> See also: Eric's recent post about trying to avoid the
> patronizing position that these other people can't possibly have a
> politics and that anything that smacks of a politics that's supportive
> of u.s. intervention or NATO intervention has to be the work of the
> CIA or somesuch horse shit.
>
Word.
> We've disagreed on that topic before though. I don't recall who was in
> the convo though. The disagreement is that the resonsing is supposedly
> circular. To which my response is, yeah, so the fuck what?
Which reasoning is supposedly circular? And how?
SA