Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
After a week, Ellis Washington still hasn't removed the fake Obama quote from last week's column at the Worldnutdaily. And he's still calling himself "former editor of the Michigan Law Review" when he was only a cite checker for an edition, maybe two. And in this week's column he demonstrates that his grasp of reality is as tenuous as his grasp of intellectual integrity.
It's a rather bizarre screed where he does his typical combining of liberalism, socialism, communism and fascism into one basic idea and then compares it to gnosticism, the early Christian belief system declared a heresy by the church. Because they were both "utopian." Or something.
Regarding American liberalism, pick any utopian socialist - from Woodrow Wilson, FDR, LBJ, Clinton, Carter, Obama, to the useful idiots of atheism, feminism, gay rights, civil-rights activists, the labor and teachers' unions - and you will find a person who thinks his knowledge base (politics) is superior to virtue; that the Bible is a collection of myths that isn't to be taken literally; that moral relativism holds that all religions lead to "god" and that no religion is better (or worse) than any other; that separation of church and state is the singular dogma of liberalism; that there are no miracles, God or need for a savior. The State is god, and god is the State. The state under socialism will give everyone heaven (utopia) on earth through cradle-to-grave care. Private property, liberty and independent man are all relics of a bygone era.
Wow. That may be a new world record for packing the most fallacies into a single paragraph. As usual, the brush with which Washington is painting is as wide as the Grand Canyon. He simply groups everyone he disagrees with into a single category and gives it a label -- "utopian socialist." Actual distinctions between the people in that group? Silly socialist, they don't count.
The fact that he includes Bill Clinton as an example of a "utopian socialist" should tell you exactly how un-seriously you should take his arguments. Bill Clinton a socialist who wanted to do away with private property? Sure, socialists are always inundated with campaign contributions from Wall Street banks and investment firms. That's obvious, isn't it?
I mean, the fact that he named the chairman of Goldman Sachs as his Treasury Secretary and then signed into law two separate deregulation bills that did away with most of the post-depression government regulations on their activities, isn't that proof of his socialism?
The fact that he campaigned on a promise of ending welfare as we know it and making it more difficult for people to remain on the government dole for very long, then signed legislation doing exactly that into law, that proves that he wanted cradle-to-grave government support for everyone, right?
The fact that he campaigned for, advocated and signed into law GATT and NAFTA proves something, right? I mean, those were top priorities on the socialist agenda in the 90s, weren't they? They weren't? Oh. Never mind.
And Ellis, if you're looking for someone who believes that their politics is superior to virtue I suggest looking in the mirror. Last week you proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that you put your political likes and dislikes ahead of virtue and integrity when you posted a fake quote from President Obama and refused to remove it even after having it proven to you that it was a fake quote. I guess that makes you a gnostic too, eh?
Politics
Comments
Heh, that's funny, if he wasn't painting with such an absurdly large brush, he'd almost have a point here -- I have written in the past that I do not think that atheistic communism as practice by Stalin, Mao, etc., can really be called secular. As Washington almost manages to point out, if he weren't so busy burning strawmen, in a totalitarian regime the State is God. Believed to be infallible? Check. Granted all power and deference? Check. Apparent mistakes glossed over, while minor victories painted as stunning triumphs? Check.
Really, the mythical Stalin sold to the people of the Soviet Union during his reign had a lot in common with Yahweh. Both ruthless father figures demanding unending sacrifice.
Posted by: James Sweet | August 2, 2010 11:26 AM
LBJ? Talk about biting the hand that freed you. I wish Ellis Washington could be dropped into an alternate America, in a moral universe that never had any liberals. In fact, I'd like it if Washington were compelled to live there for the rest of his life.
Posted by: Dr X | August 2, 2010 11:38 AM
History? Ellis has NO interest in history, only in mixing buzz words. Dump 'em in, stir, and whatever pours out is another paragraph. Pure garbage.
Posted by: Reverend Rodney | August 2, 2010 11:51 AM
Dr. X,
You mean like a Mississippi permanently stuck in the 1920s? E.W.'s dream-world, eh?
Posted by: James Hanley | August 2, 2010 12:17 PM
Atheists believe that 'all religions lead to "god"'? That's a new one to me.
Posted by: Iason Ouabache | August 2, 2010 1:38 PM
Yet Washington considers himself a real Christian & looks forward to his own version of Utopia in which everyone's needs will be met, the state will literally be ruled by god & anyone excercising the liberty to disagree will be immediately sent to hell forever.
Dickhead.
Posted by: Rob Jase | August 2, 2010 1:47 PM
The liberal ideal is still that the the state, more accurately the government, will be "of, for and by the people". This is how the constitution sets it up. The mandate of the nation comes from the people, not God.
God, whatever you hold him/her/it to be, has nothing to do with it other than as, along with any other inspirational story, an ideal that may inspire social norms and better behavior.
The right's constant attempts to alienate the people from their government is just a back-door attempt to hand the nation over to the plutocrats who will turn around and use their influence over both religion and weakened state to rule over the peasantry.
Posted by: Art | August 2, 2010 1:51 PM
@ 2
Not too far from the place where I grew up in Georgia there was Colonial Williamsburg-like place that was instead set in a slightly different era. The motto of the place was "Westville, Where It's Always 1850."
I think the actual version of that would work for your purposes.
Posted by: Fifth Dentist | August 2, 2010 2:00 PM
Does the Mich. L. Rev. masthead from the issue or two he helped out on list him as a Contributing Editor (the MLR's fancy name for cite-checkers)? If so, he's justified in calling himself a former editor, even if it was some BS thing where he was picked from the undergrad to fill in for a sick staffer.
