Joe Sobran

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
David Baker
Member
Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 11:37 am

Joe Sobran

Postby David Baker » 9 years 1 week ago (Mon Sep 13, 2010 8:26 pm)

I am a conservative, first and last. In that capacity, my 'ilk' has been targeted with incendiary labels spewed from the mouths of those who embrace their perceived oppression as a catalyst for Munchausen Syndrome. They crave attention, so they react with loud, angrily delivered rebukes against those who offer opposing viewpoints (My nickname for this practiced vitriol is the S.M.R. or "Scalded Monkey Routine") Displaying this opprobrium immediately transforms rational discourse into heated arguments, devoid of reason.
Joe Sobran wrote an article on this subject, and I would suggest you all read it, for it clearly identifies the tactic of Jewish Holocaust defenders against revisionism, in most cases. Where these polemics defy logic is in their aligning revisionism with Naziism. Though specious, the image fashioned is that of a raving skinhead demanding the death of all Jews, and other racial "Pests". Where logic dismisses such a claim is in the nature of the subject: If I hated Jews that much, I wouldn't claim to disbelieve the "Holocaust", I would want MORE HOLOCAUSTS!!! Indeed, according to their fiery descriptions, I would house dozens of crematories on my property expressly for the resumption of the Third Reich's "Final Solution". Unfortunately, my property contains a garden, a lawn (which is sometimes a bee-otch to mow..) several rose bushes and a house. I'm so sorry to let the hot air out of their hate balloons, but I ain't no Nazi. In that context, I believe the eventual exposure of this canard will come about with calm, lucid and rational research, discussion and agreement. How boring it will be to the yammering, whining contingent who have perfected the aura of truth as being an instrument of persecution.

Carto's Cutlass Supreme
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2359
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:42 am
Location: Northern California

Re: Joe Sobran

Postby Carto's Cutlass Supreme » 9 years 1 week ago (Mon Sep 13, 2010 9:51 pm)

So regarding the Sobran article. What's the name of it and do you have a link? Thanks.

David Baker
Member
Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 11:37 am

Re: Joe Sobran

Postby David Baker » 9 years 6 days ago (Tue Sep 14, 2010 3:49 am)

Carto's, I hope this web address works: http://www.sobran.com/columns/index.shtml

Mr. Sobran is a former contributing editor for William F. Buckley's conservative magazine, "National Review". I enjoy Mr. Sobran's ability to articulate my viewpoints.

User avatar
Hektor
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 3326
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 7:59 am

Re: Joe Sobran

Postby Hektor » 9 years 1 day ago (Sun Sep 19, 2010 5:50 am)

I don't find such an article on that page.

David Baker
Member
Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 11:37 am

Re: Joe Sobran

Postby David Baker » 9 years 1 day ago (Sun Sep 19, 2010 6:48 am)

Hektor,

Sorry, the articles are changed occasionally. I believe in the archive section the title "Uses of Hate" appears.

nathan
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 229
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2007 10:14 am

Re: Joe Sobran

Postby nathan » 8 years 11 months ago (Sat Oct 09, 2010 5:39 am)

RIP Joseph Sobran. I too was a fan, although his politics were far from mine. An added loss is that we shall now never see the book that Joe was planning to write in rebuttal of James Shapiro’s absurdly over-praised book on the Shakespeare authorship question.

A noteworthy but little noted fact is that all – all - the great nineteenth century American writers were anti-Stratfordian skeptics. They found it astonishing that Shakespeare (whoever he was) should have been so little remarked by his contemporaries. To be sure, no law says that a literary genius has to cut a figure in the world. But Shakespeare, of all writers must surely have been very noticeable; and yet no one appears ever to have noticed him. However the Baconians, who raised the question, disappeared down a rabbit-hole in search of hidden codes and anagrams and conspiracies, and not even their most famous friend Mark Twain was willing to endorse their man with any confidence. Henry James and William James considered the philosopher of science to be “even” less believable as a dramatic poet than the Stratford nonentity. Until the twentieth century there was no plausible candidate for authorship.

In 1920 a schoolmaster, cruelly misnamed Thomas Looney(pronounced “low knee”), published a book which treated the plays as if they were purely anonymous products - which they very nearly are - and cast around for the most likely suspect. He stumbled upon the forgotten figure Edward de Vere, Earl of Oxford. Looney’s book made some illustrious converts, including Sigmund Freud. Looney tended to avoid internal literary evidence but one of his followers, an academic scholar Dr Randall, produced a book devoted entirely to the Sonnets. The sonnets are manifestly autobiographical, and the biography in question cannot be that of a provincial grain hoarder who began his career hustling around theatres and ale-houses.

Joseph Sobran’s excellent but neglected book Alias Shakespeare, was a development of that theme. Until Shapiro’s recent scholarly book the anti-Stratfordian thesis has been mainly treated with jeers and by silence by the English Literature establishment, and Shapiro’s book has provided mindless book reviewers with an excuse to repeat the jeers against what the Observer’s Robert McCrum wittily calls “loony” arguments. A familiar pattern. Another godsend to Orthodoxy is that Unorthodoxy attracted a retinue of crackpots and sectarians who were ready to out-Bacon the Baconians in the search for rabbit holes. Another familiar pattern.

Sobran once attended an IHR conference. Though unconvinced, he bravely gave them a friendly write-up.

HelenChicago
Member
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2009 9:58 am

Re: Joe Sobran

Postby HelenChicago » 8 years 11 months ago (Sat Oct 09, 2010 9:47 am)

Sobran's book was pretty good, but an even stronger, more detailed case for de Vere is put forward in a more recent book by Mark Anderson called "'Shakespeare' by another name." He has a website here: www.shakespearebyanothername.blogspot.com.

The authorship question is a lot like holocaust revisionism. The more you read of the the Oxfordian position, the more you realize there's little arguing with it. But you hold your tongue, the better part of valor being discretion. Instead, you wonder how it is the whole world hasn't come to the very same realization. What would it take to convince them? Or has their belief in the Stratfordian myth become a sort of comforting religion they dare not relinquish?

:study:

David Baker
Member
Member
Posts: 61
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 11:37 am

Re: Joe Sobran

Postby David Baker » 8 years 11 months ago (Tue Oct 12, 2010 3:13 pm)

Nathan, yes he was a very good man. Unlike his spineless contemporaries, he eschewed the practice of parsing his thoughts with political correctness, but he was not given to spurious opprobrium. Joe Sobran was very rational and well versed in the subjects he wrote about. Few conservatives these days possess the ability to address potent issues without resigning to their anger, and engaging in fits of ad hominem. Joe Sobran was that special breed who could confront his opponents without fear, and systematically reduce them to the whining polemics they truly are. I'll miss him.


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Lamprecht and 6 guests