[lbo-talk] Wow!

knowknot at mindspring.com knowknot at mindspring.com
Sat Oct 1 09:50:08 PDT 2005


On 9/30/05, joanna <123hop at comcast.net> said:

>

> did you see this? To reduce crime rate, abort every black baby....

> <http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/30/bennett.comments/index.html>http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/30/bennett.comments/index.html

Query what the "Wow!" and the "this" above are intended to refer to?

That a near-truism would warrant a "Wow!" -- i.e., that _if_ someone had said that "[t]o reduce crime rate, abort every black baby" (and _if_ those messy "...." ellipses were not so warranted in the circumstances apparently referred to), that would justify a "Wow!"?

Or that the concededly otherwise essentially stupid hypocrite and blow-hard Wm. Bennett said that it would be "impossibly ridiculous" and "morally reprehensible" to recommend abortion as a means to reduce crime rates?

Or that the poster above (and the others who have contributed to the parallel thread here characterized as Bennett's supposed "Racism") disagree with what, quite obviously, was Bennett's actual statement -- namely, that that ignoring nuance and complexity and instead extracting as a "sole purpose" an aim (here: such as "reduc[ing] crime") risks reaching "ridiculous" and "represhensible" conclusions (such as recommending that "you could abort every black baby in this country")?

Or maybe the above poster and the others who have contributed to that other thread are just sophisticatedly recalling American labor history and John L. Lewis' contempt of court conviction because, though Lewis announced that there ought not be a strike, by a "wink and a nod" he actually meant the opposite and, likewise, they believe Bennett to be lying when he said that it would be impossibly ridiculous and morally reprehensible to do what the poster extracts (in the circumstances: grossly out of context) above? But if so, why not try to make that case explicitly?

Bennett is a toady who can/should be criticised for many things, including (as noted) for stupidity not infrequently cloaked with a veneer of intellectuality; but the hyper-perfervid and, worse, themselves intellectually dishonest responses to his remarks including on this List have been disgusting.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list