> > I guess I'm getting old(er) and soft(er), but I have to admit more than a > > bit of admiration for someone from the bosom of the establishment who uses > > her (unearned, unjustified) celebrity to tackle the international arms > > industry and the British Tories on issues like land mines. The issue I think isn't Diana but the common understanding of her, which is deeply flawed, to say the least. > Three cheers! Here's someone aware that Diana was as much a prisoner of > birth and upbringing as any welfare baby, and that she tried mightily to > overcome that circumstance, as well as its typical maladies: guilt, fear, > boredom, isolation, self-contempt and every sort of inbreeding. > Had she relinquished every perk to make a purer effort, she would have > been forgotten as quickly as then Chicago mayor Jane Byrne, whose move as > an earnest into a city housing project is now less than ancient history. > I suggest that issues of truth and falsehood re the phenomenon of Diana > are inseparable from those of monarchy, a state church and a formal > class system; in other words, we should be content to observe the British > people - particularly the women - sort them out. Diana, welfare babies, and Jane Byrne. Hmmm. My suggestion is that the public is far from "sorting this out"; rather, it seems to be in the midst of constructing the grossest of fantasies. > > Given all of the phoniness and media hype attached to this woman and her > > demise, how many leftists can be said to have had a comparable influence? > > A painful point. It took Robert McNamara's book tour _culpa mea_ in 1995 > to confer legitimacy upon the anti-war movement, something that the whole > American left had been unable to achieve in the preceding 20-30 years. > Would any of you have him recant because of who he is or what he was? Good grief. The anti-war movement became legitimate when the last US helicopter left Saigon. We sure didn't need Robert McN. Abbie Hoffman had more influence than Diana. I defy anyone to specify concrete, noteworthy social changes resulting from her existence. I do not consider charitable activities, however commendable their motives and effects, as social change. Into this you can put all the fund-raising for AIDS, health etc. Nor do I think you can say any change in the disposition of land-mines will have any effect on the conduct of war, repression, or counter-insurgency in the next century. MBS ================================================== Max B. Sawicky Economic Policy Institute [EMAIL PROTECTED] Suite 1200 202-775-8810 (voice) 1660 L Street, NW 202-775-0819 (fax) Washington, DC 20036 Opinions here do not necessarily represent the views of anyone associated with the Economic Policy Institute. ===================================================
