>It is important to understand that in James's peculiar blend of
>libertarianism and Marxism, the late Julian Simon and Ron Arnold of the
>"Wise Use" movement are not reactionaries. They are both outspoken
>defenders of capitalist progress, which is really a contradiction in terms.
>James's group has simply taken some of Marx and Engels ideas about the need
>to defend a revolutionary bourgeoisie against the feudal aristocracy and
>universalized it. When you take these ideas out of their historical
>context, you end up with a mess. Ron Arnold is a tool of the logging
>companies, while Simon's Cato Institute defends a libertarianism that
>includes an all-out assault on the welfare state. If you read James's
>magazine, you will discover that they are about to make a qualititative
>shift. They have begun to rail against the British health system in terms
>not that different from the Tories. Also, one of their leaders has an odd
>article about the problem of protecting one's children against sex
>offenders, whose title is something to the effect of "The quandary of a
>libertarian parent." This magazine no longer uses the word socialist to
>describe its politics, and my guess is that "libertarian" will become more
>prominent fairly soon.
Does Anthony Giddens have a role in all this? I'm told Giddens has some influence around New Left Review these days.
Doug