>If this were really as irrelevant and obvious and repetitive as you
>claims it is, you'd just let it pass. Instead, you emit one rancid
>rant after another. Curious.
Chuck asked the following question first. It's been asked now about a dozen times. No answer:
"At the end of the article, I am still not sure who Reed is addressing. I have to suppose a `diverse bourgeoisie' who wants to believe we are passed all that. But who here on LBO believes we are passed anything? Just exactly who here was fooled by the rainbow coalition Bush cabinet? So, I keep asking myself, why belabor this obvious and not very relevant point to the people who actually compose LBO?"
As Chuck says, I just don't see who, here, is the target of these posts. You must be trying to communicate to someone here. Are there people here who are the equivalent of Tim Wise? Who is the audience?
I said awhile ago that it seems to me that Adolph Reed is involved in an argument with other black intellectuals on the left. which is fine. But who is he talking to? Because he seems to be talking to other black activists and intellectuals -- people who seem to be concerned about whether it's racism when Oprah and Cosby rant on about personal responsibility, etc. I'm not sure who they are, actually. Michael Eric Dyson? But I don't think Dyson is a race-only kind of guy. So I doubt it's him. Is Reed on about folks like Cornell West?
He obviously thinks that there's a problem and that the people promulgating this problem are doing some damage to the potential for a left social movement. It'd be nice to have some names -- of someone who matters. Tim Wise ain't it, in my view. But if all of this is just the result of some dispute in the blogosphere or on an email list -- then WTF?
shag