====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
Interesting that you would draw a line between my characterization of Chomsky and somebody else's (don't know who) about Sherrod. Chomsky's seems like a good guy, but my appraisal of his interest in showing how he is a worthy supporter of "Israel" (note that his quoted remarks do not say the people of or working people of Israel, but "Israel) because he is trying to make it do better than what it is doing by the Palestinian people seems like a liberal stance albeit as I said a particularly better one than most. I agree with Louis that I would not place him with other enemies, but there are other "liberals" who are not enemies even if they do have liberal views (you know, like a large majority of "progressive" workers who reside in the Democratic Party). And, before you go and get all scientific definitionny on me, there are liberals who I know will stand with the working class and the oppressed when push comes to shove as there will be members of the working class who will stand with their capitalist masters in a fight for workers power, so, just because I am willing to characterize Noam Chomsky for his less than adequate (in my view) position on Palestinian self-determination doesn't mean that he is not an ally or that I believe him to be an enemy; only that his position seems to straddle that equivocal line on the national question and it appears liberal to me. Although my jaw is not dropping (meaning I guess I am not surprised), I am incredulous that all you can muster is indignation that someone would challenge the legitimacy of some intellectual "icon" rather than addressing what I wrote about his position. If it was not clear, I meant my post to be a query; to understand better the issues of BDS, Chomsky as "good Zionist", how helping Israel be better will improve the lot of and win the self-determination of the Palestinian people, and, most importantly, how Chomsky's views conform with the views of purported revolutionists on this list. Perhaps I should have used a more palatable formulation like his positions "seems" liberal? Would that be less upsetting? Manuel > Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 18:35:43 -0400 > From: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Marxism] A response to Blankfort's hatchet job on Chomsky > To: [email protected] > > ====================================================================== > Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > ====================================================================== > > > There are a number of questions on which I completely disagree with Chomsky, > buta "bourgeois liberal" he is not. In contrast, we recently had a post > refering to Shirley Sherrod as a "comrade" to which almost nobody made any > objection. So, we embrace members of the government as our comrades and > denounce a heroic ally who's stuck his neck out repeatedly for all the right > reasons a liberal of the enemy class. > > My jaw is dropping.... > > ML > ________________________________________________ > Send list submissions to: [email protected] > Set your options at: > http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/mtomas3%40hotmail.com ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: [email protected] Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
