[lbo-talk] Carrol-baiting versus actual discussion (WAS: Re: west on obama and boycotts)

[Andy]

On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 2:10 PM, shag carpet bomb <shag at cleandraws.com> wrote:
> ha! you're one to talk, Mr Pithic Himself. I was going to say that I
> found it annoying to read your remark. You never explained your terms.
> you made the assumption that people think boycotts are good - i don't
> and i know not everyone here thinks boycotts are good. then you said
> that there's an assumption that social conscious consumerism is
> assumed to be bad.

Feedback, excellent!  Thank you for taking the trouble.

I have nothing against classical pithology.  It's merely the second
time in as many weeks that I got the same dismissive one-word answer
from Carrol to a complicated question.  It occurred to me that I
should follow Doug's recent example and not rise to the bait, but then
I find out that I'm the one who's baiting.  Hey, learn something new
every day.

I didn't mean the generalization to be taken too literally.  But if
boycotts aren't supported enough on the list, how about picket lines?
And I honestly have a hard time remembering anybody to the left of the
Utne Reader saying anything approving about any kind of "socially
conscious consumerism".  It's usually mentioned with scorn.  But you
think I'm mistaken?  Don't you do a lot of the scorning?


>
> who are these folks. what the hell is SCC anywaY?

Sorry, I missed that.

-- 
Andy