[lbo-talk] Liberal imperialism

Jim Farmelant farmelantj at juno.com
Tue Sep 27 17:08:49 PDT 2005


On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 19:18:58 -0400 Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> writes:
> Carrol Cox wrote:
>
> >The members of the local anti-war group (except for Jan & me) are
> all
> >liberals, not marxists or even socialists particularly; they all
> support
> >DP candidates. I have from the beginning periodically made sure
> they all
> >know about how the WWP/ANSWER is regarded by people like Nathan.
> They
> >all don't give a fuck. They find the topic not only irrelvant but
> >aggressively boring and a waste of time.
>
> Couldn't agree more. Why does it bother the Nathan Newmans and Marc
> Coopers so much? It's not like you have to sign a statement of
> support for Kim Jong Il to participate. It's just pure sectarianism
> in the name of anti-sectarianism. And it's crap.

The cold war has been over for at least fifteen years but some people cannot let go of it, least of all some of the people who post here. Even Dubya's administration finds it can get more mileage from bashing Muslims and people of Middle Eastern origin than it can out of bashing reds. I suspect that Carrol right that most "ordinary" liberals and progressives, as opposed to the kind that post here, couldn't care less about WWP's positions on North Korea or China. That's no longer seen as relevant by most people. I realize that certain people here cannott resist playing Sidney Hook on the Internet but Hook is dead along with the cold war.


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



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list