<DIV>Walzer's a Zionist lickspittle. Philosophically he's on the left -- as a philosopher he's not half bad, actually, little taste as I have for communitarianism after Rwanda and the Balkans. Practically, he's a State Department socialist. And YOU, self-appointed scourge of the WWP, have no business going on about left unity. They at least are practically good if they are theoretically bad, Walzer's the other way around. Guess which one counts? "By their fruits shall ye know them," the Good Book says. jks<BR><BR><B><I>Nathan Newman <nathanne@nathannewman.org></I></B> wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">----- Original Message ----- <BR>From: "Doug Henwood" <DHENWOOD@PANIX.COM><BR><BR><BR>Michael Pollak wrote:<BR>>To be fair, fwiw, Walzer was against the war on Iraq.<BR><BR>-Why be fair to Walzer? He's a creep and a thug.<BR><BR>Funny how selective calls for "unity on the left" end up being. <BR><BR>-- Nathan Newman<BR><BR><BR>___________________________________<BR>http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk</BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><p><br><hr size=1>Do you Yahoo!?<br>
<a href="http://us.rd.yahoo.com/search/mailsig/*http://search.yahoo.com">The New Yahoo! Search</a> - Faster. Easier. Bingo.