Doug Henwood wrote:
> She defined the target
> too narrowly, though, by confining it to Marxists (though on
> re-reading it, I see she also referred to a "Left") - there are
> plenty of liberals and leftists of various stripes who entirely fit
> the bill. How often have you heard the "class not race" mantra? How
> often have you heard that talking about gender and sexuality is a
> diversion from "real" struggles? Haven't you any experience of the
> aesthetic and moral conservatism of a lot of self-identified Marxists? . . .
I agree -- but it doesn't change my accusation that Butler is a liar. Just because there are so many liberals, leftists, marxists who fit the bill -- I would cite Rakesh and Angela on this list, anyone who objected or quibbled re the rightness of the existence of the BRC --Butler's failure to name specifically those she was attacking is despicable. The only reason for that omission that I can see is to smear marxists and "leftists-who-disagree-with-Butler" in general with the same brush. If she wished in a serious political way to challenge such conservative marxism (or leftism) she would make some minimal attempt to identify clearly who she was attacking.
Gitlin and Alterman won't do as examples. Horses asses don't count. We need to have Butler name serious people.