Like Max, I really don't care how "left" someone is. It's not like there's a way of measuring such things along some hard-and-fast and objective spectrum. Besides, what's "left" changes over time. Back in the 1940s, supporting the state of Israel was quite a "leftist" thing to do. Now it isn't.
Recently, I heard on pen-l that Noam Chomsky isn't as leftist as people think. He also can't walk on water.
Similarly, I heard on pen-l that Alan Sokal was a "social democrat." Who cares? Does his status as a social democrat imply that he's worse than some creep who runs a small sect of five people which claims to have the "correct line (or program)"? should we shun Sokal and reject everything he says out of hand?
Just as Michael Perelman says we shouldn't characterize each others' politics, we should down-play the characterization of the politics of those outside the list. The content of their politics is more important than the label.
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Max Sawicky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 1:10 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [PEN-L:26774] RE: RE: RE: tompaine.com
>
>
> Kuttner, tompaine.com, and Moyers are political
> comrades. How much more 'left' one is than the
> other is a trivial question. How left they all are
> compared to your ideal, or to what you think
> is defensible, is more to the point.
>
> By the way, Paul Starr, TAP co-editor, is notably less liberal
> than Kuttner.
>
> mbs
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Devine, James
> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2002 3:44 PM
> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: [PEN-L:26772] RE: RE: tompaine.com
>
>
> also, is it true that Kuttner is pretending to be leftist by being
> associated with tompaine.com? or is he a tompaine.com-type
> leftist who is
> pretending to be more "moderate" in THE AMERICAN PROSPECT? or
> is he trying
> to build a coalition with the lefists?
> in any event, I don't think it's useful to attach a label to
> Kuttner and
> reject him. He says some interesting things, even though I
> don't like his
> focus on the wonderful[*] Democratic Party. The key is he a
> logical thinker
> who bases his conclusions on fact and doesn't leave important
> things (such
> as class relations) out? or does he provide an incomplete
> picture that can
> complement others' incomplete pictures to allow us to develop a more
> complete understanding and a guide for political practice?
> [*] irony intended.
> Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
>
