Bigger threat

[The Ben G]

Which would you consider a bigger threat? Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, or Sean Hannity.

[Klaatu]

None of these three have a formal education. And if their overlords decide to drop them, they are toast.
Therefore, I feel a threat even bigger than any of these three is their financer, Rupert Murdoch himself.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Wow, all 5 votes for Beck so far. I don't like to focus too much on people like this because crazy infuriating right-wing loons with fascist-like tendencies have always been around. There were red-baiting anti-Semite loons in the 30s like Father Caughlin and I'm sure they make Limbaugh seem like Walter Cronkite but that didn't stop worker's militant struggles and didn't stop society from shifting to the left altogether.

But anyway, I think the poll is kind of a no-brainier. Limbaugh has more clout and more followers, but to my knowledge he never actively encouraged right-wingers to take any more action than buy his books and vote against liberals. Hannity is a frat-boy who'd be telling us what the weather is like in Minnetonka on some local news channel if it wasn't for FOX news - more to the point, he's a Republican party tool and even most conservatives I've talked to see him that way.

Beck claims to speak for "independents (conservative right-wingers)" and that gives his BS the whiff of fascist demagoguery. He is so wild and over the top that he seems to be immune from most liberal criticism: I mean I saw him on CNN when noone knew who he was and he said something along the lines of: "People don't understand: Islam is irreconcilable with us; you can't negotiate with it; it will stop at nothing to destroy us - nukes will be used in the end, the only question is will it be us or them who are eliminated from the planet". Even Rush Limbaugh would have a hard time getting away with calling for the nuclear extermination of what - 1/5th of the human population (though he probably did say things like that in the few years after 9/11 - but in 2006 he would have found it hard to get away with). Also, G. Bleck is a witch-hunter and a red-baiter and considering all the crazy fans he has is a formula for getting the subjects of his crusades shot eventually (if they don't get fired first - which they have been).

[The Vegan Marxist]

None of these three have a formal education. And if their overlords decide to drop them, they are toast.
Therefore, I feel a threat even bigger than any of these three is their financer, Rupert Murdoch himself.

Rupert Murdoch funds them, but eventually that'll branch off to something else. In fact, we're seeing that already. Glenn Beck & his 9/12'ers are practically forming this dogmatic militant stance against anything they consider "progressive". I believe Glenn has branched himself off further than what we know of from Fox News.

[Klaatu]

Rupert Murdoch funds them, but eventually that'll branch off to something else. In fact, we're seeing that already. Glenn Beck & his 9/12'ers are practically forming this dogmatic militant stance against anything they consider "progressive". I believe Glenn has branched himself off further than what we know of from Fox News.

So in a sense, we can say that Beck himself, is "progressive." :lol:

[Klaatu]

(A) Hannity tells outright lies. For example, Obama said in a speech: "The health insurance executives don't make big profits because they are bad people, it's just because they want to make money." Hannity's version: "The president said that health insurance executives are bad people." Perhaps Hannity has a hearing problem (or has shit in his ears)

(B) Limbaugh makes up his own BS too: "Michael J Fox was exaggerating his illness." and "School buses should be segregated by race" and - here's a zinger: "I agree with the Taliban." He said that. I'm taking that out of context, but it sounds just as weird in context.

(C) Beck is not acting - he is seriously mentally disturbed. And anyone who takes a disturbed person seriously is going to get what they wish for, but it won't be good. Consider that actors get a part because of their personality. For example, a director would not want a shy, meek actor to play the part of a mean-spirited thug. He would be unconvincing. An actor plays a part best-suited to his personal demeanor. Hence, an easily-agitated man plays the part of a thug. Hence, Beck is not just faking crazy, he really is crazy.

Point is, these guys will eventually hang themselves. As proof, I personally know conservatives who have stopped listening (for the above reasons, and then some) One neocon female colleague refers to Beck as an "Irritating imbecile."

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

They are not a threat. They are simply the pawns in the media game that feeds garbage to the masses in order to distract them from the real issues.

They can be replaced in a flash. Anybody who can be replaced in a flash, as such, is not a threat by themselves, but part of a bigger danger - in this case, being the far-right that has become all too mainstream in the US.

[RadioRaheem84]

The real threat are the people backing Beck and the people that Beck influences. Beck is just a medium.

[Wolf Larson]

They are not a threat. They are simply the pawns in the media game that feeds garbage to the masses in order to distract them from the real issues.

They can be replaced in a flash. Anybody who can be replaced in a flash, as such, is not a threat by themselves, but part of a bigger danger - in this case, being the far-right that has become all too mainstream in the US.

