Henwood vs. Cockburn
sawicky at epinet.org
Thu Nov 11 14:02:43 PST 1999
> Max Sawicky wrote:
> >I have to say I strongly support this remark
> >by AC, though not so much its focus on
> >"Apropos my supposed enthusiasm for the right, I think, Doug, your
> >problem is that you rarely advance into the American hinterland west of
> >Hudson, and regard it as a place of terror infested with fundamentalists,
> >militia men and other demons of the polite liberal metropolitan
> >inflamed by hysterical fundraising letters from Morris Dees. . . . "
> This is horseshit. I think Morris Dees is a faker. I like the stuff
> that Ken Silverstein did in Counterpunch (for which Cockburn
> inevitably got credit) exposing him as a poseur. I got accused of
> being soft on racism for writing in LBO and on several e-lists that
> "the militias" were not the gang of crypto-fasicsts that a lot of
> leftists were denouncing them as. Ask Charles Brown about this.
I'm agnostic on Morris Dees. I'll allow that "not so much its focus
on Henwood" is not strong enough. I should have said I like
AC's remark incept insofar as it is applied to Henwood. Except
for just a little bit. It sure does work for Katha Pollitt though.
Also for a few blokes in these precincts.
If anyone doubts, check the LBO archives from last summer
(June-July) on the promise keepers, abortion, militias, and
white guy stuff.
As for militias, they are crypto-fascist. So are lots of white
workers when they get angry. Meanwhile, lots of blacks dig
Farrakhan. Tell me something new. That's the territory that
has to be worked. You don't do it with milksop appeals to
brother/sisterhood, or rinky-dink radical denunciations of
More information about the lbo-talk