>
> On Sat, 4 Jul 2009 12:21:19 -0700 (PDT) Chris Doss
> <lookoverhere1 at yahoo.com> writes:
> >
> > What was rotten about his politics? I have a soft spot for the guy.
>
>
> I actually like many of his books but his role as a political activist,
> especially during the 1960s, left something to be desired. There
> was an extensive thread about this on Marxmail around
> New Year's time. Some of my posts on this issue include:
> http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/2008w52/msg00145.htm
> http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/2009w00/msg00027.htm
> http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/2009w00/msg00050.htm
>
> Jim F.
Following Jim's links and the thread on Marxmail, I found this of particular interest:
http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/2008w52/msg00129.htm
<http://archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/marxism/2008w52/msg00129.htm> http://www.tomhayden.com/articlesGA7.htm
<http://www.tomhayden.com/articlesGA7.htm>From Tom Hayden's review of Isserman's biography of Harrington, there was his wishy-washyness on the Vietnam War (even Jane Fonda did better!), and this item seems to be of particular scum-bagishness:
§ In 1964 he joined the Democratic Party establishment in favoring a compromise that would give two nonvoting seats to the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party while seating the white-only delegation at the Democratic convention. Since the expulsion of the segregationist Democrats would have achieved the very "political realignment" that Michael preached, the compromise was denounced bitterly as a sellout by civil rights activists. -- http://left-wingwacko.blogspot.com/