[lbo-talk] The Nation and brain death

[Bhaskar Sunkara]

I haven't thought long enough on this to judge it's coherence, but wouldn't
you agree that there is peculiar brand of "liberal radicalism" unique to the
United States.  Specifically, I mean Michael Moore, Naomi Klein, and even
Gore Vidal in his prime, Alexander Cockburn, et all (not sure if Cockburn
belongs).  These people never 100 percent make the structural critiques...
capitalism, exploitation of labor, class society, but they make enough of a
critique and more significant use self-marginalizing rhetoric that often
positions themselves outside of the "mainstream" even while arguing banal
operative social democratic politics.  This peculiar brand of "liberal
radicalism" also seems especially prone to moralism and silly populist
analysis. I've always wondered why they didn't just make peace with the
Democratic Party, the left wing of which (the Congressional
Progressive Caucus) pretty much represents their politics.  Sure, if we had
a real anticapitalist left a lot of these people would break into that
direction and it "left-liberal" rags can be seen as what they are...
"liberal", center-left publications.  No one was confusing *The Nation *for
the *The New Masses....  *Naomi Klein thinks the left's history in the 1930s
was a tremendous success, how can she belong to the same vague entity known
as the "left" as people who see it as a profound missed opportunity and
historical regression that helped forestall the possibility of socialism,
bring about the rise of an inter-imperialist war and fascism, etc.  Make any
sense?

On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:


>
> On Feb 21, 2010, at 4:21 PM, SA wrote:
>
>  I wonder if KVH is influenced by these people:
>>
>>
>> http://www.inthesetimes.com/main/print/5583/
>>
>> Beyond Pale, Male and Stale
>> Why ‘legacy’ progressive media must reinvent themselves to remain
>> relevant.
>> By Jessica Clark and Tracy Van Slyke February 17, 2010
>>
>> To reach out to and sustain relationships with so-called "minority users,"
>> progressive media makers need to move beyond their core white audiences
>> (pale), reach out to women and queer communities (male), and stop being so
>> serious all the time (that is, wonkish, humorless, and stale).
>>
>
> Well, KvH herself isn't male, nor is another top editor, Betsy Reed. It is
> rather white, except for the columnists Patricia Williams, Gary Younge, and
> now MHL. KvH has no interest at all in humor - any witty or otherwise
> striking turn of phrase is edited out.
>
> But really, what's the political content of this sort of demographic
> analysis?
>
> And "legacy," really? I've heard that applied to applicants to elite
> universities and software written in Cobol, but it's fucking dumb applied to
> publications with a history and some sort of influence. "Their expertise
> lies in their personal experience, background, and passion, which are
> reflected in the tone they adopt to communicate with their users—a tone that
> appeals because it represents an authentic and accessible voice, one that
> relates a shared identity and experience." Activistism in a new guise?
>
> Doug
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>