[Marxism] NYT honors 50 yrs of Dissent (but not MR)

[Chris Brady <cdbrady@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

The New York Times celebrates the Fiftieth Anniversary of the quarterly
Dissent.

See: ?A Leftist Stalwart, Still Fighting the Fight?
By Felicia R. Lee, New York Times, 21 February 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/21/arts/21DISS.html

The NYT's Lee calls Dissent a radical, leftist, and/or socialist
journal.  The New York Times didn?t print any notice of the Fiftieth
Anniversary of the radical, leftist, socialist magazine Monthly Review,
and MR is five years older than Dissent..  Dissent also calls itself a
magazine, not a journal; same with MR.  "Journal" sounds loftier,
though.     Dissent only appears once every three months, whereas
Monthly Review comes out more frequently, i.e.,?clearly, by its
title?monthly.  MR has published writers with reputations and insights
at least equal to those that have appeared in Dissent.
So why has the NYT snubbed MR?

The answer maybe found in the points made by the Times that the
?anti-Stalinist? Dissent ?has often been fiercer in its critique of the
left?.  With Stalinists, fellow travelers, Trotskyists, Maoists, and
libertarian socialists alike appearing on its pages, MR has simply never
been as convenient a tool of the capitalist establishment as Dissent.
Dissent?s editors favored forcibly removing Saddam.  MR was opposed to
US war against Iraq.

MR is a socialist magazine, but it is not a party publication.  It has
been consistent in its support for anti-imperialism around the world.  I
have no solid data, but I have met more socialists from abroad who know
of and appreciate MR than ever heard of Dissent magazine.

I must thank Jack McCarthy of Counterpunch for his funny note about The
National Lampoon parody of  Dissent magazine and its founder Irving
Howe.  The Lampoon described Howe as a socialist who supported all
revolutions ?except those that actually occurred.?  (See:
http://www.counterpunch.org/mccarthy0416.html )

Here?s some more reasons the NYT might favor Dissent and not MR.  The
character of the magazine was established by its founder:
??those opposed to communism like Howe?by the early fifties, a
democratic socialist. [clip]
Howe became alarmed at the New Left's dismissal of anti-communism and
their admiration for Castro's new communist regime in Cuba?. In Dissent
Howe launched his own criticisms of the student protestors.  In the
sixties, even old antagonists like Howe and [Irving] Kristol could find
themselves in agreement in their antagonism toward the new student
radicals.?
from:
A SHORT HISTORY OF THE NEW YORK INTELLECTUALS
[N.B.: NOT by Alan Wald]
http://www.pbs.org/arguing/docs/1history.html

MR has not opposed communism.  Its founders have openly admired Castro
and the Cuban Revolution.  MR was well-regarded among the student left
in the Sixties.  From today's students we might ascertain yet more
perspective on the NYT?s appreciation of Dissent (and neglect of MR):

A hawkish left
I've been thinking about progressives and foreign policy recently, and
just got around to reading Josh Marshall's article in The Forward from
last week about the recent push by the Social Democrats USA (the hawkish
splinter-group spawn of the old American Socialist Party) to mobilize an
active leftist movement in America that combines a strongly progressive
and pro-labor domestic agenda with a Blairite liberal interventionist
foreign policy approach (or, as they like to put it, "muscular
internationalism").  I have to say that this holds a strong appeal for
me, and I think this direction is one with real potential as a long-term
progressive/Democratic strategy.
[clip]
A few reading suggestions:  For those who are interested in this kind of
hawkish/interventionist left (but don't really dig the uber-hawkish
neolib/neocon New Republic), Dissent magazine is the place to go. ?

Sam Rosenfeld
Managing Editor, Columbia Political Review
http://www.columbiapoliticalreview.com/blog/archive.asp?year=2003&month=5

Pale praise indeed, for a Red-blooded socialist.  In consideration of
the above, perhaps to be recognized so affectionately by the NYT would
not be such a high recommendation for an anti-imperialist, socialist
publication.

So be it.
So it be.



_______________________________________________
Marxism mailing list
Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism