<< AWESOME STAT HIGHLIGHTED ~ MAIN ~ SAID IT BEFORE HE DIDN'T SAY IT >>
STEYN BEATEN
Mark Steyn! Crushed! By a major Australian intellectual!
I don’t believe I was ever aware that Aussie prof John Quiggin had launched a competition to demonstrate I was a congenital liar, but apparently he did back in 2002, indignantly objecting to my “lie” that Australia, Spain, Italy and co were “on board” for an America-led Iraq invasion without UN authorisation.
Yup, he certainly nailed me on that one.
Beware of Quiggin, neo-con hegemonsters. This Australian Puce will surely bring down all of us.
As is appropriate in a debate about unilateralism, I’ll be judge and jury in my own case.
-- QuigginAnd as is appropriate in a debate about Mark Steyn, zeppenwolf will judge Professor Quiggin, PhD, LLC, 123.
Quiggy, you’re an ass.
A wombat’s ass, to be precise.
Posted by zeppenwolf on 2006 04 25 at 11:12 AM • permalinkAlmost on-topic, I just have to report again on that new econ prof of mine that I mentioned a week ago. In short, what we’ve “learned” today was:
- he thinks that division of labour is a faulty concept because market competition implies that there is no coordinated usage of labour, and by golly, that means it can’t possibly be efficient, and we’d really really need industry-wide cooperation to achieve efficiency. (I guess he’s never heard of, well, prices.) The obvious, but again not explicitly stated, offshoot of his argument was that he’s a one-world kinda guy who thinks we should let some higher power “coordinate” the world economy, rather than rely on all this international trade nonsense.
- he’s concerned that international trade (gasp!) actually hasn’t improved the economic lot of people in some countries.(Nevermind that these countries by and large are run by insane dictators who salt away their countries’ wealth in Swiss bank accounts.) He was also terribly sad about the fact that the losers of market competition aren’t just faceless firms, but people as well. (Imagine that.)
- he thinks that looking at the barter economies of millennia past can somehow provide us with valuable insights into the shortcomings of modern trade. (He didn’t get to elaborate on that yet, but I’m sure we’re in for another sterling piece of rhetoric on this subject next time.)
- he fawned over Paul Krugman, calling him “probably the most famous and well-regarded American economist” and pointed to Krugman’s “multiple Nobel prize nominations”...at least the Krugman argument he then referred to was from back in the 1970s when Paulie was actually still taken seriously. Still, I had to work hard not to laugh out loud at that point.
- and he somehow tried to connect trade wars and military wars (not specious in itself, of course, but if he had an actual point to it, I sure missed it, as did everybody else sitting around me), and I quote: “The Iraq War, might it be about...OIL??” (You probably had to be there, the tonal shift for the word “oil” was quite impressive. He was leaning across his lectern like a fire-and-brimstone preacher at that point, too.)
I’m probably missing a few more whoppers, because I stopped taking notes after 20 minutes. Well, I still need the credit points for that course, but I’ve pretty much decided to treat this as an anthropological study now...you know, “academic moonbat in his natural habitat”.
7 PW’s professor has a big big consistency problem:
he’s concerned that international trade (gasp!) actually hasn’t improved the economic lot of people in some countries.
but
he fawned over Paul Krugman, calling him “probably the most famous and well-regarded American economist” and pointed to Krugman’s “multiple Nobel prize nominations”
Krugman made his original reputation by arguing, persuasively and correctly, the exact opposite of the the drivel in that first quote above. Sounds like professor leftie didn’t start liking PK until he became the tiresome dishonest propoganda whore that he is today.
Short version: a useless dipshit. Are you SURE there are no other Econ sections you can transfer into?Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 25 at 12:35 PM • permalinkYeah, consistency doesn’t seem to be his strong point. There was another argument (I forget what it was exactly) around the halfway mark of the lecture that wildly contradicted something he’d said at the beginning.
Anyway, the “but, some people aren’t better off due to trade!” stuff this week stunned me because he explicitly acknowledged last week that the mainstream view on trade doesn’t say that every single person will be better off individually, just that society overall will be. I bet that trade is still making, say, Zimbabwe better off, it’s just that 99.9% of the created wealth ends up with Mugabe and friends. That’s not a failure of trade though, quite obviously (to anyone but this guy, at least).
