On Sat, 13 Jan 2001, Max Sawicky wrote:
> You can catalogue all you like the resort to financial critique by
> 20th century rightists and fascists. You can profile the psychological
> equation of the other with the jew and money. NONE OF THAT HAS ANY
> BEARING ON THE EFFICACY OF FINANCIAL REFORM.
Nobody on this list's against financial critique or financial reform (least of all Doug). Just against terms like finance capitalism, and the freight they carry. And you wouldn't use that a term like that in a thousand years, especially in a political intervention like a column or position paper. Would you? So it beats me what we're fighting about here. Neither side would use the term.
On top of that, despite an argument that sometimes seems to imply that you'd be more willing to give antisemitish populists who use such terms the benefit of the doubt, the only time we ever had a real antisemite that railed against finance capitalism on this list, it was you who got fed up first and led the show-down. So there's not a dime's worth of difference between the two sides on that count either.
Is there a difference I'm missing? From the outside this seems like all displacement at this point, like a gimpy stalking horse for the anti/pro populism debate or the limits of reform debate, both of which I've always enjoyed.
Michael __________________________________________________________________________ Michael Pollak................New York City..............mpollak at panix.com