I maintain that there is a problem of people on the left incritically posting fascist, reactionary, and antisemitic material on left lists. It's part of my job to study this fact. It has been going on for years. I am writing a paper on it for the Center for Millennial Studies at Boston University for their annual conference. Michael Pugliese has also noticed the problem in slightly different arenas. If you go to the website I suggested you will see a number of articles by the people I mentioned talking about the problem. I cite them to get you to read their articles which, in fact, raise similar concerns to my own. I see nothing obnoxious about citing other people's work. Why do you?
If folks don't want to bother to do some reading and just want to post blasts at me, don't expect me to conjure up a lengthy response. Your comments are beneath your usual level of discourse. I am tired, I am recovering from leg surgery and am cranky, I sometimes lose my temper, for which I apologize. But if you want to imply that I am making this up, or waving around a macho male wand, you might appreciate why I resent it.
I take my work seriously. I do not invent facts or issues. I have a right to defend myself from people who imply such things because they are in a glib mood or too lazy to do their homework.
-Chip
----- Original Message ----- From: "kelley" <kwalker2 at gte.net> To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com>; <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 9:59 PM Subject: Re: Clerical Fascism
> At 09:19 PM 10/3/01 -0400, Chip Berlet wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >So we were sitting in the office at Political Research Associates today
> >watching as an "anti-imperialist" post by US fascist leader David Duke was
> >being posted and cross-posted uncritically as useful rhetoric on left list
> >after left list. <snip the list of people intended to authorize chip's
> >claims. logical fallacies, you say?>
>
>
> on the Internet, every man has a 10" rod (and the rest pretend to be women).
>
> this "evidence" is like positivist content analysis which merely counts
> events without providing context for interpretation.
>
> kelley
>