At any rate, just like last week, he was trying to hang completely unrelated albatrosses around the neck of economic models he doesn’t like. This time he more or less tried to blame economists for not including the many failures of the political system in their economic models. That’s fine and all, but it’s also completely pointless. Go make your own models then, sheesh.
And no, there aren’t any other sections for the forseeable future. It’s 6x2 credit points for that part of my curriculum, and between the two other profs there are only 5 courses offered. (And I was only going to take 4 of those, actually, until the realization quickly set in last week that I’m definitely not going to be able to stomach Moonbat, PhD for a second class next term.)
To Paraphrase;
Capitalism is the worst system in the world...except for all the other systems.
H/t to Winston.
Posted by Go Canucks on 2006 04 25 at 01:26 PM • permalinkPW, if you can survive one term with Herr Professor Moonbat, you’re a better man than I am.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 25 at 01:26 PM • permalink#6 Professor Quiggin, PhD, LLC, 123.
Why does that strike me as hilarious?
Posted by wronwright on 2006 04 25 at 01:35 PM • permalinkWas that Wronwright? Isn’t he supposed to be watching the Hidden Imam?
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 25 at 02:25 PM • permalinkSteyn fails to mention that “&co” includes Turkey.
He turns out to be right, though, that both Blair and Howard were lying in their public statements at the time, which denied any commitment of the kind claimed by Steyn.
Posted by John Quiggin on 2006 04 25 at 04:35 PM • permalinkWRONWRIGHT!!!!!!!!!
Get the unhidden Imam back into hiding tout de suite!
I’ve got my priorities straight here, and there’s one thing I know for sure: if Armageddon breaks out during this administration, everybody’s gonna need somebody to blame. Well bunko, you get one guess where all the paper trails lead. A word to the wise, eh?Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 25 at 05:26 PM • permalinkSeems the poster known as John Quiggen is on everyone’s ignore list.
Anyway, I bet Kuwait, Qatar, Suadi Arabia, etc were also on that “denied any commitment” list, Prof Dr LLC 123 Quiggin.
Posted by Some0Seppo on 2006 04 25 at 05:55 PM • permalinkPuce wanted me to pass along that he’s extremely insulted by the comparison.
Posted by Jim Treacher on 2006 04 25 at 06:03 PM • permalinkSteyn fails to mention that “&co” includes Turkey.
So you’re saying that what he said was almost completely correct and what you said was almost completely INcorrect then?
(humble pie has a particularly unpleasant taste eh)He turns out to be right, though, that both Blair and Howard were lying in their public statements at the time, which denied any commitment of the kind claimed by Steyn.
Considering that no-one amongst your moonbat crowd really seemed to believe those claims, doesn’t that mean you were either very gullible or just didn’t "care about the truth (or actively prefers lying, I’m not sure which)." as you put it in your little attack piece?
Just heard Richard Carlton, GRJ [Great Roving Journalist] [or is that Raving?]
say [after a jig at Chernobyl] that, as he travels the world these days, he’s ‘more and more overtaken by the hopelessness and helplessness everywhere’.Has the George Negus Disease struck again?
Should he stay at home and sit on a couch?’without UN authorisation’
Back in July 2004 the UN made some sort of noises against the Jangeweed [Ganga-weeds maybe?] for extensively terrorizing Darfur villagers.
‘Don’t do it’, or something.Now, in April 2006, it is saying something nasty about the scorched earth policy that’s happened in between, killing and expelling 100,000s of non-Moslem peasants.
‘Don’t do it’, or something.Thank God for all the UN’s Occasional Authoritative Statements. [OAS]
OAS also stands for Organisation of African States.#16 He turns out to be right, though, that both Blair and Howard were lying in their public statements at the time, which denied any commitment of the kind claimed by Steyn.—Posted by John Quiggin
Is this the same Tony Blair that came out in support of the US, President Bush, and the War Against Terrorism from the start? The same world leader that sat beside Laura Bush at the State of the Union Address in January, 2002, receiving a standing ovation by all three branches of the Federal government?