TV is a threat in general. Some of the richest capitalists in the world own all of the programing and that's essentially what it is, programing [what to think about and how to think about it]. Right now I'd say Obama is a bigger threat than Glen Beck. Anyone who believes Glen Becks nonsense about Obama being a socialist is ignorant beyond imagination. The Fox news AM radio combination is just a small part of the overall game. Right now they're an insurance policy keeping Obama to his promise to represent his capitalist campaign financiers Rahm Emanuel lined up and Obama would be doing so either way. The game's rigged. Obama's just another fraud. Our so called democracy is noting but a plutocratic republic and if anything this should be obvious now but the hyperbolic partisan game hides the fact that Obama is no different than Bush/McCain/Clinton. The bigger threat is the silly partisan game that fools many of us on the left into supporting corporate capitalists over silly hyperbolic wedge issues. The Democrat party, more specifically, the Democratic Leadership Council, is running the show and they're connected at the hip with status quo corporate/war policy.

[Klaatu]

The Democrat party, more specifically, the Democratic Leadership Council, is running the show and they're connected at the hip with status quo corporate/war policy.

President Eisenhower, in the 1960s, had warned of the "military-industrial complex."
Man was he right. It's here, and it's here to stay, budget deficits be damned.

[The Red Next Door]

I do not see them as a threat but the people who do listen to them, especially that guy fox took away from a mental ward and put him on the air, as dangerous.

[bailey_187]

Glenn Beck actually has a campaign against real Communists and Communism in action historically, while the others seem to just accuse Obama of being a Communist and bringing Communism to America. Glenn Beck actually slanders us and our history, so he is more dangerous.

[Tablo]

Beck has a more direct influence on my life. My parents eat up everything he says and assumes I'm some kind of Nazi. :/

[Invincible Summer]

I think Glenn Beck is more "dangerous." Although all of them are equally hypocritical and disgusting, Beck is, IMO, more of a populist. He always tries to act like he's just an "everyman," which is probably why lots of people are buying into his neo-McCarthyist smear campaign against anything remotely "progressive."

He's normalizing paleoconservatism and fabricates batshit crazy lies, which is more dangerous than Hannity/Limbaugh's opinion-based shit.

[Devrim]

I have never heard of any of these people. Therefore I doubt that any of them are particularly important or dangerous.

Devrim

[willdw79]

Glenn Beck actually has a campaign against real Communists and Communism in action historically, while the others seem to just accuse Obama of being a Communist and bringing Communism to America. Glenn Beck actually slanders us and our history, so he is more dangerous.
I agree about Glenn Beck. He is targeting real communists, not just neo-liberals like Obama. However, this may backfire, because Beck has given the names of organizations, people, and literature that are sometime difficult to find within our small circles.

Plus, Beck motivates his fascist followers (like the Tea Party) to action, which may bring the conflict between communists and fascists to the forefront. The neo-liberals' "live and let live" attitude does not confront fascism. The only real opposition to fascism comes from anarchists and communists. Beck may be successful in giving the left a clear target.

One of the Tea Baggers' leaders has said that they are in favor of testing people before they can vote and making sure that people can speak english before they participate in society etc. These are clear targets for the left to smash.

It can be hard sometimes to convince a person that racism effects all workers, that sexism hurts all workers, or that equality is a principle worth fighting for. The rationales for these ideas can be somewhat complicated for various reasons. But fascists like Beck and the Tea Baggers have a way of being so overt with their racism, sexism, anti-homosexual, anti-youth, anti-poor, ideals that they engender a visceral response in many more people than say Bill Clinton or even Ronald Reagan.

Thats why I think that Beck is the most dangerous, but he also gives us a foil. The radical left should look forward to conflicts like these, because we can win them.

[Tablo]

I have never heard of any of these people. Therefore I doubt that any of them are particularly important or dangerous.

Devrim
They are major figures in the American media. Even the most poorly educated European would probably laugh at their idiotic behavior. :/

[Devrim]

They are major figures in the American media. Even the most poorly educated European would probably laugh at their idiotic behavior. :/

So basically they are talking heads on TV. Why on Earth does anybody think they are a threat?

Devrim

[Tatarin]

Strange question. Who's most evil, Hitler or Himmler? :D

[Invincible Summer]

So basically they are talking heads on TV. Why on Earth does anybody think they are a threat?

Devrim


The media is one of the biggest tools/weapons (depending on how you want to see it) that the ruling class has. It creates, modifies, disseminates norms, values, and perceptions of society. Yeah, they're "talking heads," but they are on the largest news networks in the US. Their ideas are given a veil of legitimacy because they are hosts of their own programs. People are bound to hear to their bullshit at some point.

