[D Shniad:]
> Nope. It's those who strike a neutral stance at a time of fundamental
> crisis among conflicting value systems.
> > Am still awash in existential nausea brought on by the State Dept's
> > appalled discovery, after 32 years of wedded bliss, that Mobutu is
> > one evil dude who should have been hung out to dry in the Sixties.
> > In Dante's Inferno, isn't it the hypocrites that rate the hottest spots?
Being no Dante buff and having no text at hand, I'll have to give your
correction a provisional acceptance, BUT:
unless you're talking about plainly theatrical posturing for tactical
purposes, I'd count the striking of a neutral stance as _an honest and
integral part_ of said fundamental crisis, indeed one of its basic
ingredients.
North America is chock full of people who foresee - or even currently
experience - the depredations of finance capitalism, yet have sincere
doubts of the most agonizing sort about what arrangement should follow it.
If all such people are _per se_ candidates for the Inferno, that place
would make Calcutta look like a stretch of Wyoming.
I have nothing to add to this problem, important as it is, but I hope
that others have thoughts warranting an extension of the thread.
valis
Occupied America
