That's it. That's all it took to get it started.
Prepositions can make for odd Spanish to English translations if you want them to. For example, in Spanish you can walk "por la playa." Walk "for the beach"? Actually, it means walk "on the beach." Or "along the beach." Or maybe even "across the beach."
But it definitely doesn't mean that you are walking "for the beach." Because that doesn't make sense.
"Por" has different meanings in Spanish than "for" does in English. (To make things harder, Spanish has another word that sometimes means "for": "para.")
A correct translation of the nine words would be:
"By means of La Raza, everything. Outside La Raza, nothing."
Or, as Ted Barlow at Crooked Timber points out that MEChA phrases it in their actual slogan, "La union hace la fuerza (Unity creates power)." A very typical sentiment for a club such as MEChA. ("La Raza" also does not translate directly to English as "the race" as English speakers use the term "race.") It is a standard "strength through unity" sentiment that you will also find expressed by Black Student Unions and Gay and Lesbian Alliances and even, oh, let's say, political parties.
However, what if you "translated" the nine words in a way that didn't account for the multiple meanings of "por" in Spanish and the expansive meaning of "La Raza"? What if you claimed the phrase meant "For the race, everything. Outside the race, nothing"? Suddenly the group isn't trying to encourage unity within the group, but instead trying to claim "everything" (in the world?) for itself--for its "race."
And that's kind of...Nazi-like. Bingo.
It was that easy. It didn't matter that if the proficient Spanish speakers of MEChA had meant "for the race" they would have written "para la raza" (the other wouldn't have meant that), or that even a simple-to-do computer translation of "por La Raza" results in "by the race."
Who can be bothered with details? MEChA = KKK, that's the important thing.
And Glenn Reynolds played his part by posting this on August 16:
IF YOU WANT TO BE GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA, Tacitus advises, it's best to renounce your past connections to fascist hatemongers.
"Fascist hatemongers"? Did Glenn Reynolds know that there was no credible support for this smear, which he delivered to his tens of thousands of daily readers, and which the rest of the right-wing blogosphere echoed with glee? I don't know. But in a cult, facts don't matter anyway. You play your part. You do what the cult needs. And the cult needed Bustamante to be a racist hypocrite.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Al Barger
Good ol' Brian, always reliable. You whine like a little bitch about personal attacks, but this post is nothing else. Glenn Reynolds a "demagogue"? That's just nonsense. He does not say things that he does not believe are true and accurate.
Anybody who challenges your left-wing orthodoxy gets to be accused of being in a "cult." Yeah, like the left ain't cult-like. Puh-lease.
Bustamante's personal membership in an avowedly racial separatist organization might reasonably be seen to rate as considerably worse than Schwarzenegger knowing someone at US English who has made one or two remarks not nearly as bad as the avowed goals of Mecha.
2 - John Mudd
Just remember, there is a difference between a conservative and a right wing nut, and that nuts join cults and keep them going, not conservatives, or liberals for that matter (but left wing lunatics do keep them going).
I consider myself a conservative, and I am very economically conservative, but socially, I will tolerate quite a bit of liberalism (and even admire it to some degree when it stands up for its beliefs, publicity stunt or not - see the Carey article for details).
I am a graduate of the Young America's Foundation and the Phillips Foundation's Ronald Reagan Future Leaders Program (and Leadership Florida's College Leadership Florida, but that's a whole other story), however, I am intelligent enough to know that America's health care system needs some kind of fixing, and that ideology works well in theory, but Marx's communism proved it doesn't actually work in practice. However, it does take one extreme to balance the other, it seems.
Whatever form of philosophy one follows really doesn't pose a danger as long as two things are in place: (1) Intelligence (this allows people to see what the truth really is) and (2) Sanity (this prevents cults from ruling the world). When they are not in place, right wing nuts are born, as are left wing lunatics, and while some of these ideological intellectuals may reign for a time, history shows us that they're either (a) exposed, (b) overthrown or (c) laughed at when proven wrong my their critics, or worse, those of us who have enough common sense not to worship the ideology at the center of our universe, or wherever it actually is to those of us with common sense. Both sides have fringes, unfortunately.