Posted by: Chuck | August 2, 2010 2:13 PM
What I don't understand is why he's picking on the Gnostics. The Gnostics weren't Utopians; they were ascestics who taught that the physical world was fundamentally corrupt.
The specific religious beliefs he's describing are associated with Humanism. (Except that Humanism treats people as having individual value and not as disposable parts of an all-powerful State.) There's a long and respected right-wing tradition of bashing Humanism so I'm not sure why he didn't just hop onto that bandwagon.
I could probably figure it out if I could see his Summer reading list. I bet there was a critique of "The Da Vinci Code" on it and now he thinks he's fighting a secret Gnostic conspiracy.
Posted by: chaos-engineer | August 2, 2010 2:18 PM
He's afraid the gnostics 'know' something he doesn't.
(Sorry, I couldn't resist.)
Posted by: Reverend Rodney | August 2, 2010 2:34 PM
@ 10
I think he just picked the name of a heresy with some pop-cultural resonance and then made up the rest of the connection from there in service of painting all of his political opponents as an undifferentiated horde of blasphemers and schismatics worshiping Mooby, the Golden Calf of State.
Posted by: snurp | August 2, 2010 4:26 PM
Yeah, "real" socialists wouldn't use the rope capitalists sell to hang them with, would they?
Not that Wall St is "capitalist" but that's a distinction far too difficult to expect you to understand.
You really don't think too good.
Posted by: Michael Maier | August 2, 2010 7:00 PM
@13
So which of the groups listed above do you consider socialists, how are you defining socialist in this context (since it's apparently not "acting in support of a socialist state"), and where may I find these hanged capitalist roaders?
Posted by: snurp | August 2, 2010 7:30 PM
I like the inclusion of "civil rights activists" on the list. (Martin Luther King, history's greatest monster.)
Posted by: Jeffrey Kramer | August 2, 2010 8:17 PM
Re:Michigan Law Review, has anyone contacted them about this? I imagine they wouldn't be very happy to find out that he's making that claim.
Posted by: Joshua Zelinsky | August 2, 2010 9:09 PM
I have never heard of this guy, but coincidentally I actually was an editor of the Michigan Law Review my second and third year of law school. I googled him and he has an "MM" degree from University of Michigan but his JD is from John Marshall Law School. So I'm having trouble understanding how he could have been an editor of Michigan Law Review. Unless he first attended University of Michigan Law School and then transferred to John Marshall Law School??
Posted by: Marilyn Mann | August 2, 2010 10:06 PM
Wow, a pretend self-righteous phony fleece-flocker. Who could ever have guessed! Wow...
Posted by: 386sx | August 2, 2010 10:26 PM
There's a lot of stupid in that one blockquote to keep me busy for hours refuting it, but I'll cherry pick this one:
As far as I know, all the "socialist" states in Europe permit their citizens to own private property, guarantee them some civil liberties, and pretty much leave folks alone (except for demanding higher taxes to pay for that "cradle to grave" care). I'm thinking of Sweden, France and the UK as examples here.
Shit, even the big "socialist" monster, China, lets people own private property. It's not too generous yet with civil liberties, but the terror of the Cultural Revolution is long gone. And, ironically, there is no cradle to grave care in China. If you get sick, and your employer has no health plan, you'd better have a lot of cash to pay the doctors.
I'd invite Washington to come see for himself, but China does not want mentally challenged people to enter the country.
Posted by: wheatdogg | August 2, 2010 10:33 PM
"What I don't understand is why he's picking on the Gnostics. The Gnostics weren't Utopians; they were ascestics who taught that the physical world was fundamentally corrupt."
The problem is that many Christian theologians lump every early Christian sect that deviated from the ultimate orthodoxy into the "Gnosticism" category. Thus the Gospel of Thomas, an early wisdom scripture that makes no mention of demiurges, archons, or any of the other staples of Gnostic cosmology, is labeled "Gnostic" because of its heterodox teaching.
Posted by: Tyler DiPietro | August 2, 2010 11:05 PM
Wow. So many words shoveled into so many peoples mouths! And not a close hit on any of them.
Ellis Washington -- you suck. You don't paint with a broad brush, you drive by with a paintball gun.
Posted by: debaser | August 3, 2010 12:57 PM
Do we believe that private property should be abolished and the State control all the means of production? If not, then we're not Socialists.
Posted by: andrew | August 3, 2010 7:59 PM
Keep stinging him Ed. I'm really hopeful that eventually Washington will write one of his hallucinogenic dialogues featuring you. You know, the ones where he puts his own words into Socrates' mouth and constantly defines 'veritas'. Such is my excitement, I've even had a crack at it for Washington, to get the ball rolling.
Socrates: So you accept then Mr Brayton that you do not conduct yourself according to veritas? (truth) That your contempt for Christianity and the constitution makes you another idealist liberal fascist, like the constitution shredding FDR or Nietzsche?
Brayton: get out of my way Socrates! You are a fool, there is no truth but power and relativism. I do not like this 'veritas' (truth) of which you speak!
Socrates: It is you who is the fool Brayton not I. I have the eternal gospel to preserve me, unlike you, foolish man.
Brayton: What is a man? Nothing more than a miserable pile of secrets! But enough talk, have at you!
Posted by: Coryat | August 4, 2010 6:35 AM
"'I am a goat fucking pederast who eats live babies on weekends' says Ellis Washington editor in chief of the Really Import Law Review"*.
- Dingo
----
* or rather that's what I'd imagine he'd say which is as good as a direct quote on the Washington (I'd never tell a lie) scale
Posted by: DingoJack | August 4, 2010 8:02 AM