Is this the same John Howard who stood at the podium with George Bush shortly after 9/11 proclaiming the full and unqualified support of the people of Australia?
It seems to me that both Tony Blair and John Howard were nothing but consistent in their full support of President Bush’s plan to combat Islamist terrorism.
Posted by wronwright on 2006 04 25 at 08:08 PM • permalink#27. Yes, Wronwright, they were the same Tony Blair and John HoWARd, but remember, they were LYING!!!
Professor Quiggin just told us that.
OMIGOD I feel an Audrey Hepburn moment coming on…
<sing>Just you wait, Proffy Quiggin, just you wait......</aing>
Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2006 04 25 at 08:33 PM • permalinkProfessor Quiggin, PhD, LLC, 123...EIEIO
The (non)Hidden Imam — Quick! There’s a Western woman with her veil off down in the basement!
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 04 25 at 10:06 PM • permalink16- Not one for losing gracefully is he?
Life long losers are funny that way, Ross. Must be sensitive or something.
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 04 25 at 10:19 PM • permalinkHas anybody perchance seen a swarthy little guy sporting a turban and carrying a bag of Cheetos running by? Not that there’s anything wrong mind you. Just, you know, asking.
Posted by wronwright on 2006 04 25 at 10:26 PM • permalinkI sympathise PW. Does anyone think to ask him why then that economies employing division of labour in a competitive environment are usually a lot more efficient and productive than where some form of coordination or control is sought.
Sounds like the type of economist who sees something work in practice but wonders if it’ll work in theory.
Actually he doesn’t sound like any kind of trained economist at all.
Actually moving slightly further of topic I remember some similar thing in an Iain Banks novel (Whit i think). He was trying to make this religious cult woman appear wise and insightful so had her say something about how the capitalist economy isn’t really efficient because it would be more efficient to make just one type of car rather than all the choices you can get.
Rather than thinking this a brilliant piece of logic I got shocked out of the novel by its banality and ability to totally miss a point.
It was only after reading some more Banks novels I realised he’s a total moonbat. One of his novels had a main character criticise the first Gulf War since “the Kuwaitis had virtually invited Iraq in”
Well to be fair to the prof, Howard was saying something along the lines of “haven’t decided yet” wrt joining the coalition of the willing. he strung that one along for some time.
Everyone knew we would go, however, as we are not 80 percent allies, or french.
Howard was just employing diplomatic double speak and confusing the lefties (aka lying if you want to be uncharitable). Doesn’t mean Quiggin was right though.28 Nilknarf
<sing>Just you wait, Proffy Quiggin, just you wait......</aing>
For fullest Hepburnian authenticity, you’ll need to do some incredibly bad lip-synching. The worst ever seen, indeed, will be required. Hilariously bad. Funniest thing in the whole movie, come to think of it.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 26 at 12:37 PM • permalinkWell now isn’t this just typical?
It’s lovely to hear Hepburn in “Just You Wait,” as it comes as something of a surprise if you had thought all of her singing was dubbed, as I once had.
It turns out to be the only Eliza song in the whole movie that Marni Nixon did NOT sing. Bah!
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 26 at 12:42 PM • permalinkQuiggen is supporting himself on his own blog, pretending to be someone else.
Some highlights from Quiggen in his alter ego personna, rabee:
“A further warning to you John and others who happen to be serious intellectuals.”
“They are frustrated at not being able to establish serious intellectual careers. They unnaturally blame progressive academics for this failure. So it is not surprising that they are most vicious in the case of progressive professors such as Juan Cole and John Quiggin.”
Don’t you know that Quiggen’s been dying to say this about himself forever?
Are you actually pleased to have these guys as your supporters, Tim?
Posted by John Quiggin on 2006 04 26 at 04:58 PM • permalinkAre you actually able to defend your actual point, Professor? Or is argumentum ad populi the best you can do?
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 04 26 at 05:12 PM • permalinkAre you actually pleased to have these guys as your supporters, Tim?
John, given that the tone of Tim’s lead-in post isn’t all that different from that of us commenters in this thread, I’m sure even a serious intellectual like you will be able to figure out the answer to that question.
