louis, so, you're going to send this puffball little recommendation for moby's new cd to the list (moby? did i read you right? with that soporific cheezball mirthful-dirge-cum-moog "everything is wrong" crap? the guy who peddles his meat-bad-jesus-good politics for warner brothers? ... ), and then try to tag doug for publishing an article in LM? come on. it would be different if doug weren't right--in fact, what's so amazing is how scrupulously you actually avoided talking about the content of the piece. correct me if i'm wrong, but you seem to be pissed because doug published a piece that skewers marxist romanticization of crisis in a journal that skewers the left in general. or that's apostolic about its relation to rcp. so what's your point? if you're trying to say that doug isn't a genuine revolutionary (zzzzz), or not really marxist (yawn), or doesn't have good political judgment (?), how bout just saying so? at least then we wouldn't have to wade through all of this innuendo. and maybe there might be something else to say about the politics of publishing (something not already covered in the thread about your o'connor review), eh? best christian
