Christopher Cutrone wrote,
>Whatever else may be fallacious about their thinking, one thing that
>speaks to the rationality of the positions taken by such types as
>Hitchens, Makiya, Glavin, et al. is their recognition that their is no
>effective Left politics, i.e., that there is no real potential progressive
>"anti-imperialist" politics that provides an actual emancipatory
>alternative to U.S. policy (not that I agree with the conclusions they
>draw from this observation, but this factor still needs to be faced and
>processed).
I think that's nonsense.There are many anti-imperialists who simultaneously oppose
* both U.S. murderous imperialism against Iraq and Saddam Hussein's vicious regime
* both U.S. military and economic threats against Iran and Ahmadinejad's repression of feminists, trade unionists and other democratic forces
* both the U.S. wars against Afghanistan and Pakistan, and the retrograde policies of Al Qaeda and the Taliban Implicit in this simultaneous opposition is support for movements for social justice, democracy and peace in all countries, and the belief that these movements, visible or latent, constitute the "real potential progressive anti-imperialist politics that provides an actual emancipatory alternative to U.S. policy." For campaigns along these lines, supported by dozens of leading leftists, check out the website of the Campaign for Peace and Democracy (CPD) at www.cpdweb.org
IMHO, BTW, the left strengthens itself to the extent that it aggressively defends democratic rights everywhere.
---Joanne Landy, Co-Director, Campaign for Peace and Democracy PS. Christopher Hitchens used to be an active supporter of CPD -- until he came to embrace the various and sundry U.S. wars. PPS Christopher Cutrone, I still haven't heard from you as to whether Platypus supports the U.S. war in Afghanistan. Does it? Are there disagreements among Platypi on this issue? You write "not that I agree with the conclusions they draw from this observation, but this factor still needs to be faced and processed." Which conclusions of Hitchens et al do you disagree with?