[lbo-talk] Re: Churchill's Complaint

[Turbulo at aol.com]

I don't see the point to all this careful parsing of Churchill's remarks. Were computer programmers who worked in the WTC more culpable than janitors? It's pretty obvious to me that, despite recent disclaimers, Churchill buys into notions of "mass guilt" on the part of ordinary citizens of imperialist countries. Such ideas have an old pedigree among radicals, going back at least to Weatherman, which regarded just about all caucasian Americans as the beneficiaries of "white skin privilege." This kind of thinking can only hurt any effort to undercut popular support for imperialist policies. 

But isn't it also clear that O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Coulter, etc. aren't only going after Churchill, but any public person not on board with the Bush crusade?  So should the leftist response be mainly to amplify Bushite attacks or defend Churchill's tenure? Again, the answer seems self-evident. But not to some, like Cooper and Newman, apparently. This to me is the most disturbing aspect of the recent discussion. It's not a question of whether one agrees or disagrees with Churchill, but where one places the emphasis.