My blog is getting very popular - I've received a hate letter

I must confess that for quite some time my blog was missing a counter-point, a strong consistent unashamed left-wing point of view. All of the blog entries and 95% of comments were coming from right-wing, very right-wing, extremely right-wing and yet even more right-wing authors. Finally, yesterday my blog was visited by a liberal, and he was brave enough to share his ideas with the readers of this blog. Comrade Morrisminor responded to my blog entry "Meghan McCain - literacy is racist". Let me start by explaining the background and reiterating was said in my blog entry.

Meghan McCain, a mentally retarded daughter of John McCain was upset with Tom Tancredo's idea to introduce literacy tests for the voters. Even though such tests would be color blond, Meghan claimed that these tests would be inherently racist, and they would be indistinguishable from the earlier anti-black voter tests in the South.

Clearly, her claims were stupid from logical and historic perspectives. Firstly, the anti-black literacy tests were NOT color blind, and illiterate whites were treated differently than illiterate blacks. So, by default, Tancredo's proposal is completely different from the racist literacy tests executed half a century ago.

Secondly, an idea that literacy test is inherently racist - is RACICT, since it rests on the hypothesis that some races are inherently unteachable to read.

Mr.Morrisminor responded to my post with very thought-provoking claims, which I decided to reproduce here in full. He wrote:

I guess you are too ignorant and/or racist yourself to notice similar traits in Tancredo. Literacy tests have a long history here in America of denying blacks the right to vote. If LGF and Megan are far left to a Russin creep like you, then you must be to the right of Ivan the Terrible. Since I found this link on Pajama Dreck, I am not surprised at your pathetic trash.

 
I must confess that I was unduly impressed with Mr.Morrisminor's response. Firstly, he completely ignored that his main point "Tancredo's literacy tests are identical to racist Southern literacy tests" was debunked in my original post. In fact, I have a feeling that he actually did not read my post, because no one can be so stupid as to repeat the accusations proposed by mentally retarded Meghan McCain without even bothering to read the counter-arguments.
 
Secondly, I was also quite persuaded by the ad hominem attacks in the post - I was called "ignorant", "racist", "Russin creep" and my writing was "pathetic trash". Mr.Morrisminor could have spent some time developing arguments in support of his main thesis (that Southern literacy tests were color blind), or he could have used same time, effort and energy on putting together a list of insults - and we can all see which path he chose.
 
What amused me most was Mr.Morrisminor's reference to Ivan the Terrible, who in his mind was some kind of Tea-Party going, small limited government right-wing guy. I can only presume that Mr.Morrisminor is a product of American public education, and his knowledge of Russian history probably rivals his understanding of quantum mechanics.
 
Mr.Morrisminor, let me give you a little tutorial on Ivan the Terrible - all free of charge. Contrary to what you have been taught by your liberal middle-school teacher, this Russian tsar was very left-wing. If you are to the left of Ivan the Terrible, you must be somewhat between Pol Pot and Nikolae Chaushesku. If you are wondering how that could be, I will use Joseph Stalin (a solid left-winger, very progressive, very communist and in addition adored by your grandparents, beloved by FDR and promoted by the liberal New York Times) as an official reference.
 
Back in the 1940ies, a famous Russian director, Sergey Eisenstein made a 3-part movie about Ivan the Terrible. In case you are wondering why I am mentioning this man - it was Sergey Eisenstein who created "Battleship Potemkin" - the famous movie which you grew up watching in your red-diaper-doper camps. "Ivan the Terrible" was quite critical of Ivan the Terrible, and comrade Stalin (same one your grandparents worshiped as the second coming of Lenin) prohibited the showing of the second part and ordered the physical destruction of the third part.
 
In case you are wondering, comrade Stalin believed that Ivan the Terrible was a very progressive Russian tsar, far better than Peter the Great, and that if anything, Ivan was not cruel enough. Here are a few appropriate quotes from Stalin's opinion about Ivan the Terrible, which are taken from Stalin's critique of Eisenstein's movie:
 
Царь Иван был великий и мудрый правитель, и если его [c. 433] сравнить с Людовиком XI (вы читали о Людовике XI, который готовил абсолютизм для Людовика XIV?), то Иван Грозный по отношению к Людовику на десятом небе. Мудрость Ивана Грозного состояла в том, что он стоял на национальной точке зрения и иностранцев в свою страну не пускал, ограждая страну от проникновения иностранного влияния. В показе Ивана Грозного в таком направлении были допущены отклонения и неправильности. Петр I – тоже великий государь, но он слишком либерально относился к иностранцам, слишком раскрыл ворота и допустил иностранное влияние в страну, допустив онемечивание России.
 
My translation:
Ivan was a great and wise ruler and if you compare him with Ludvig XI, you would see that Ivan was much better. The wisdom of Ivan the Terrible was that he was a nationalist, and he would not let in the foreigners - and thus protected the country from the foreign influence. The depiction of Ivan the Terrible was incorrect [in Eisenstein's movie]. Peter I was also a great tsar, but he was too liberal to foreigners [the term liberal is used in Russian meaning of the word - which today's means "libertarian"], he opened the gates and let in the foreign influence, and allowed the Germanization of Russia.
 
The further quotes from Stalin are staggering - he compares Ivan the Terrible with the liberal icon - Vladimir Lenin...
 
Замечательным мероприятием Ивана Грозного было то, что он первый ввел государственную монополию внешней торговли. Иван Грозный был первый, кто ее ввел, Ленин – второй.

My translation:
The great achievement of Ivan the Terrible was the introduction of the state monopoly in foreign trade in Russia. Ivan the Terrible was the first one who introduced it, and Lenin was the second.


And last passage makes an even stronger case that Ivan was a lefty -  alas, a hesitant lefty by Stalin's standards.



Иван Грозный был очень жестоким. Показывать, что он был жестоким можно, но нужно показать, почему необходимо быть жестоким.

Одна из ошибок Ивана Грозного состояла в том, что он не дорезал пять крупных феодальных семейств. Если он эти пять боярских семейств уничтожил бы, то вообще не было бы Смутного времени. А Иван Грозный кого-нибудь казнил и потом долго каялся и молился. Бог ему в этом деле мешал… Нужно было быть еще решительнее.

My translation:
Ivan the Terrible was very cruel. It is permitted [permitted!] to show his cruelty, but it is necessary to show why it was required of him to be so cruel. One of the errors of Ivan the Terrible was he had not cut the throats of five largest feudal families [Stalin uses a very literate term - he indeed believed that Ivan should have murdered the 5 families in their entirety]. Had Ivan the Terrible exterminated these 5 families, there would be no Time of Troubles.

Ivan the Terrible would execute someone, and then he would be repentant and praying to God for forgiveness. God was an obstacle to his policies. Ivan should have been even more decisive in his actions.

And as far as left-wing authorities go - Stalin beats you hands down. If this world renown leader of communism believed Ivan the Terrible was a left-winger, who are to doubt him?

And lastly, I was to ask a very pointed question. If an "ignorant", "racist", "Russin creep" writing "pathetic trash" is smarter and more knowledgeable than you are - then what does it make you? Give it a thought, comrade.