On Mar 30, 2009, at 1:33 PM, Carrol Cox wrote:
> Perhaps a clarification. I have never said or thought that newspapers
> were not important or that we could get along without them. I would
> more
> or less agree with Doug if that is the question.
>
> I just said that I personally didn't read newspapers much (even though
> we have always subscribed to two & sometimes three). I never read them
> very carefully and sometimes only the comics and Ann Landers. :-)
Hey, I wasn't accusing you of anything in that post.
By the way, in an effort to advance peace & understanding, I want to clarify my position on "morality." I don't believe in any timeless moral principles - there's just no ground on which they could be established. My only point is that people are drawn to radical politics, or any other kind, on what they think of as moral or ethical principles. Sure, these can be post facto or socially determined or whatever, and not some timeless template applied to transient social reality, but I'd argue that even Marxists who think they're being scientific are thinking in some moral or ethical sense. I'm talking about how people think and feel about their choices and affiliations. And if you want to engage them, you have to deal with that.
Doug