>From: ravi <gadfly at home.com>
>Reply-To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
>To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
>Subject: Re: Cockburn/St. Clair: Enron and the Green Seal
>Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 15:16:48 -0500
>
>Mina Kumar wrote:
>
>>>ravi wrote:
>>>
>>>>a valuable point, i would agree. but is there anything wrong or
>>>>valuless with that stance? i see value in someone (pretty assured
>>>>to be in the minority) playing the contrarian, keeping alternative
>>>>theses, even weaker ones, alive (jks might detect the pkf
>>>>influence in this view).
>>>
>>
>>
>>Well, chacun a son gout but I don't cut my conscience to defy this
>>year's fashions!
>>
>>Besides, the answer to your question is at the beginning of this thread:
>>no sense of proportion, and priveleging rhetorical style over
>>ideological substance.
>>
>
>
>hi mina, thank you for your response. as i mentioned in a response
>(to carrol?), i kind of jumped in the middle of your conversation
>without tracing its history. i was not talking about cockburn or a
>particular person with a counterpoint, in my message. i agree with
>your point about sense of proportion, but is there a clear
>boundary between the style of rhetoric and the substance of
>ideology?
Actually, my point was precisely about a rhetorical style which depends on insubstantiality of ideology: where substance of ideology is sacrificed to keep up a style of being contrarian.
But as I said, chacun a son gout.
_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.