compared to the spectacle of free markets, and some people becoming disproportionately wealthy through trade.

Are any of you leftists beginning to understand the sheer ridiculousness of all this?

Two in the hopper. Hopefully they will make it out.

Since neither contains objectionable material, it would be my hope that they will find their way out before too long.

BrightonGeoff #130

Re Goëbbels reference. The Nazis made propaganda films jumping back and forth between clips of Jews on the street interposed with hordes of rats in sewers and infecting granaries. Klein repeatedly shows scratchy clips out of the 40s of people writhing on a table or bed following horrific electroconvulsive therapy. Cut to cartoons allegedly illustrating a CIA handbook. Cut to a WTC impact. Cut to W at ground zero. Cut to Friedman getting the Nobel prize. Cut to street protests, allegedly against Friedman's ideas. Writhing. Back to the CIA book. Cut to the Thailand tsunami. Cut to wars, massacres, 911. Cut to quotations allegedly Friedman's. Writhing. Back to the CIA cartoons. This is proof by juxtaposition. Although the subject is different, the technique is recognizable as Goëbbels' genre. The style is intellectually repulsive and deserving of the Goëbbels label. It is propaganda, and the susceptible audience comprises the stupid class. Hence, the satirical link to the stupid gene vs. left gene.

Re Seattle connection. On review of my claim that Klein “has been accused of having organization responsibility for the Seattle riots against the World Trade Organization”, I find it to be strangely true, but ex post facto. Her first book, No Logos, could have been helpful for the rioters. It was almost her first writing, but it was released almost coincidentally with the 1999 protest. What she has done is try to organize the riots after the fact. She has tried to get in front of the parade to be its leader. See her article, “Were the DC and Seattle Protests Unfocused?” Her answer is yes, totally. Seattle was a hodge-podge of protestors, somewhat emphasizing anti-globalization, but some just relics of the '60s. She addressed a conference called “Re-Imagining Politics and Society at the Millennium: Creating a Just, Caring and Sustainable World”, May 18-21, 2000. In her address she decried “the lack of 'unity of vision and strategy' guiding the movement against global corporatism.” She said, “Our mission, according to the conference organizers at the Foundation for Ethics and Meaning, was to whip that chaos on the streets into some kind of structured, media-friendly shape.” Clearly, she wishes to provide that coherence to the protests. She is writing its manifesto. Specifically she wants to reshape the hapless energy of protest from anti-globalization into simply anti-corporations. She wants to go slow, putting recruitment above a coup.

I will add that her writings are far more coherent and clever than her repulsive video. But her writings are quite unquotable. They are not definitive enough on anything. I read three interviews of her, and found them far more enlightening. In one, she says, “I'm not really interested in economics; I'm interested in politics and culture.” She claims to have inherited (satire by ridicule) her knowledge of economics from her brother.

The main difference between Klein and the accusation that she organized Seattle on the one hand and the accusation that CrossFit has negative health impacts is that Klein would be honored and flattered by the charge, and CrossFit would demonstrate the falsity of its barb.

Re her vertical inheritance: Her grandfather “activist” was a Marxist. Her parents expatriated from the US during the Vietnam War. She would do her family proud.

Re her knowledge of economics: What I said was that she knew no more than Marx about the subject. Marx's utopia hung on the conjecture that people would labor for the good of the state. He's been proved wrong time and again. When his socialism comes to power, it consumes any national wealth, but creates none. Both Marx and Klein demonstrate a lack of understanding of the role of materialized incentives (that's where you get a bite of the carrot) in the creation of wealth. Her books may indeed prove to be important and help us understand the present, as you suggest. Das Capital was important, and by its errors, both theoretical and experiential, helped us understand the present, and she recognizes who are foremost among the “us”: Hayek and Friedman.

Jeff,

I'm having some trouble with the filter this go-round, but did want to say I'm really enjoying your posts.

Barry I heard Chomsky speak in London some ten years ago. He was asked the classic left question, 'what is to be done?' by a member of the audience. He replied saying nothing about social forms being fixed and there being a need for revolution. I think the onus is on you to tell us where he does say/think this.

Re the first three Horowitz quotes, I agree they are spot on.

