Daniel, I just wanted to send a brief note to carry you how much I appreciate your consistent good sense, which is rare phenomenon on the list.
On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 05:31:03PM +0100, Daniel Davies wrote: > >>Crooked Timber, > a group blog that he joined recently and that was > made to order for him. This is a gang of > underachieving liberal academics with socialist > pretensions<< > > ouch! > > actually the underachieving liberal tendency is only part of the Crooked > Timber mix. We also have a couple of bitter old clapped-out Trots, and one > or two repulsive hypocritical yuppie champagne Bolsheviks. Something for > everyone really. > > I don't necessarily agree with what Michael said and did in 2003 (assuming > that I have got an accurate picture of what it was, a point which is to say > the least controversial); I still can't make my mind up whether he would > have been part of the "Decent Left" of the time if he was British, and I > have always thought that having a go at your own side is a daft thing to do. > > I also think that the idea that anti-imperialism of any flavour has much to > do with "sovereignty" is a pretty huge and arguably tendentious > misunderstanding, and that it's had quite a destructive effect in creating a > space for people to believe that wandering round the globe blowing things up > can often be a correct and moral thing to do - liberal internationalism IMO > functions as a kind of methadone to a lot of the War Party, in that it's > what people take when they realise that American exceptionalism is having a > destructive effect, but they can't quite bear to give it up. > > But surely it has to be recognised in context that a) this was like four > years ago, b) this time round, he did not start it and c) even if he was the > worst bastard on earth, it is not OK to stitch him up with misquotes like > Cockburn did. If vanity battles between liberals and leftists over whose > opposition to the Iraq War was grounded in the best analysis of modern > politics were a bad idea then (and they were) they're a bad idea now. > > best > dd > > PS: I'm copying this to the CT authors mailing list on the general basis > that they probably deserve to be aware of what I'm saying about them behind > their back, not for any other reason. > > -----Original Message----- > From: PEN-L list [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Louis > Proyect > Sent: 27 March 2007 16:51 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Michael Bérubé: amateur red-baiter > > > As a long-time observer of the cruise missile > left, I was happy to see Alexander Cockburn nail > them in a recent Counterpunch: > > >>The war party virtually monopolized > television. AM radio poured out a filthy torrent > of war bluster. The laptop bombardiers such as > Salman Rushdie were in full war paint. Among the > progressives the liberal interventionists thumped > their tin drums, often by writing pompous pieces > attacking the antiwar hard left. Mini-pundits > Todd Gitlin and Michael Bérubé played this game > eagerly. Bérubé lavished abuse on Noam Chomsky > and other clear opponents of the war, mumbling > about the therapeutic potential of great power > interventionism, piously invoking the tradition > of left internationalism. Others, like Ian > Williams, played supportive roles in instilling > the idea that the upcoming war was negotiable, > instead of an irreversible intent of the Bush > administration, no matter what Saddam Hussein did.<< > > Bérubé, a publicity-hungry Penn State professor > who is Alan Colmes to red-baiter David Horowitzs > Sean Hannity, defended himself on Crooked Timber, > a group blog that he joined recently and that was > made to order for him. This is a gang of > underachieving liberal academics with socialist > pretensions who spent most of the 90s demanding > that the dastardly Serbs be brought to heel and > then without skipping a beat cheered on the > B-52s as they rained bombs down on the Taliban. > When George W. Bush took the next logical step > and invaded Iraq, they responded that that was > not what they had in mind. However, a jury would > likely have found him guilty of being an > accessory after the fact. US imperialism > certainly saw all these invasions as consistent > with each other, even if liberals like Bérubé > could not. This would require an understanding of > class politics that is sadly missing in the postmodernist swamp he inhabits. > > full: http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/2007/03/27/442/ -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu michaelperelman.wordpress.com
