Chris Burford wrote:
> >leftwingers like Cockburn agree Nazis and racists are not a big deal.
> >
I happen to have read the cp article in question. I don't know if it is very accurate but I didn't get this message out of it. What I got from the article was that Nazis and racists are a big enough deal not to waste money on Dees who, according to the article, spends the money on a lavish home and servants. The article went on to provide an example of a black law firm that was doing more legal work with less money. The attack on Morris Dees may have been unfair but your interperation of what Cockburn wrote in CP sounds like pure distortion. Besides I think Silverstein was co-editor at the time so it may have been authored by him.
> Yes the piece is objectionable. While there can be fascism of the left as
> well as fascism of the right, the two are not equivalent. Nor is the
> struggle left and right against oppression.
How are you defining fascism? You seem to be using a broad definition that would encompass anything you find repugnent. It seem to me that the term fascism by definition has many characteristics. It resembles a diagnosis in the psychiatric DSM 4 where a certain number of specified characteristics warrants a diagnosis of fascism. What is you definition? And also, what is an example of "left wing fascism."
Brad Hatch