01
Oct
09

This haterade is delicious!

This is, what, my fourth post on the Polanski affair?  Fifth?  Wow.  Good thing the Japanese Grand Prix is coming up, or I’d probably keep ranting on it.  (And my revisions are almost done, so I’ll have time to think up full blog posts of my own in a couple of days.)

Credibility: How to lose it

While the media-darling segment of “the left” — more on that below — has thrown themselves upon the kidfucker grenade with gleeful abandon, the feminist segment has provided Polanski’s — and the kidfucker apologists’ — most vitriolic opponents, and not for lack of competition.  So when you come across a statement like:

“It’s bad a person was raped. But that was so many years ago. The guy has been through so much in his life.”

you expect it to be from some self-absorbed dipshit on the Miramax payroll.

Turns out not.  That was Peg Yorkin, founder of the Feminist Majority Foundation, as quoted in the Los Angeles Times.  (Hat tip: Reason Hit & Run.)

So much for judicial misconduct?

Doug Mataconis reports that the central figure of the “the judge was out to get Polanski” argument has recanted.

Wells, who retired more than two years ago, did not handle Polanski’s case but was assigned to the courtroom where it was heard and had frequent interactions with the now-deceased trial judge Laurence J. Rittenband.

“They interviewed me in the Malibu courthouse when I was still a DA, and I embellished a story,” Wells said about the film crew in an interview with The Associated Press Wednesday. “I’m a guy who cuts to the chase – I lied. It embarrasses the hell of me.”

Wells said he was sorry about making the comments for the documentary.

“I cost the DA’s office a lot of money and aggravation over this,” Wells said.

TalkLeft, which appears to be the centre of that argument, has a countervailing post.

Rank deficiency in the Polanski affair

(Warning: this part of my post is an extended and rather lame linear algebra pun.)

Over on the Atlantic, Ta-Nehisi Coates notes that this isn’t a “left vs. right” thing:

There’s a developing meme that this defense of Polanski is more evidence of the excesses of liberals, and lack of morality among the bra-burners. I think it’s worth acknowledging that the myopic Hollywood bunch backing Polanski are, for the most part, liberals. Rightly or wrongly, the tribe mentality says that these fools are giving liberalism a bad name.

That said, [… s]ometimes The Man believes in universal health care, too. It’s worth citing XXFactor, Salon, LGM, TAPPED, Media Matters, and Eugene Robinson. Moreover, it’s worth noting that, among the pundit class, Polanski’s loudest defenders, Richard Cohen and Anne Applebaum, are by no means “of the Left.”

The problem here is that we’re projecting a vast set of preferences onto a single “left <-> right” axis.  It doesn’t work that way.

If kidfucking is permitted, what do you have to do to piss off Hollywood?

Oh, right.

I am not the first person to make this comment, but damned if I can find the link to whoever said it first.

The Pianist was a pretty damn good movie, but the world would’ve been a better place if Polanski’s victim had put, say, a full cylinder of .38 Spl up his centreline instead of being forced to flee him through Jack Nicholson’s house.  Kalashnikovs are good for that, too.

In defence of globalism

Among other things, I’m working my way through Steil and Hinds’ Money, Markets, and Sovereignty.  It’s still a damn good book, and you should buy it.  (No, I don’t get a cut of that.)  Near the beginning of Chapter 3, they describe the keystone of anti-globalist theory in Westphalian sovereignty, which (among other things) asserts that nation-states have absolute authority over what goes on within their borders.  This, one finds, is often followed up by whining about how multinational corporations are usurping rightful state authority by selling products in those states, hiring people in those states, and &c. Steil and Hinds note that (a) this has been going on damn near forever, and (b) no state has ever held Westphalian sovereignty — not even the states under the eponymous Treaty of Westphalia.

Under the Westphalian arguments of the anti-globalists, the Swiss would have no right to extradite Polanski — state sovereignty is so absolute under the Westphalian model that even governments cannot abdicate it.  Polanski’s arrest is therefore a dagger in the side of anti-globalism, which makes me even happier about it than I’d been so far.

——

Okay, I’ll stop now.

Advertisements

2 Responses to “This haterade is delicious!”


  1. 1 Windy Wilson
    October 2, 2009 at 14:03

    “It’s bad a person was raped. But that was so many years ago. The guy has been through so much in his life.”
    I can’t imagine Ms Yorkin saying that about a priest who molested some girl once in 1977 and fled the country after taking a plea as did Polanski, but then everyone knows it hurts more when a priest rapes you than when a friend of your mother rapes you.

    • October 2, 2009 at 14:27

      And if that friend is a famous and talented director, well, you must’ve been asking for it!

      You’re right: if we were talking about Fr. Polanski the Catholic priest, or Bud Polanski the long-distance trucker, there’d be no question about it. But if you’re famous, well, that’s different, especially if you’re rich and charming. (See also: Kennedy, Ted.)


Leave a reply; use raw HTML for markup. Please blockquote quotations from the post or other comments.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


anarchocapitalist agitprop

Be advised

I say fuck a lot

Categories

Archives

Statistics FTW


%d bloggers like this: