Most leftists aren't too bright either. I also may be in a distorted situation, hanging out with a lot of really smart Univ of Chicago right-wingers (like Judge Posner, although I don't exactly hang out with Posner, just his law clerks). But Horowitz is a genuine fool. He did, however, edit a couple of useful books published by Monthly Review in the 60s, one on Marx and Modern Economics, another on Corporations and the Cold War. In any case whether he is worh debating has to balanced against the likelihood of a thorough demolition.
Hitchens isn't a socialist anymore? I mean. he's idiosyncratic--prolife/antiabortion, prohumanitarian intervention, etc.--but I am in no position to complain about idiosyncratic socialism. Where did he Renounce The God That Failed?
--jks
>From: "Carl Remick" <carlremick at hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
>To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
>Subject: Re: David Horowitz/reparations for slavery
>Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 21:55:29
>
>>All the above is a long-winded way of saying that the right is easy to
>>debate. Most of them are idiots.
>
>Absolutely, which is why the left has been so successful in raising
>consciousness, setting the public issues agenda, and getting elected to
>office for the past few decades. Time and again, sheer brainpower has
>carried the day.
>
>Carl
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
>
_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com