Dennis Claxton wrote:
>
> >
>
> Sheesh Carrol. The one-liner you pounce on here was followed by a
> ton of actual analysis. Sometimes it looks like a toss-up as to
> which the left needs worse, nice clothes or a sense of humor.
Why didn't he just give the analysis. Why wrap it in a pointless humorless sneer at unnamed parties. I admit that when it comes to claims to mental telepathy in ascribing motives I do not have and do not intend to develop a "sense of humor." That sort of thing has pissed me off for 50 years or so -- and in fact was what back in 1965 (before I had the wildest notion I would ever become a marxist) begin to draw me to left activity -- what, at the time, I called put-downs of various groups, put-downs which in fact were usually grounded in some idiotic guess as to motive.
In the summer of 1948 I was taking private lessons in Latin from a woman wh regularly subbed at the high school, which was how I knew of her. She came from a wealthy local family and had married a wealthy attorney from a wealthy local family. The family had a good deal of rental property. One day we were chatting and she retailed some events from a decade+ earlier which still griped her. She told of going to the movies and there in the ticket line would be a family that was behind on their rent. I like the woman and so didn't say, "Perhaps they had to have some entertainment to r esist the temptation to strangle their landlord?" I was far from a political radical at the time but still. . . .This is the sort of thing that I have in mind every time I object to someone ascribing motive. It's a vile habit.
Carrol