I did like the piece, though, Brian. Very well written and researched.
Cheers.
3 - Dawn
Brian,
I was attacked by Mike Larkin here on Blogcritics, more than once. He is a lefty nutjob, so what's his excuse?
I mean dude, PUUUUHHHLLLEEEASSSE with this right vs left crap. People are just assholes to each other sometimes, it isn't always about politics.
Al, that's not nice calling Brian a whiny bitch. Whiny liberal nutjob will do.
4 - Joe
Wow, that doesn't seem very sporting, did anyone other than Glenn give you the time of day regarding
5 - Eric Olsen
Brian, Glenn Reynolds is about as centrist as it gets. He isn't anywhere near the "right wing" on anything other than, perhaps, gun rights, which is just one of those personal things.
And to compare him to O'Reilly is just absurd. He is extremely judicious and fair-minded, as well as far-ranging and catholic in his interests. He sits where he does in the blogosphere for these very reasons. People - at least people who read blogs regularly - are not stupid. They can see through a phony, a dissembler, or a demagogue, if not immediately, then certainly over time. Reynolds is none of these things.
I don't agree with him, or anyone else, all the time, but what I look for in a writer, a reporter, a thinker is someone who approaches each situation with an open mind, who admits when he has made a mistake or changed his mind, is logical, gives fair reading to the other side, and airs at least some of his thinking process. Glenn Reynolds does all these things on a consistent basis.
Here is a phrase that speaks demagoguery pretty plainly to me:
And Glenn Reynolds played his part, only too happy to toss out the words "racist hatemongers" if it will smear the opposition. Sure, he later linked to people who suggested that Bustamante wasn't associated with racist hatemongers, but do you really think the goal was to have a discussion that led to the truth?
Um, yes I do. That's exactly why he "later linked to people who suggested that Bustamante wasn't associated with racist hatemongers," because he wanted the truth to come out. Why else would he have done so?You can do fine and tenacious reporting and writing Brian, but your myopic insistence on funneling everything through ideology - even the most non-ideological independent thinkers with whom you happen to disagree - makes it very easy to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
6 - Joe
That's weird I meant to put a link to this:
And why did you change the title of the post? You're not trolling for an instalanche are you?
I know, questions.
7 - Chris
Just one little thing -- the Crooked Timbers Post you cited has been overtaken by events. Since you were so hot and heavy on this story I might think you have noticed that. But, since you researched it this far, you should be able to figure out what I am talking about.
Also, this post is the equilivant of complaining that the media is conservative and then only talking about Fox News and the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal.
Tacitus did some nice work on this issue, it might be worthwhile to go back and re-read all the his stuff.
One more thing -- every try to disagree with the commenters over at Eschaton and Counterspin?
8 - Dawn
Brian,
You are being totally lame.
Thanks,
Dawn
9 - Al Barger
Apparently you're under the mistaken impression that the definition of both the words "right-wing demagogue" and "fascist hatemonger" is "anyone who is not a pinko liberal." Those words, however, have real meanings, none of which even VAGUELY apply to Glenn.
You just cannot seem to STAND any dissent at all from the pinko party line, not even mild and even-handed Glenn Reynolds.
Do you think that you can just bully everyone into being thoughtless pinko drones by badgering us with bad names? Come on.
10 - Mac Diva
Hey, I've disagreed with the commenters at Eschaton and lived to tell about it! In fact I disagree with Atrios sometimes and he usually comes around or we agree to disagree. As soon as he gets a clue as to what a creep Jim Capozola, the Shrieking Queen of Philly, is, I'll start speaking to him again.
I know Reynolds is a patron saint of this site. But, I can't say that makes him any less of a pompous, Right Wing windbag in my opinion. He may have been the first 'name' blogger, but he will never be anywhere near the best.
11 - John Mudd
Glenn doesn't strike me as a right wing nut. Take the 1st Amendment for example - he definitely leans toward the left on the right to free speech and expression. He's conservative on gun control, but so is everyone else who is a true conservative, and while his blog may not be 100 percent fair and balanced, I would bet that, neither is yours.