Re yr position on being conservative/rightist and gradualism. Friedman in conversation with Pinochet said that the way to create an "economic miracle" there required decisive "shock" and rejected "gradualism" as "unfeasible" - you'll find this in his Memoirs 'Two Lucky People'.

Thanks for yr reply Jeff and summary of the video. Case by juxtaposition I agree. When I saw the video I was not convinced, I felt it was a deliberate ploy to be provocative. The video does not exist alone though, but as a visual account of the books thesis. The books account has to be disproved before the video can be rejected as extremely partial or inaccurate outright. I'll email her to see if she replies to the accusation that her video is Goebells style propoganda.

Re yr further comments on 'organisational responsibility'. Claiming, as she does in the quotes you give, to have been aiming to 'whip chaos into structure' and 'provide coherence' - doesn't prove she was having any great influence. And I agree with you that I'm sure her ego would be flattered by the charge. I strangely added that in my previous post, but removed it as I didnt think it was necessary as part of the point I was making.

Re inheriting her economics knowledge from her brother? Page 530 of her book she says that she questioned him on monetarist theory. Additionally the book was read before release she says by Ricardo Greenspun (economist) and Stephen McBride (Political economist). I've read the Chait article and I'm skimming back through the book, (not to prove her correct) to make an assessment of his refutations which appeared very weak.

Its not clear what yr saying on Klein's economic understanding and Marx's. Initially you said that she did not appreciate the goods created by market economies, I'm paraphrasing as you specifically said 'liberties'. But I don't see where she denies this. Shock Doctrine is about specific policies in specific countries with specific effects. The points she makes, to the contrary of yr earlier claim, are "definitive". Which is why I'm looking for some hard empirical refutations.

Yr final point does not chime with the importance which either Gray or Farrell attribute to her.
There is nothing I've read where she expects people to labour for the good of the state.
Does Marx's economic work demand this? All the economists I've met think that Marx had significant understanding of the way the economy of the 19th century operated. Note this does not imply that I am a Communist.

I think the materialised incentives in South America Klein discusses are opportunites to get out of material poverty caused by Friedman's model.

I agree with you on the lack of incentives under Communism which partly caused its downfall. I don't know to what extent this is due to Marx's writings specifically. Friends from former Communist countries tell me that the economic models followed by the corrupt dictatorial cliques who managed these countries probably had little to do with Marx's work. I suspect their economies were politicised far more by the work of Lenin(ism) which had little to do with Marx.

Marx was writing about improving the basic conditions of the workers and peasants from serfdom. Material conditions then were nothing like today - while some people were concerned with gettting stuffed chairs, the majority wanted a wooden bench.
A normal worker did not aspire to a golden plated horse drawn carriage, not even a carriage, but possibly a horse. Incentives then and now were entirely different.

BrightonGeoff #142, #143:

You might want to check with Naomi Klein about whether she thinks her video is Goëbbels-esque. Wouldn't we all be surprised if her answer were yes?

I based my comments about her intent to organize and steer the anti-globalization horde on her own writings posted on her blog at naomiklein.org, plus just a little reading between her lines. I did not say that she was either successful or influential, just that she was proudly worthy of the accusation of wanting to lead and promote anti-corporate street riots. She well may achieve recognition with a little ripening, in spite of the universal decline in Marxist influence (except among US Democrats, of course).

Shock Doctrine is Klein's socio-economic model based on her distortion of a word or two from Friedman, intermixed with factual distortions and irrelevancies, all extrapolated to fantastic levels. It's a great idea for rallying a leftist movement, but like the majority of social science models, it has neither analytical value nor predictive power.

In answer to your question, of course Klein expects people to labor for the State. She's a Marxist. You ask, “Does Marxist economic work demand this?” To be sure!

Karl Marx wrote the slogan, “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”. It is an adequate summary of Marxism. Do note that this slogan has but one actor, “each”, meaning the worker, comrade, or citizen (but, as it turned out, (surprise!) not the apparatchik). The silent actor is the State. The State will decide whether the worker is giving according to his ability, and will determine what the worker's needs might be. In the benevolence of utopian socialism, the worker decides what he can do for the state and the state satisfies his slightest wish. In practical socialism, the worker is forced to produce. This gift-wrapped tyranny is the essence of Marx's seductive (for the weak minded) but hideous socio-economic system.