[Devrim]

The media is one of the biggest tools/weapons (depending on how you want to see it) that the ruling class has. It creates, modifies, disseminates norms, values, and perceptions of society. Yeah, they're "talking heads," but they are on the largest news networks in the US. Their ideas are given a veil of legitimacy because they are hosts of their own programs. People are bound to hear to their bullshit at some point.

You could argue that about the media, but I don't think that individual TV stars are a particular threat. As somebody pointed out earlier in the thread. people like Rupert Murdoch can buy and sell these sort of people, and does.

Devrim

[Tablo]

You could argue that about the media, but I don't think that individual TV stars are a particular threat. As somebody pointed out earlier in the thread. people like Rupert Murdoch can buy and sell these sort of people, and does.

Devrim
The US the media and its figures are a very big deal. It may be a bit of a stereotype, but people really base everything they believe on what is told to them on television. My parents watch Beck and his nonsense. They eat it up as absolute truth as do many of my teachers and family members. He is not dangerous as an individual, but the ideas he convinces people are truth are extremely dangerous. They are turning uneducated individuals into right-wing radicals where I live. I frequently hear people repeat things Beck said as absolute truth like it is some kind of religious cult.

[Klaatu]

The US the media and its figures are a very big deal. It may be a bit of a stereotype, but people really base everything they believe on what is told to them on television. My parents watch Beck and his nonsense. They eat it up as absolute truth as do many of my teachers and family members. He is not dangerous as an individual, but the ideas he convinces people are truth are extremely dangerous. They are turning uneducated individuals into right-wing radicals where I live. I frequently hear people repeat things Beck said as absolute truth like it is some kind of religious cult.

Kind of like the Taliban?

[Devrim]

The US the media and its figures are a very big deal. It may be a bit of a stereotype, but people really base everything they believe on what is told to them on television. My parents watch Beck and his nonsense. They eat it up as absolute truth as do many of my teachers and family members. He is not dangerous as an individual, but the ideas he convinces people are truth are extremely dangerous. They are turning uneducated individuals into right-wing radicals where I live. I frequently hear people repeat things Beck said as absolute truth like it is some kind of religious cult.

Yes, Ok the media can influence people, but it is not the individual talking heads on it that are a problem as you point out. I think that the important question here is related to how class consciousness develops. For communists it is not a question of competing with the bourgeois media to influence people.

Devrim

[The Douche]

You could argue that about the media, but I don't think that individual TV stars are a particular threat. As somebody pointed out earlier in the thread. people like Rupert Murdoch can buy and sell these sort of people, and does.

Devrim

Beck, however (and limbaugh somehwhat, to a much lesser extent), contributes in an ideological leadership position to the tea party mass movement in the US.

[RED DAVE]

Glenn Beck actually has a campaign against real Communists and Communism in action historically, while the others seem to just accuse Obama of being a Communist and bringing Communism to America. Glenn Beck actually slanders us and our history, so he is more dangerous.This is correct. There is a real whiff of the genuine fascist in Beck, and his penchant for historical "research" is gradually taking him further and further into the traditional areas of the US radical right: racism, antisemitism, conspiracy theory.

Once the labor movement begins to move, he will become more and more obviously reactionary. He has the ability to be a serious fascist leader or at least a serious fascist publicist.

RED DAVE

[willdw79]

For communists it is not a question of competing with the bourgeois media to influence people.

Devrim

If we don't compete with the bourgeois media amongst others then who do we compete with? It seems that dialectical thought, which underlies Socialism/Communism/Anarchism is the dialectic.

[Devrim]

If we don't compete with the bourgeois media amongst others then who do we compete with? It seems that dialectical thought, which underlies Socialism/Communism/Anarchism is the dialectic.

The communist view point doesn't see the development of class consciousness as an 'educationalist competition' in which it is necessary to 'outargue' the bourgeois media. Which is real quite a good thing as we would have no chance. It sees the development of class consciousness as being formed through the struggle of the working class, and people being forced into situations where through their own position in society they are forced to question ideas that they used to hold. A well known international example of this can be seen from the reaction of the UK miners to the police. Many miners talked about how only months before they would have seen the police beating people in inner city riots as 'people doing a hard job in difficult circumstances', but their own experience with the police forced them to change their minds. One could also talk about the experience of women in that strike as another example. These are just well know, large scale examples of a process that goes on in every struggle, everyday.

Devrim