[PEN-L:5559] RE: Re: How the Left repeats simplistic analogies (H ow the Serbs became fascists

["Bohmer, Pete" <BohmerP@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I just sent Nathan Newman a note telling him that while I am totally against
the U.S./NATO war against Yugoslavia, the self-righteousness of some of the
people on this list who are against the War and their ad-hominem attacks
also bothers me, e.g., a few of the many posts of Proyect and Henwood fall
into this category.  Because of the difficulty of anti-war people in putting
forth a position that protects the rights of the Albanian Kosovans, I can
understand (although not agree with) why some progressive people do not have
a clear position against the U.S. war.

I have done a fair amount of leafleting and speaking against the war since
March 24th and find myself continually being confronted by honest people
with points of view and arguments  similar to what Max Sawicky and Nathan
Newman have been raising.

I urge members on this list to challenge as strongly as they can the
arguments of members of Pen-l who support the War but to respect the
individual and to not attack their motives.

Peter Bohmer
> ----------
> Reply To: 	pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: 	Monday, April 19, 1999 2:23 PM
> To: 	pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: 	[PEN-L:5542] Re: How the Left repeats simplistic analogies
> (How the Serbs became fascists
>
> I wrote: >>It's interesting (and sad) that the DSA seems to be reverting
> to
> its roots [i.e., of cold-war liberalism], or more correctly, to some its
> worst traditions. When will they ever learn?<<
>
> >My lord, the intellectual intolerance building on this issue by the
> "pro-Serbian genocide" forces (as opposed to us "cruise missile liberals")
> is getting quite incredible.  You folks seem to refuse to deal with the
> fact that there are a large chunk of folks who have marched in anti-war
> marches for decades (or only for their short adult lifetimes) but who just
> see the alternatives in this situation differently.<
>
> Look, I am NOT (repeat: NOT) "pro-Serbian genocide" at all; I've repeated
> that so many times you'd think you'd get it. You labelled yourself a
> "cruise missile liberal" or something like that and it seems to fit. Since
> you never have replied to my arguments against your arguments in favor of
> "cruising" the Serbs, I assume you have no reasonable reply except
> emotional cant about "'we' had to do _something_ about Kosovo/a" (as in
> the
> YDSA position paper). Instead, you respond in an ad hominem style with
> accusations of "intellectual intolerance."
>
> I am not responsible for what Milosevic or the Serbian government or the
> Serbs as a whole do, since I don't pay taxes to them and they don't act in
> my name. On the other hand, the US government takes my taxes and blows
> people away again and again. And as I've argued again and again -- and
> you've ignored and ignored -- the US/NATO is not making things better in
> Serbia, Kosova/o, Montenegro, Macedonia, or Albania. They are f*cking
> things up much more. It doesn't make sense tactically, strategically,
> politically, or morally.
>
> As for the "large chunk of folks who have marched in anti-war marches for
> decades" before deciding that imperialism was great, it's important to
> remember that the folks who turned the old SP-USA into a pro-war force in
> the late 1960s and early 1970s _also_ had their credentials as activists.
> And also that just because  someone has credentials doesn't automatically
> mean that they're right (or that people without credentials are
> automatically wrong). In my book, they have to present reasoned arguments
> rather than resting on their laurels. (This biz reminds me of those people
> who act superior because _they_ were at Woodstock.)
>
> >You don't have to agree with those who support intervention but this
> wholesale excommunication of everyone who disagrees with you from the Left
> is sectarian in the worst sense of the word.<
>
> There have been no excommunications while I've been participating in this
> debate on pen-l. I presented reasoned responses to your "NATO is the best
> we've got" argument and you didn't reply. Period.
>
> >I am starting to find pen-l as intellectually narrow as freerepublic.com
> (with pretty damn similar rhetoric) in the complete refusal to
> respectfully
> engage with those you disagree with.<
>
> So _you_ are excommunicating us. Further, I _engaged_ with you and you
> _ignored_ it.
>
> >To just dismiss this division on the Left as a reversion to Cold War
> liberalism is just intellectually simplistic.  It may be the old folks
> living the last war (Vietnam in this case), who are resurrecting the worst
> sectarian traditions of division and intolerance of yesteryear.<
>
> Having caught only the last, cynical, tail of the anti-war movement I
> can't
> say that I am nostalgic for those days. Never having been a sectarian (and
> having actually belonged to the SP-USA, DSOC, and the New American
> Movement), I don't know who you are talking to here. (Maybe to Louis, but
> I'm not Louis. If anyone, it's Max who looks like Louis.)
>
> I am, on the other hand, old (47). Maybe it leads to flatulence (to quote
> one of your insults) but it also gives me a sense of history. I know that
> when the YDSA embraces cruise missiles they are repeating mistakes similar
> to those made in the past. I know that those who don't learn from history
> are bound to repeat its mistakes.
>
> Jim Devine jdevine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx &
> http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html
>