[lbo-talk] Marc Cooper's flipping out over Churchill

[jthorn65 at sbcglobal.net]

> > Why do you have such a great understanding for people being alienated
> > against the left in this issue?
> > 
> > John Thornton
> 
> Because the left embodies the only hope for combating this whole disaster,
> and the left is very small and very weak and totally dependent on being
> ethically superior to the right.  Hence, when a dolt like Churchill uses his
> relative fame to endorse and re-endorse Al Qaeda and the targeting of
> civilians, it hurts the only chance human beings have for solving this
> problem.  The supposedly Eichmannic population of the United States already
> understands that it's wrong and illegal to target civilians.  If the left
> starts talking like Churchill, they will lose that understanding and side
> with the right.  Part of the left's job is to insist on preserving and
> expanding the principle, while searching for ways to crack open the media
> system that keeps people from connecting the dots about "our" own actions.
> It's a very tough job, but it's the only one in town.
> 
> Why can't you see this?  You don't seem to be one of the loons who think
> Churchill's statement helps us.

I don't think anything worthwhile came from Churchills essay but I think the 
only damage done was to his reputation. The left doesn't need to start 
speaking in hyperbolic ways about "little Eichmanns" because if they did that 
would be damaging. But they aren't about to start doing this because of his 
essay. If his essay was picked up by the majority of progresssives then I 
would be worried. I will discuss the errors in Churchills essay but I won't 
attack him and I won't say what he wrote damages progressive causes. He 
simply does not have that much influence. If Howard Zinn, Noam Chomsky 
and Eric Alterman all wrote essays saying the WTC victims deserved what 
they got I would be worried. That would be damaging but those authors are far 
more widely read then Ward.


> I'm all in favor of staying on guard against racist attacks, but this isn't
> a racist attack.  It just isn't.
> 
> Michael Dawson

I disagree for the reasons I've already stated. You are entitled to your opinion 
but I have not seen an explaination of why, in spite of the admittedly little 
evidence presented in this forum, you hold this belief. Racism doesn't always 
hit you over the head like a club. It takes on a much more subtle and less 
easily discerned face these days. If someone is publically stating that Ward 
should "go back to his trailer and get drunk" and there is no protest over this 
blatantly racist comment it seems a stretch to say there is not a racist 
motivation in some of this attack.

John Thornton