Doug said:
>Does that sound like accusing Kos of "a betrayal that marks [him] as
>an enemy of the movement, a 'liberal imperialist" or whatever.'
-Nathan's a propagandist, and a master of the tendentious paraphrase. -And I say this with some admiration for his skill.
Um, Doug is it a tendentious paraphrase that Carroll said, that critics of ANSWER were limited: "One consists of the enemies of any mass movement: Nathan, Chuck0, Wojtek, Pugliese."
Or that a thread reacting to my criticism was labelled as "liberal imperialist"?
But I will accept the compliment for my supposed propaganda skills, even if unwarranted.
And in another post Doug said this about the whole ANSWER issue: -No one except you, David Corn, Marc Cooper, and Nathan Newman really -finds this a scandal. Carrol Cox's liberal comrades in Illinois don't -care. Philip Weiss, writing in this week's New York magazine, doesn't -care. This is sectarianism disguised as anti-sectarianism. The cold -war is long over. Give it up.
Again, this is a pseudo populist line. There have been raging debates involving hundreds of posters on this exact issue all over Daily Kos and other groups.
And it's not about the Cold War, which has been over pretty much my whole conscious political life. It's about both the failure of a real democratic organization to build to run marches in a stratefic way that wouldn't make them a waste of time and resources, and politics of ANSWER that make their presence on places like C-SPAN not only noxious, but even worse, boring as hell.
Nathan