Greengard's ChessNinja.com

The Neocon Opening

| Permalink | 4 comments

The clever capitalists at the Wall Street Journal rarely give away any content for free, but the May 19 editorial by Garry Kasparov was made their feature article and can be viewed by lowly non-subscribers (likely Communists) here. Those eager to dismiss his stuff as "celebrity politics" (Streisand for Clinton, Maradona for anything, etc.) should realize that Kasparov has been writing for the WJS since 1991, over 30 articles. Even when he's not giving press conferences, testimony (today in DC), or interviews on politics, he's always up to date and looking for an argument. I like to tease him that he's a step to the right of Reagan and goose-step to the left of Mussolini. Agree or disagree with his politics, his work for pro-democracy groups in Russia is all good. But can he do both this and chess full time? His results of the past year or so suggest not. I think he should spend the next five years just on chess and then he'd still be young for politics. He's in danger of doing many things poorly instead of one thing well.


> I like to tease him that he's a step to the
> right of Reagan and goose-step to the left of
> Mussolini

But Mussolini was a man of the left -- at most a centrist. His political origins are in socialist parties, and you can find in his speeches strong denunciations of the "excesses" of the free market.

Just because Soviet propaganda of putting fascism and communism at opposed poles --even though they are more like close cousins-- has succeeded does not mean that it is true.

You'd better hope that Kasparov doesn't read this blog for he may blunt your punchline.


I'm a bit confused by some parts of the article. He starts a paragraph with "U.S. success in Iraq is essential in order to provide an alternative model", but then switches to "We are dealing..." and "...we must follow through.".

Who's this "We" he's talking about? Since he's writing for WSJ, are we supposed to assume "We" means the U.S.? Not so, because of the reference to "U.S." in the previous sentence. Does "We" mean "West"? Could be, because he's talking about the West. Since "We" includes himself, it follows that he includes Russia also as part of the "West", but goes on to criticize Russia's actions in Chechenya, comparing it to Abu Ghraib. Also, not the entire West is fighting Iraq. France, Germany, Russia, and NATO our cospicuosly out of the coalition!

He's using the word "We" so freely in the article, it makes one wonder if the Bush Administration has granted him a honorary U.S. Citizenship!

Am I the only one confused here?

"We" means those who stand against terror, principally. It's a typical rhetorical device, which boils down to "us" and "them" at some level.

Kasparov is the king of chess but a patzer when it comes to politics.

He's simply trying to further his political ambitions by aligning himself with the west. Hence "we" as in "we of the free world" implying the rest of russia is not free and needs one mr.kasparov to save it from itself.

All one has to do to get a taste of the free world is go visit Abu Gharib and how citizens of the so-called civilized world behave.

He should stop wasting his time and get back to chess IMHO.
His antics impress nobody.

Twitter Updates

    Follow me on Twitter



    About this Entry

    This page contains a single entry by Mig published on May 20, 2004 1:35 PM.

    Do Not Adjust Your URL was the previous entry in this blog.

    Women Live Online! is the next entry in this blog.

    Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.