Dear Jared,
I have to notice that there has been some confusion here: probably my
imperfect English is to be blame. Namely, I have never made this request:
> 1) During the bombing you asked me to write a chapter of a book - I have
the
> emails that passed between us and I said I would write about media lies. I
> had a suspicion from your writing that certain things would be expected of
me
> - so before I got started I inquired: will I be required to attack
> Milosevich? You wrote back: You will.
I have never set this condition, and I am sure that other people from the
book team would confirm that.
I am an anarchist. I don't like to impose rules to people. Being a scientist
as well, there was one principle I have insisted upon: that your chapter
must be built on facts.
So, it is either
1. My bad English or, and I hope it isn't,
2. Activist disease of fighting for his opinion by every means possible.
You are bringing me, constantly, in position to "defend" Chomsky; Chomsky
can defend himself if he wants.
I am saying that his books and interviews did help leftist in Yugoslavia to
convince people that capitalist democracies are not paradises on earth. It
is simple as that.
>
> You offer no defense of Chomsky except that we all make mistakes.
>
> What Chomsky has done is indefensible.
>
Again, I am not defending anyone. I admire Chomsky very much. And I think
that Chomsky made a mistake because he never was in Yugoslavia , a country
he has written a book about. This book, New Military Humanism, is full of
material mistakes. I am reproaching Noam because of his non scientific
attitude in this particular situation. I don't think that his behavior was
indefensible. Take Remsy Clark , for instance. I respect IAC very much. But
this gentleman was taking a lot of money- and I know this for certain- from
YU government.
Chomsky wanted to escape this. As I have said, Chomsky should be judged only
on the basis of consistency. I repeat:
...... And I think that you should admit that Chomsky was also very
consistent; he
made many mistakes, but he never did abandon his crucial principal: "Not
supporting the government but opposing foreign intervention". He never did
supported Vietnamese leaders. He opposed criminal war against Vietnam people
and their right to chose. Same for Nicaragua, Salvador , Columbia ( he is
very much against FARC as you know, of course)....
So, in brief, I don't see that Chomsky did something harmful. Once again,
he was very useful to us, leftist community here, as someone who had
brilliantly demasked AmeriKKKan imperialism , media deceptions, State
violence per se......
I cannot judge his usefulness to American anti war movement because I am
not
in America.............
With regards to Milosevic, I will write only this: today my friend was
hospitalized in Belgrade Clinical Center.
He is, and I am not, a member of Otpor. I am confronting Otpor organization
whenever I can. But I do not choose my friends on the basis of their
political beliefs. Police had beaten him up because he had Otpor!
T-shirt. Milosevic government is not oppressive? Ask him. He is without
conciseness, hospitalized in Pancevo hospital. Please, don't tell me that in
AmeriKKKA things are the same. I know that they are. And not only in
AmeriKKKa. Everywhere. Why are you insiston sanctifying politicians than? I
cannot follow you.
Is that "a pitfall of national consciousness" ?
".....A purely national consciousness
rallies to defend the leadership of the "oppressed nation"
as its bulwark against imperialism......"
Is that it? I cannot understand your positions, regardless how much I admire
your effortless fight against US militarism.
Best regards,
Andrej
www.resistancenet.org
_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
