Barkley Rosser wrote: > I accept that I mischaracterized Henry's >position vis a vis Max. However, Henry certainly >characterized one position as being "evil" even >if he did not specifically list people who held it, >although Max came closer to it than anybody on >the list. Not too surprising that he took offense. Unless one separates a position from those who hold it, one can't argue about anything that would arouse passion. If Henry (or anyone) wants to say that a position X is evil, unjust, immoral, or whatever, I hope he'll continue to say it, without tempering his words. Barkley Rosser also wrote: >We may sneer at all the >self-styled progressives who are supporting the bombing. >But it is a serious position and they are not all doing it >to kiss somebody's derrriere or to win favors or positions >in the US Congress, or whatever. It may be a 'serious' position in the sense that it is sincerely held without self-interested motives. However, it isn't a serious position in that it is negated by facts (e.g. NATO has bombed those whom they claim to protect as well), among other reasons. One can only hold this position seriously as long as one pays no attention to the effects of bombings. Yoshie