I dispute your claim of the existence of “material poverty caused by Friedman's model” anywhere. It's unprovable on its face (we don't have a laboratory with identical paths, one with and one without Friedman's model). It's contrary to experience everywhere to the extent that free markets have been attempted. For the closest thing to laboratories, compare Hong Kong or Singapore to Communist China, South Korea to North Korea, East to West Germany, the United States to post-nationalized Great Britain. Friedman's model is based on those experiments. Poverty exists in any system. But I would dispute the claim that poverty increased anywhere under the Friedman model, before or after he documented it.

By the way, I have a unique definition of a free market, one that might not jibe with Friedman or anyone else. A free market exists where there is an auction for competing products, whether by type or price. Laissez faire economics, at least under some of its variable definitions by self-anointed Libertarians (again, no definition), allows monopolies to take over markets.

You puzzled about the extent to which Communism was “due to Marx's writings specifically”. You must distinguish between the product and its advertising. International Communism is a fully centralized, authoritarian system under the guise of Marxism/socialism. Communists here and there regularly admitted that the socialism was yet to come. Communism enslaved people with unbelievable brutality, including genocide and especially intelligencia-cide. It expanded through military action and almost never by the ballot.

Marxism in Communism had and has a softening effect on its opposition. In this country, the liberals concocted the Great Convergence Theorem. Communism would become more and more democratic, and the US more and more socialistic, and we would have a great convergence and, at last, World Peace, Coupled with timidity and fear, this was practiced by the US government. We must not upset the Communists, but just wait them out. We drew lines everywhere. We could not cross first the Yalu River, and then the 38th parallel. We could not cross first into China or later into North Vietnam. This is the formula of sanctuaries and for perpetual conflict, war, and death. The enemy never risked anything that he didn't choose to risk. It cost us reunification of Korea, and it cost us all of Vietnam.

So as not to threaten the unstable Soviet leader of the day, we instituted the insane policy of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD). We would absorb the first strike, and have enough resources left to annihilate the USSR. We would not fire on warning, even with in-coming ICBMs. Those policies probably cost us the equivalent of the collective treasuries of Europe.

This was the effect Marx had.

Reagan started the US conversion to a sane foreign policy. He crossed the border in Grenada, bristling with symbology if not force. With Star Wars, as it came to be disparaged, we would check the in-coming harmlessly in space. We would no longer absorb the first strike. The Soviets knew we could do it, notwithstanding the Union of Concerned Scientists, and they simply unraveled.

Obama against Hillary would have taken us back to sanctuaries, cowardice, and fear. Obama against McCain would take us back but just in Iraq, and not Iran or Israel, and he would boldly cross a new border going into Pakistan! This will splinter his base when they catch on, except for those who know he knows they know. A President Obama, they'd guess, would take us back. Change!

If McCain lets Obama redefine himself, Obama might win. The real Obama won't do much better than the best of his predecessors, McGovern, Dukakis, Mondale. He'd be lucky to carry four states.

If I had the power to erase the effects of any man in history, it would be Karl Marx.

It would leave Naomi Klein completely empty-headed.

Jeff thanks for yr reply. Just got in from wrestling and gotta get some sleep to be ready for double whammy of wods tommorra. Interestingly the wrestling instructor informed our group this evening that it was Margaret Thatcher who ordered the dismantling of the Inner London Education Authority in the late 80s. ILEA was promoting and supporting among many other sporting activities, Greco-Roman wrestling. Thatcher despised wrestling for its 'working class' cultural connections in England. Complete aside but something I'm going to look into nonetheless. Our instructor is a chinese entrepreneur, not a Marxist by the way.

Re Emailing Klein - should have made this clear before. I reckon that she may have intended the video to be seen in a propogandist fashion, its too deliberately stylised to be viewed otherwise.
Anyway we'll see.

Still no evidence on the factual distortions.
I'll carry on looking.

It's grossly reductionist to describe all of Marx's writings as discernable in one phrase, "From each according to..." and yr dogmatic interpretation of it. From my readings some time ago, I found no theory of the state whatsoever.

Re Friedman and poverty. If the data on the economies Klein gives is accurate prior to the implementing of his theories and correct regarding the period after implentation that should be enough evidence? Where is the need for 1 lab and 2 paths one with and without Friedmans economic advice? If we followed this logic, we'd need a control group for every claim that an economist made re success and failure of specific economic practices, would we not?

