Hi all,
been away a while. I was working on a book which was then interrupted by a six month bout of RSI. I probably won't be active but did want to make a couple of comments.
One, in terms of the premiums of empire for working class people living within them. One thought occurs to me is to compare the lives of working class people in say the U.S. to the lives of working class people in say Sweden. The U.S. is a rich capitalist empire, Sweden a rich capitalist non-empire. So if working people in the U.S. are better off, then you have a good case for an imperialism/empire premium for the working class within empires, if worse off a good case against it. Not decisive of course, but indicative.
Two in terms of the whole Churchill thing - I came in at the tail end of the discussion and there is one point that I may have missed being made. Regardless of whether Churchill's essay is wonderful or appalling is this the right time to launch blistering attacks upon it - when the worst of the right wing are trying to escalate their attacks on academic freedom by forcing him out of his job ?
It is one thing to say, as Voltaire may have said "I disagree with everything you say, but will defend to your death the right to say it." (BTW, I heard that Voltaire was a bit of hypocrite - called for the prosecution of Rousseau for his writings. True?)
It is quite another to shout out (in the midst of a howling mob attacking some unfortunate soul) "YOU UNSPEAKABLE LYING SCUMBAG! HOW COULD YOU SAY SUCH A THING! of course you have the right to freedom of speech and what this mob is doing is wrong EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE AN UNSPEAKABLE LYINGS SCUMBAG WHO DESERVES NOTHING BUT CONTEMPT FOR SAYING WHAT YOU SAID." To choose that moment to launch or reemphasize your critique does not strike me as a robust defense of defense of freedom of speech.