On foxholes and atheists

[scholar_vit]

There is the famous saying, "There are no atheists in foxholes". Krugman recently added a corollary: there are no libertarians in financial crisis. The article by Christopher Buckley (yes, of these Buckleys) shows that we are deep in the excrement.

I positively love the beginning of the piece:

Let me be the latest conservative/libertarian/

Comments

[cheeha]

а мне понравилось ещё: "Necessity is the mother of bipartisanship."

WFB

[anonymous]

William F Buckley was an interesting guy. If you consider his speaking style and temperament, Buckley was his generation's version of Bill O'Reilly with the added benefit of a faux British accent

Re: WFB

[scholar_vit]

Well, the joke goes like this. What does a neocon say to a Trotskyte? "Dad, can you get me a job?"

As to WFB, you see, I do not share the obligatory swoon American leftists have when they talk about Great Gatsby Buckley. He is considered to be the intellectual lion of the Conservatism; I think Mencken was much more fitting for this distinction. Of course Mencken was too smart for the usual right wing crowd.

Well, WFB was better educated and more intelligent than Bill O'Reilly, but it was Buckley who worked toward lowering the bar of American political discourse, and he is ultimately responsible for the role o'reillys play now. If you want the first 2000 names in the phone directory to rule the Govt, you should not complain when your wish is granted.

I quoted this article of his son as an amusing evidence of the ultimate bankruptcy of a particular faction of American political philosophy.

[roman_sharp]

There is the famous saying, "There are no atheists in foxholes". Krugman recently added a corollary: there are no libertarians in financial crisis.

Applause!

[ny_quant]

Бляди, сэр.

[sergeyr]

Шо, атеисты - тоже?

[vryadli]

те, про которых сказано. Правда, я таких в жизни не встречал.

[sergeyr]

Простите, я не понимаю логики в вашем ответе.

В посте сказано про две категории - про политиков (в каких-то обстоятельствах "перебегающих к врагу") и про атеистов (которые в окопе начинают молиться всем богам). Эти две категории в посте связаны через аналогию.
В комменте, на который я отвечал, они названы [продажными женщинами].

Я спросил автора коммента, действительно ли он имеет в виду, что все эти люди, о коих речь в посте, по его мнению - [продажные женщины]? Включая атеистов в окопах.

Вы вряд ли моджете ответить за автора коммента, которому я этот вопрос задавал (ибо миелофона у вас почти наверняка нет), но если уж отвечаете - не могли бы ответить понятно?
Про кого, по-вашему, сказано и кого вы не встречали?

[ramendik]

Actually some strong old-style libertarians may well survive. They always attacked fractional reserve banking and fiat money, and they can blame these. Besides, they were always against offensive wars like Iraq, and can say that the financing for these wars distorted the market.

The part regarding wars is my own suspicion too. The ultra low interest ratew, shich did a lot for the bubble, apparently coincide with the active phase of warmongering. Perhaps someone told Greenspan to make finance easily available for the war, in order to avoid Congress resisting war budget expansion?