>Seems to me that both the phrase and practice of redbaiting are the
>enemies of serious thought. The phrase is often deployed to deflect
>justified criticism; ANSWER and WWP do it all the time. But on the
>other hand there's also a reflexive and mindless impulse behind the
>practice too - ANSWER = Ba'ath = Kim Jong Il. It's a lot like Bush's
>axis of evil logic. It's a lot better to talk substance than trade in
>guilt or innocence by association.
Hey, I've talked substance with extensive documentation on the ANSWER problem, and basically got driven out of the National Lawyers Guild for daring to post such facts on my own web site (and on this email list). I've never been harassed by the FBI or other government agency for anything I wrote on this list, but I was essentially hauled up on charges at the Guild for an email message here. And had a national "anti-redbaiting" resolution passed with myself as the stated target.
There is repression today, but against Arabs and immigrants, not commies. Lefties whining about redbaiting are complaining about ideological criticism, nothing more.
Yes, anything other than nuanced discussion with all shades of grey discussed is bad for high level "serious thought", but equating WWP/ANSWER with Hussein is no more simplistic than equating Bush with Halliburton. There may be nuanced differences, but they coordinated their strategies; the WWP even held joint rallies in Bagdad with the Hussein government at points.
-- Nathan Newman