Perhaps you should have CLICKed on Tim’s Puce link to further your understanding, dear Professor.
People are just making fun of you, Prof. Q. Dont take yourself so seriously.
Posted by niobium2000 on 2006 04 26 at 08:14 PM • permalinkProfessor
It is clear that you have been treated poorly on this thread - but what did you expect from these oafs?
Just a suggestion: you can turn around your popularity here by letting us know which numbers you think will not be drawn in tonight’s Powerball. If it helps, you can confer with other prominent seers such as Bob Ellis, Alan Ramsey, Margo or anyone who writes letters to Fairfax newspapers.
Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 26 at 09:58 PM • permalinkQuiggin asks:
Are you actually pleased to have these guys as your supporters, Tim?I ask
Are you actually pleased to have these guys as your supporters, Quiggin?Dave Ricardo Says:
April 20th, 2005 at 9:16 am
A hymn for the new PopeDeutschland, Deutschland über alles,
Über alles in der Welt,
Wenn es stets zu Schutz und Trutze
Brüderlich zusammenhält,
Von der Maas bis an die Memel,
Von der Etsch bis an den Belt -
|: Deutschland, Deutschland über alles,
Über alles in der WeltDave Ricardo Says:
April 20th, 2005 at 1:20 pm
Well maybe someone who knew Ratzinger during the war could fill us in on how enthusiastic a member of the Hitler youth he was.It’s a funny thing, though, other than Herman Goerring, I can’t think of a single German who admitted after the war to supporting the Nazis, 1933-45. There seemed to be a fair few at the time, though.
Dave Ricardo Says:
April 20th, 2005 at 2:03 pm
“nobody seriously holds it against these individuals.”
“puts the issue to rest.”So it’s just a coincidence that Ratzinger was elected on Hitler’s birthday.
John Quiggin Says:
April 20th, 2005 at 3:46 pm
MB “Just like everyone else” isn’t quite right. Some people took heroic or saintly stands against the Nazi regime and, in most cases, paid with their lives. Ratzinger went along quietly like the majority, and doesn’t appear to have suffered any spiritual crisis in the process, or in retrospect.He’s Quiggin himself
It’s hard to blame Ratzinger for saving his skin and saying nothing (assuming he was secretly opposed to the regime) but I had the impression that the church expected more from God’s representative on earth.By the last last comment Quiggin must be pleased.
Quiggin likes to lead anti-Catholic bashing but doesn’t like criticism of himself. What a guy.
Impressive stuff, powderkeg. One silly comment from a long-gone commenter on my blog, and you’ve been going on about it (under a dozen different sock puppets) for at least a year.
PW, I guess you’re right. Reading a sample of recent posts, Tim is at the same level as his audience. A pity, since he was much better a few years ago.
Posted by John Quiggin on 2006 04 27 at 02:36 AM • permalinkNot much time left, Professor - the numbers please.
Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 04 27 at 02:56 AM • permalinkCareful “professor” ! And it wasn’t just one scumbag who posted at that worthless campus troll site of yours on that thread. That was just a sample of the shit that is allowed to go at your site.
Suppose, also when you’ve got a chorus line of dickheads accusing Windschuttle of being a racist before you anyone else had read the book would qualify as well.
Jenny Marohasy was right about you. The only thing you know what to do is attack people at a personal level. “You’re a master at personal at the personal attack”, she said.
Oh, and would your comment qualify as silly or just plain anti Catholic. It wasn’t that silly was it?
Tim B, I don’t know how you allow Quiggin on your site.
These are some of the other “kidding around” comments, Quiggin.
I also posted some of your bigoted comments. Even Slatts called you a bigot on that thread.
Do us a favour, “professor” spare us the phoney idignation. You’re a bigot who doesn’t like what he dishes out to people that don’t agree with your hard-left campus troll views. Take a hike.
