[lbo-talk] dishonest material on Portside

Charles Brown cbrown at michiganlegal.org
Wed Oct 25 11:50:31 PDT 2006


See below for the latest utterly dishonest material from Portside. The folllowing correction was submitted to Portside on October 22, but nothing has appeared as of October 25.

Jesse Lemisch =================================

CB: With due respect, your grammar is a bit ambiguous. You do say,

"I CAN'T SEE IT".

But then you suggest that

" but discussion may bring out some continuity."

The second part of your sentence makes Mark Solomon's commment accurate.

And then again you say: "I CAN'T SEE HOW THESE REVELATIONS of despicable sexual behavior make American Negro Slave Revolts or the horrifying Truth about Hungary any more true or false."

Then you seem to contradict yourself with what follows:

"But I am interested in what connections people might be able to sketch in. There might be some."

CB: "Utterly dishonest" is not an accurate way to describe Solomon's claim that: " Lemisch urges the search for a connection between

molestation and Aptheker's writings in African American

history and other areas". You do , in fact,in the second part of your sentence and in your second sentence in the next case, "urge a search for a connection between molestation and Aptheker's writings in African American history and other areas"

(More below-CB)

In his comment on Portside 10/22/06 [see below] Mark Solomon selectively omits words surrounding those that he quotes from my "About the Herbert Aptheker Sexual Revelations," History News Network, 10/4/06 www.hnn.us/articles/30519.html, and thus precisely reverses what I said. Solomon writes:


> Lemisch urges the search for a connection between
> molestation and Aptheker's writings in African American
> history and other areas: "I continue to wish for
> discussion on how the attitudes expressed in Herbert's
> awful acts might have been reflected in books like the
> centrally important American Negro Slave Revolts and or
> the truly terrible The Truth About Hungary." In a note
> to Phelps, Lemisch returns to that point: "I am
> interested in seeing what connections people might be
> able to sketch in. There might be some."

What I said, quoted below, is the reverse of what Solomon has me saying:

"I continue to wish for discussion as to how the attititudes expressed in Herbert's awful acts might have been reflected in books like the centrally important American Negro Slave Revolts and/or the truly terrible The Truth about Hungary. I CAN'T SEE IT, but discussion may bring out some continuity. I think Chris[topher Phelps] implies but DOES NOT SHOW A CONNECTION ... Without positing a major disconnect between the personal and the public, I CAN'T SEE HOW THESE REVELATIONS of despicable sexual behavior make American Negro Slave Revolts or the horrifying Truth about Hungary any more true or false. But I am interested in what connections people might be able to sketch in. There might be some." (EMPHASIS ADDED)

In other words, Solomon has turned my expression of disagreement with the idea of a connection upside down, and made it into concurrence with the idea.

CB: Not really. He doesn't say you concur with the idea. He says:

"Lemisch urges the search for a connection between

molestation and Aptheker's writings in African American

history and other areas". You do say "but discussion may bring out some continuity." and " "I am

interested in seeing what connections people might be

able to sketch in. There might be some." Those seem to be "urg(ing) the search for a connection ..."

^^^^^

Quite a feat! Nonetheless, it's too bad that the discussion I invited doesn't seem to be taking place.

^^^^^ CB: Again here you seem to want a discussion that might find some connection between the two. You might want to think about what you quote yourself right here on this list on this. Your expressions are very ambiguous. Solomon's characterization of what you said seems accurate from reading what you just posted here of your own words. You first say you don't think there's a connection, but you then say "but" there might be a connection and you want people to discuss it to see if there is a connection. Think about it.

^^^^^^^

Jesse Lemisch



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list