I will as you suggest investigate the countries you list and examine Friedmans influence or lack of on each and consequences.

I agree that laissez faire economics advocates allow monopolies to take over markets. I'm certain that Adam Smith would turn in his grave if he was to hear the UK Adam Smith Institue claiming to represent his ideas. How do you propose we overcome monopolies that distort the market?

You say, "International Communism is a fully centralized..." I'm assuming you mean 'was'?
I have no disagreement regarding how mendacious Communist governments often were.

Can't reply to yr thoughts on US Communism, MAD, the missile shield or Obama, I have no idea whether yr narrative is reasonably accurate or quite biased.

Signing off for tonight.

Best

Geoff

This was a disappointing reading. It gives lip service to the patriotic duty of dissent, and then tears it apart. I wish these rabid 'patriots' could remember what they were saying about America and its leadership when Clinton was being impeached.

Jeff, Barry, thank you, both, learned a lot, revelled in your spirited representation of Hayak/Friedman over the rest.

BG - After reading your posts, I wonder how you would define "Friedman's Model?"

Paul

Comment #88 - Posted by: Carl. "I believe that a patriot is simply a person that places the "interests" of the nation above their own."

Carl, how would you define the interests of the nation? What is 'the nation?' How does 'the nation' know if its interests are being met? What of the innate human desire to serve 'self interest?' In what locations of the world do humans discuss the needs/concerns of others rather than their own?

Paul

BG said: "I agree that laissez faire economics advocates allow monopolies to take over markets. I'm certain that Adam Smith would turn in his grave if he was to hear the UK Adam Smith Institue claiming to represent his ideas. How do you propose we overcome monopolies that distort the market?"

Can you cite a monopoly which has gained control over a free market to the detriment of the consumer, other than the various governments? This phenomenon is like the Big Foot, in that it is theoretically fearsome, but unlike the Bigfoot, people don't actually seek evidence of its existence. When faced w this question, many cite the 'robber barrons' that were the supposed target of Sherman AT. However, their principle 'sin' was they overpowered inferior competitors, by providing higher quality and better prices.

Those competitors who were bankrupted by the superior businesses of the 'barrons' were able to gain and use the coercive power of the state to do what they could not by their own competitive efforts do. The point being that Sherman protected not consumers but business persons who wanted to charge consumers more money for a lower quality product.

"I will as you suggest investigate the countries you list and examine Friedmans influence or lack of on each and consequences."
--What I think you will find is that he recognized what they did rather than influenced it.

In most basic form, the nations that have moved out of 3rd world status established rule of law (defending the rights of the individuals and their property), and did not use the power of the state to restrict voluntary exchange of their citizenry, either inside or outside of the boundaries of their nation.

Paul

enjoying this thread very much- my own post got filtered- but no big deal- the conversation is very instructive- please keep posting.

BrightonGeoff,

So if I'm understanding you correctly, the sufferings of other nations--however hideous--are as nothing compared to the inequalities in outcome observed in free market systems? By what remarkable smoke and mirrors routine do you simultaneously endorse the wholesale murder of millions, and claime the moral high ground?

In my own mind, it is something beteen moral idiocy and outright evil. Read my paper. I make the case. It needs work, and relies too much on wholesale quotes, but the content is sound, and in my own mind--at least with respect to Vietnam and Cambodia--irrefutable.

For that reason, I expect you to change the subject, or offer verbiage purporting to address in a substantive way the hideous, odious evil in which Chomsky and his fellow travellers are manifestly complicit, while doing nothing of the sort.

You can't defend the indefensible. No one can.

BrightonGeoff,

I will add, that you are clearly being duplicitous. You are agreeing with the statement that every American President since World War Two has been a little Hitler, guilty of war crimes, and simultaneously asking me to prove that Chomsky is after a revolution? He rejects the entirety of the status quo, notably the role of business in the American government.

You are being obtuse. I will allow you to clarify for us if that is an example of being intentionally misleading or merely a natural consequence of having failed to think your own positions through with care.

Appolloswabbie #149,

For monopoly examples, you might consider IBM's position on business computing, Microsoft's position on personal computing, and AT&Ts position on telephone equipment.

The best example including all aspects of taking over of an established free market is OPEC.

In these examples the control may not be 100%, but it has been substantial and sufficient to do great damage.