Ron Says:
April 20th, 2005 at 9:01 am
It appears Hitler Youth membership on your CV is not such a bad thing after all.Graham Says:
April 20th, 2005 at 11:39 am
It’s kind of fitting that it’s gonna be a German that splits the church again.John Quiggin Says:
April 20th, 2005 at 11:43 am
Paul, these comparisons (+ Putin) occurred to me also. But of course, these guys have/had real battalions so moral authority isn’t such an issue
John Quiggin Says:April 20th, 2005 at 3:46 pm
MB “Just like everyone else” isn’t quite right. Some people took heroic or saintly stands against the Nazi regime and, in most cases, paid with their lives. Ratzinger
went along quietly like the majority, and doesn’t appear to have suffered any spiritual crisis in the process, or in retrospect.It’s hard to blame Ratzinger for saving his skin and saying nothing (assuming he was secretly opposed to the regime) but I had the impression that the church expected more from God’s representative on earth
slatts Says:
April 20th, 2005 at 4:46 pm
Jesus, Quiggin, your bigotry is truly astonishing. What heroic political stances did you take when you were 14? Given that Muslim leaders have even more extreme stands on the issues you mentioned, I look forward to your hate-filled diatribe on that sector. Oh, and I don’t think orthodox judaism would sit too comfortably with your shallow, trendy lefty views. Game to have a go at that?John Quiggin Says:
April 20th, 2005 at 5:48 pm
dc and slatts: I agree that, if your standard of comparison is Ayatollah Khameini or Abu Bashir, the new Pope looks pretty good. Similarly if you compare him to Hu Jintao who acquired his position in a broadly similar fashion. So, if that’s all you’re claiming, we don’t disagree.If you wish I’ll copy the shit you tried to serve to Windschuttle. Was that just kidding around as well?
Nice touch on camparing the pope to Abu Bashir. I suppose comparing you to Mullah Omar would mean you’d get offended...you big cry baby
Margos Maid, I’ll predict that neither 257 nor pi will appear. I’m using the same psychic skills that enabled me to predict that no WMDs would be found in Iran
Posted by John Quiggin on 2006 04 27 at 04:20 AM • permalinkQuiggin,I would be touching the geo political world if I were. Last time I heard you were suggesting that ah ..er Britain and France ought de-nuke as a way of enticing Iran not to build secret secrets.
Seriously, that’s gotta be the stupidest, dumbest, idiotic suggestion I have heard in a long time.
Even as a campus troll thats got to take the cake.
Ever thought of teaching political science/ economics for a living?
Hey, just four posts into his participation and the good Professor already exhibits the first troll sign* - the post that just trails off into the void without a sentence-ending period. Lose focus easily when faced with criticism, John?
* Well, besides the blatant argument-dodging, I mean.
BTW, every time I have that wretched Tuesday class of mine this semester, I’ll be thinking of you. :) Moonbat in his natural habitat, indeed.
see 59. gotta check typos one of these days.
It should read:
Quiggin,I wouldN"T be touching the geo political world if I were YOU. Last time I heard, you were suggesting that ah ..er Britain and France ought de-nuke as a way of enticing Iran not to build secret NUKES.
Seriously, that’s gotta be the stupidest, dumbest, idiotic suggestion I have heard in a long time.
Even as a campus troll thats got to take the cake.
Ever thought of teaching political science/ economics for a living?
By the the way you lied. You said I have used the same example a dozen times. I have’t as you know. The correct figure is about twice the last year.
Just holding you up to the same standards you expect of Styen etc.
Stephen Barton lowers himself to show up on Quig’s blog to politely explain his view, which he does well and completely, and here’s Quig’s response:
“Since you’re here, Stephen, would you like to defend your primary claim, that Kokoda was “a myth invented by Labor”? As I and others have pointed out, this is ludicrously false.”
uh, he just DID
Stephen politely mentions Quig’s name-calling, which he seems to be reduced to with amazing frequency and Quig’s response is:
“And feel free to spell out your concern with my observation that you are a former Liberal Party apparatchik - do you think this fact, not acknowledged in your tagline, is irrelevant?”
IOW, defend yourself from my name-calling
And the final classy shot from Quig:“Finally, if you’re going to get into historical debates you might take the trouble to copy my name correctly from the top of the page into the comments threads. Not that I mind, but it gives an impression of sloppiness that might carry over into other things.”
Do most Australian men have hissy fits as regularly as Quig does?
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
Its nice being a socialist from the safety of cushy academic tenure.