Glenn provides an interesting outlook on the news and interesting news bits, that's for sure. Whether everyone agrees with him or not, well, who cares. Blogging isn't about having everyone agree or disagree with you; that's what running for office is for.
So I guess now the question remains: Will Glenn Reynolds run for governor of California?
Probably not, but no matter what, you can guarantee that he'll remain a patron saint to Blogcritics and one of the most outstanding bloggers of all time.
Cheers.
-John Mudd
12 - Mac Diva
I would not call Reynolds a nut -- except in regard to gun control. But he is Right Wing, though he may not realize it because he only talks to an echo chamber kissing his arse here in the blogosphere. He would probably run screaming from anyone who dared challenge him.
Actually, I've been fair to the man. I don't even refer to him as InstaCracker, as many liberals do. (BTW, his beliefs about race, including blogrolling a white supremacy blog, Gene Expression, do give me pause.)
13 - Phoenix Woman
Nice to see the wingnuts coming out of the woodwork to prove Brian's point -- that since the facts aren't on the wingnuts' side, they must always resort to name-calling!
Nowhere, in ANY of the posts made to flame and trash Mr. Flemming's article, was there any attempt to use facts to disprove what he said. Instead, he was called "lame", a "nutjob", etc.
Come on -- if ANY of you Brian-bashers can prove that Glenn Reynolds didn't mistranslate/abuse the MEChA slogan, give us the proof. Right now!
Don't just call him a "nutjob" -- PROVE to us that his statements regarding InstaPundit are false.
Come on. I dare you.
14 - JT
Wow, InstaHack's right-wing cronies sure hopped to his defense here, haven't they?
The truth always strikes a nerve, I suppose...
15 - dave
Actually, the proper name is "Instacracker."
And remember - the closer you are to the mark, the more moronic brownshirt fucks will start whining.
Nicely done.
16 - dave
Come on -- if ANY of you Brian-bashers can prove that Glenn Reynolds didn't mistranslate/abuse the MEChA slogan, give us the proof. Right now!
[sound effect] chirp chirp chirp [/sound effect]
17 - Joe
There's that elevation of discourse we've all been pining for!
18 - Eric Olsen
InstaSlanderers, read and follow Chris's response, comment #7
19 - tbogg
I don't think that Glenn is a facist hatemonger anymore than Brian does. I do think that he is sloppy with who he links to, disingenous about his motives, and a bit glib for someone who wishes to be taken seriously. I think he plays to the conservative crowd while maintaining he's a centrist.
Yeah, I know. I'm glib too. But then I don't sell myself as a law professor/commentator on my blog or MSNBC, and I definitely don't sell myself as being serious. If Glenn wishes to remain a respectable "serious" or influential blogger, he needs to slow down and think before he links. Otherwise he runs the risk of becoming Mickey Kaus....(shudder)
20 - Chris
Ok.
1. Juan Non- Volokh kicks things off with a response to the Ted Barlow piece Brian linked to.
2. Tacitus provides a semi roundup here.
3. One of the original posts that I am assuming started it all was also Tacitus, here.
Bottom Line: there are some troubling aspects to MEChA, you can't really excuse an organization for its ideology because the hold car washes to raise money for high school.
Which raises the other question -- are they a community organization or something more? I don't really know, I have read just about everything on this deal and followed links to read source documents and it looks like there are some questions.
21 - Chris
Teach me to use Preview.
The link for Tacitus' orginal post is here.
The Penjmanesque roundup is here.
22 - David Ehrenstein
Excellent work, Brian.
(Mac Diva longs to be my bitch!)
23 - Eric Olsen
I don't live in California, haven't been following the recall closely, and have nothing in particular to say about MEChA one way or the other. I made my general statement about Glenn in comment #5, which I stand by.
Those particularly interested in the dynamic at play here should peruse this post.
24 - Joe
Fascinating. Whereas I assumed you were jockeying for the Instalanche, in fact, you triggered the 'Schatolanche. Brilliant!
25 - Eric Olsen
Yeah, 'lanches of any kind are good - too bad this one was triggered by rabid partisan demagoguery. But hey, better demagoguery WITH the 'lanche than without.