Would the liberal stranglehold on university liberal arts qualify? How about technical journals in certain fields, like climatology?

I am this week wearing the hats, literally, both of Capitalist and Worker. This is possible in America.

I won't be able to post on this topic again, but did want to point out that I have created, in my essay, a Rosetta Stone, by which the purposive evasions and propaganda tricks of the Left can be outed.

Very simply, they do not believe in any unchanging moral laws or values. For example, the question can be asked "is raping and murdering a 17 year old girl wrong? Yes or no. Why?"

Why, in this case, might get interesting, since the smarter ones will know where I am going.

Then, "is it ever acceptable for a State to punish the innocent, and ignore the guilty? Why, or why not?" This gets almost infinitely difficult for them, since they know precisely where I am going.

Finally, "can a State be called just which allows such things to happen as a matter of high level policy?"

The answer to that, one would think, would be no. However, in lef-lef land, things are not so simple.

This basic tactic will work on any issue whatsoever. They cannot condemn in the US anything they accept in other nations. And if they insist on doing so, they are either blockheaded, hypocritical, or actively working for a global decline in morality and virtue, presumably due to cowardice and perhaps a latent sadistic streak.

I will take on any Oxford Don, Harvard Professor, Standford alum, politician, social worker, or Presidential candidate whatsoever with this tactic--which I am stating openly--and I will win without exception every time, because I am right.

Leftism is a moral corruption which works to further human evil, degradation, vice, and ultimately self destruction. That may sound strong, but I can back it up. Read my essay. It's still crayon scribbles, but it's got all the basics.

"Carl, how would you define the interests of the nation? What is 'the nation?' How does 'the nation' know if its interests are being met? What of the innate human desire to serve 'self interest?' In what locations of the world do humans discuss the needs/concerns of others rather than their own? "

Paul,
As I mentioned in my post the "interests of the nation" are going to be defined differently by all. However, through elections we determine who is going to be given the greatest authority in defining our national interests-the elected officials. Accordingly, how are national interests are defined and met is going to lie in the hands of the people we elect. I don't think you have to agree with every decision they make but you are not required to do so.

To me our nation is the social community and culture that has been the United States since the adoption of the Constitution which established the framework for our government and rights as citizens.

'Self interest' is obviously a huge factor in decision making and therefore who you vote for. Are you voting for someone because you think they are going to harm you or the nation? Probably not. You are going to vote for the person that you think is best for the country and yourself. The majority rules and the official that is elected usually reflects some basic principles that the voting majority favored. Your self interests are obviously something that you cannot ignore. But is what you are doing a benefit to the nation? If so, I think you are a patriot.

Well in just about every nation that has a government there are people discussing the needs of others, but there own needs are obviously taken into account. I am not saying you need to sacrifice your own good to support another.

I stated that I believe a patriot is a person who places the interests of the nation ‘above’ his/her own. The word ‘above’ does not infer any kind of sacrifice be made. People inherently want what is good for themselves=self interests. I look at it in a much simpler way. For example, if you are a school teacher and doing the best you can to educate then you have placed the needs of the nation above your own. The school teacher that does not try or knowingly abuses their power is the one that does not place the needs of the nation above their own and are frauds. It is easy to look back and say I should have done this or that a different way. If you ignore your mistakes then you are an idiot and a fraud. If you grow and learn from your mistakes you can be a benefit to others and our nation.

“In what locations of the world do humans discuss the needs/concerns of others rather than their own? "
I would say everywhere. This is where I think patriotism comes from. There is just as much a human desire to do something for others as there is to serve your self interests. Can someone be a patriot and only be concerned about himself? I don’t think it is possible.
I guess I could define a patriot as someone who is beneficial to the social community of their country, not necessarily the government. It sure does not matter if you are far left or far right leaning both can be patriotic at the same time.

I am not at all claiming to be a expert on this subject matter. I am just telling you what I think.

,Carl

Barry Cooper- you are not reading Brighton Geoffs posts- at all.. If anyone one is duplicitous it is you. Youre reasoning rarely goes beyond the false dichotomies of left/right. You have been told this repeatedly by posters in polite terms, frustrated terms and through example- but you cannot understand.

