On Jul 9, 2007, at 9:24 AM, Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:
> Seen objectively in terms of their respective casualties, the
> collective records of liberalism, socialism, secular nationalism, etc.
> are not prettier than that of Islamism. As far as I can see, though,
> selective indignation is the norm rather than an exception among
> liberals and leftists...
Since you get a free pass from Carrol Cox, he won't perform his usual role of querying generalizations. And this one is a lot more problematic than claiming that the left press is often dull and witless.
Who are these "liberals and leftists" who are presumably more exercised about repression in Iran than at home? The Nation magazine? The ACLU? The CPUSA? Solidarity? Posters to lbo-talk? Posters to Marxmail? All those entities are far more vocal about repression and/ or inequality in the U.S. than in Iran. Most, save the ACLU, are highly critical of U.S. imperialism, and even use the term. We've just had a thread that explicitly addressed the bloody record of liberalism - though since you're on "nomail," you might not have actually read any of it. As I keep pointing out, you're the listmember who's obsessed with Iran; without your provocations, there'd be little talk about that country on this list except to expose and condemn the Bush admin's war plans. Most of those entities don't approve of Islamophobia or ethnic profiling, even if they aren't about to refer to their "beloved Islamic Republic of Iran" like you do. Maybe you're thinking of Danny Postel or George Packer or even Christopher Hitchens. But they're generally not highly regarded by the first set of entities that I listed.
I've been mechanically approving your first three posts of every day - and by the way I'm getting a little annoyed at how you sometimes decide to delete the pending posts, so when I go to approve them, they're gone. But I'm not going to approve any more until you actually name some names.
Doug