[lbo-talk] Hamid Dabashi on Ahmadinejad & Bollinger

[ravi]

On 11 Oct, 2007, at 22:38 PM, Doug Henwood wrote:
> On Oct 11, 2007, at 10:21 PM, ravi wrote:
>
>> Yes, yes, I think you are pretty much right here. This is what I have
>> been sort of [trying] to say, I think... that its all fine, the whole
>> liberal thing -- unlike you, I even think its valuable -- but not at
>> the cost of forgetting the reality, especially of others.
>
> So you read Dabashi's piece, or has the bad net connection made that
> impossible?
>

Didn't you say you had said your last on Iran? Hmm? ;-)

I tried scanning through Dabashi, but it got a bit tedious -- tastes  
differ, I guess. Anyway, my comment is mostly to M. Smith's points,  
especially regarding the essential difference between the camps that  
have emerged on Iran (Ahmedinijad and all) and what it is about.  
While M. Smith is talking about Dabashi (who I have heard on your  
show and find agreeable), I was not (I should have made that clear!  
My bad!) -- the original version of my response in fact made a  
reference to an old Stanley Fish article on the Mohammed cartoon  
business (which I posted here or on PEN-L a year or so ago), but I  
didn't have time to finish the thought, so I took it out.

Some more thoughts, at random: M. Smith calls it the choice between  
Ahmedinijad and Bollinger. In an earlier post, I cast it in different  
terms, as a choice (for the "third world") between the Iran/Venezuela  
model and the (Tom Friedman) India model.

Response to Rakesh when I return... I hope! (I still owe responses to  
Dwayne, Jerry, Carrol... some dating back to last year and earlier!  
But I still love all of you!)

	--ravi