Principled Discoursin' (was Re: [lbo-talk] BDL on Sweezy)

Carrol Cox cbcox at ilstu.edu
Mon Mar 1 09:15:06 PST 2004


Stephen E Philion wrote:
>
>
> -------------------------------------------
> That, btw Joanna, is what Carrol means by principled discourse. Steve's
> charge wasn't principled; it was unprincipled.
>
> --actually delong was unprincipled in his cheap shot against Sweezy.
> EOS.

Not really. DeLong makes no pretence to sharing principles with Sweezy.
>From his point of view, Sweezy is the enemy, and one does not criticize
the enemy, one attacks. I called Brad a scoundrel. That was neither principled nor unprincipled in reference to Brad, but it was a criticism in reference to Michael Yates, who had called Brad a Fool. I said that on the principle of knowing one's enemy, one should not call Brad a fool but a scoundrel (or simply an enemy, whether intentionally or merely objectively, of humanity). A criticism (principled) should always assume the possibility of the criticized agreeing with it. I would not anticipate Brad agreeing with anything I had to say (beyond stale commonplaces that Brad, Stalin, I, & probably Goering could agree on). There is nothing Brad could do to meet my attack other than cease being what he is. Just as the (nameless) left writers who are attacked behind their backs on this list could not cease being "bad writers" except by crawling into a hole and dying. They are all writing as well as they can, and to attack them as "bad writers" is merely to express personal spleen, not to make a useful criticism of anyone.

Carrol


>
> steve
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list