The predicating questions you pose are perfect examples of your own duplicitous line of reasoning- particularly since in various posts over time I have observed you argue against the veiws you attribute to people who disagree with you. 1)your stance on tortue as policy 2) your stated belief that you would kill your family to save a million people 3) your statement that the Iraq war 'wasnt that bad' in light of the number of troop deaths ( you left out collatoral damage completely in your assessment- which was either duplicitous or stupid- take your pick= and yet you accuse "leftists" of doing the same with respect to cambodia Darfur - or any other country just out of the purview of the actual discussion you are having- a distraction meant to cover your tail.

You have no moral compass- you lovingly, authoritatively speak of morality- and deride those who reach different conclusions in quest of the same, This hypocrisy is disgusting.
No Mr Cooper- all ideas are not created equal- but in the court of reason, ideas are suspect before the people promulgating them are.
You routinely, perhaps willingly, fail at making that distinction in the service of your ideology. In your world Ideology trumps all. So quick to talk of "evil" and so slow to recognize its truest form- that of the demagogue.

Your approach to thinking is that of a very intelligent person who is stuck- stuck on the need not to find truth- but to "be right" It is shameful. because at the root of it all it causes you to be incapable of learning from people clearly more intelligent than you are - unless they are politically correct- preferring instead to devolve into petty character attacks, cloaked in jingoism and smatters of foreign language cliches when things get real and people leave you in the dust fair and square.

I am simply obliging you at your most basic impulse. If you want a fight- then fight- but dont dress it up as any kind of intellectual prowess at 'debate'- it is the technique of the embittered school marm who wants control of the class rather than genuine freedom of intellectual expression. Time for the back of the class to speak up at the emptiness of heart.

I offer this invective in hopes that the more thoughtful posters wouldnt waste their energy refuting such trollish rejoinders as you typically offer- it distracts those of us here to learn.
. Because they often dont know - in their own sincerity they take you as being a trustworthy 'sparring' partner- you are not-and there is scant reason to pretend otherwise.

The debate is rarely about Left and RIght- but about the demagogues on both sides who can only build a thought by it's opposition- I guess this puts you your leftist/rightist cohort with Hegel- and we know what that means in your paradigm.

I will never understand undue arrogance in intellectual debate- its like stepping on something foul on your way into church.

Appolo short of time at present but will reply to questions a)defining Friedman's model in more detail - briefly I'd say its ostensibly to transform mixed economies to a clean slate where the market can operate without government interference. In practice in the examples Klein gives it favours an authoritarian corporatist solution reducing liberty, freedom and material wealth.

b) monopolies distorting markets - I agree with all of Jeff's examples. I think a stronger claim can be made for 'oligarchies' distorting markets - quick example: from the film 'Who Killed the Electric Car' (which I cite not for environmental reasons but for issues of creative technological development, cost and efficiency) - GM and Petrolic Corporations succeeded in preventing a viable new technology for purchase.

c) You may be right re Friedman and the countries Jeff suggested for comparison on his recognition of their achievements and methods and not his outright influence. I will look into this further. Klein cites Stephen Haggard who she describes as a 'staunch neo-liberal' who says(p.134 Shock Doctrine) that the biggest Friedman reforms came in the wake of military coups in South America, Indonesia, Turkey, South Korea and Ghana and in 1 party states - Mexico, Singapore, Hong Kong and Taiwan. Her book partly cites data suggesting that in some of these countries their undemocratic governments were involved in shaping the Friedman reforms.
The central question here is to what extent have these governments restricted individual rights and property rights in the widest sense of those terms. In some countries the answer is substantively in others hardly at all possibly.
I need to examine the countries Jeff presented to think this through.

Barry - Re the final quote from Horrowitz, I didnt agree with it, simply because I dont know if that is what Chomsky believes, or believed at some time in the past. I'll read up on Cambodia and Vietnam over the summer and look into what Chomsky said about them in detail. I disagree that the US picked up where the Nazi's left off. Where does he say this? I would describe the situation in Britain as an 'elected dictatorship'. You only have to look at how many people voted in total and how many for each party and find that approximately a quarter of the countries population (due to barmy voting methodology) brings in the majority government who have near total control.

Re yr example of rape and murder in China. Why would anyone, left, right or otherwise seek to defend the position of the perpetrator(s)?
I think yr conjuring a mythical enemy.

Any sensible person will challenge injustice per se.