An imaginary reader writes in to say, “Michael, how come you haven’t done any self-promotion lately? You used to excel at it, but now you’re all caught up in ‘this humble blog’ nonsense. We miss the days when you used to walk around Penn State with a sandwich board advertising your latest essay, signing people up to receive free offprints and photocopies.”
Well, I.R., you have a point. After all, this book has been out for weeks now, and I haven’t even mentioned that mine is the volume’s closing essay. I apologize.
And let’s not forget that nominations for the 2004 Koufax Awards-- as Chris Bowers puts it, “the only blogosphere award that matters"-- are now open. Since this shamelessly self-promoting blog debuted on January 7 of this year, we’re still officially a “new” blog, though judging from the nominations so far, we expect to lose badly to James Wolcott in this and perhaps a couple of other categories as well. But if you’re so inclined, please stop by and nominate me in the “best liberal-left hockey blogging during an NHL lockout-- new blogs” category. I think I should have that one sewn up.
The Chairman of the Red Party thanks you.
I see Pharyngula has been nominated a few times, so I’ll plug it here, too.
Everyone seems to be nominating it as “best expert blog”, which really has me wondering...expert at what? I’m thinking “best expert at advising invertebrates in how to overcome sexual dysfunction,” which, if only they had the guts to write out the full title, would allow me to walk all over those other poseurs who have been nominated, like Juan Cole and Kevin Drum, who wouldn’t know a hectocotyl arm if they were slapped with it, or wouldn’t recognize a spermatophore if one were plopped into their bellybutton.
I might also have a shot at “best expert at making lit studies professors grimace at his windy, convoluted sentences.”Posted by PZ Myers on 12/15 at 09:20 AM
That’s really funny you say that, PZ. I was going to nominate you for best expert blog, too, and I didn’t even know about your important work advising invertebrates in how to overcome sexual dysfunction. Is this about the squid again?Posted by Michael on 12/15 at 10:21 AM
You say tentacles; I say testicles. Let’s call the whole thing off.Posted by on 12/15 at 10:34 AM
Warning - any nematocyst discharge lasting more than 4 hours should seek immediate medical attention
Also, isn’t spermatophore sur le bellybutton on the holiday menu at Le Cirque?Posted by on 12/15 at 11:00 AM
Mr. Red Party Chairman, I know this means instant excommunication from your great and powerful political party, but...ahem..uh...well..um...I mean to say, um...are you sure you are not blogging too much and therefore not spending enough time working to take over the nation on behalf of the Red Party?
I promise, oh powerful and perfect Chairman, no reporter asked me to ask that question!
(How was that, Mr. Hersh? D’oh!)Posted by on 12/15 at 11:24 AM
You are forgiven this once, Mitchell. The great and powerful Chairman will answer your question! First, you will note that today’s self-promoting post was contentless, and took no more than fifteen minutes of my day, allowing me to write about 2000 words of my book-- which is, you’ll recall, a centerpiece of my plan to take over the nation. And second, the Red Party, although formed, has not yet convened. 9 PM tonight, 8 Central, 6 Pacific. You will be notified.Posted by Michael on 12/15 at 12:18 PM
15 minutes is approximately 1% of your day. That means you are progressing, at best, at 99% of the rate you could be. Maximum Effort to the Goals of the Party, sir!Posted by PZ Myers on 12/15 at 03:04 PM
The Red Party:Posted by on 12/15 at 03:07 PM
Thanks for the link, Bill! But while I resonate in sympathy with the principles of the U.K. Red Party, I hope you’ll note that my Red Party is even smaller and even newer.Posted by Michael on 12/15 at 03:15 PM
Michael: if you´re serious about this Red Party business you should not fail to differentiate yourself from all the opportunistic-revisionist Red Parties that abound on the ultra-Left market place. Ergo, you should define when exactly the other Red Parties started betraying the Proletariat.
Current options are: 1914 (Bolsh-Mensh split), 1923-7 (Stalin), 1932-3 (CP fuckup in Germany), 1948 (Tito), 1956 (Krushov´s unveiling of Stalin), 1960 (China´s unveiling of Krushov´s unveiling as yet another opportunistic betrayal). A few more options must have popped up since I lost track of my own Red Party.
Or you can come up with your own dates, of course, which would be even nicer. But don´t fail to address that in today´s meeting. It´s essential for your identity as a serious Red Party. Oh, and a position on the 11th and most recent split of the IV International would be nice too.
Greetings from a land ruled by a corporate-controlled Red Party.Posted by Idelber on 12/16 at 05:31 AM
Current options are: 1914 (Bolsh-Mensh split), 1923-7 (Stalin), 1932-3 (CP fuckup in Germany), 1948 (Tito), 1956 (Krushov´s unveiling of Stalin), 1960 (China´s unveiling of Krushov´s unveiling as yet another opportunistic betrayal).
All sellouts, all of them on every side of every one of those those false dialectics.
I exhort Michael to pin the blame precisely on those accommodationists who acceded to the reformist repeal of the Corn Laws in 1848.Posted by Chris Clarke on 12/16 at 08:53 AM
You intellectuals all have way too much time on your hands. If, like me, you were working stiffs, you would not have time to read, and laugh at, this blog, nor to respond to the senseless piffle constantly bandied about.
I thought Michael’s Red Party was progressive as he self-defined it. This means it cannot be affiliated with the old time Red Party which believes in dialectics. Progressivism as espoused by Michael’s Red Party is capable of “multiple, pragmatic, fluid coalitions with people who believe exactly what I believe, and for all the right reasons”. Hence, it cannot suffer from the inherent self-contradiction that would lead to a dialectic crisis. There is no inherent self-contradiction since there is nothing there to believe in or adhere to, except whatever he wants, which can change at any moment.
Something like “L’etat, c’est moi” without the nice accent aigue.Posted by on 12/16 at 10:26 AM
The initial meeting of the Party went quite well, thank you. Idelber, I caucused myself and voted unanimously not to recognize the Fourth International at all. And Chris, thanks for the reminder about the liberal reformists who sold us out in 1848. But the roots of that conflict go much further back, of course, and it is fitting that on this day, December 16, the anniversary of the founding of Cromwell’s Protectorate in 1653, we take the time to denounce both Cromwell and the Levellers who rose to overthrow him in 1655. Talk about your false dialectics!
Thanks for the kind words, Carol. The Red Party will never contradict itself! I am post-dialectical and have already overcome all overcoming. I will also promise you that in my party, nothing will be aufgehoben into anything else. And I will have no patience with intellectuals, either.Posted by Michael on 12/16 at 10:29 AM
Michael’s Red Party is off to a great start! The only danger I see is if Michael’s inherent liberalist strain comes out and he starts seeing the point of view of those who may disagree with him.
Of course, the beauty of the party-of-one is that all one has to do is deny the past, never admit you held any different position, blame others...oh wait. That sounds like modern Republicans.
This is going to be tougher than we thought…Posted by on 12/16 at 06:55 PM
I have a question about the awards themselves. If Koufax stands as an avatar of the left, should we now expect to see a slew of awards for the rightests among us named for Pedro Martinez? His defection to the Muts seems now to have secured his standing, if not stature, on the right.
(sorry, it’s cold here in S.E. PA, and I’ve got the hot stove on the mind)Posted by on 12/20 at 04:35 AM
- Posted by atbgelyi on 01/04 at 03:01 AM
- Posted by ouivwteo on 01/05 at 04:38 PM