Louis thinks he knows what kind of socialism I am interested in, but the
real question is what kind of socialism is possible. At the moment, no
socialism is possible because the concept has been so badly
discredited--including in Cuba. Louis and other Cuba apologists on this list
would not want to live under those conditions for two minutes, and I think
they know it. Cuban "socialism" for the Cubans!

As for Jeremiah Wright: I suppose Louis thinks that the job of the left is
to defend any rant, any time, as long as it is roughly in the ballpark of
what a stereotype of a left point of view might be (including Wright's
insightful comments on the AIDS epidemic.) Louis and his ilk don't have a
clue about how to make the left more influential in the United States, but
they are very good at making it irrelevant. In fact, spreading left ideas is
not even their main objective. Take a look at Louis' Marxism mailing list
for what really motivates them: Keeping the torch of left sectarian
navel-gazing, infighting tribalism alive. Yes, Louis and his breed have
turned the left into a cult, from which all but true believers and pure
leftists are excluded (sort of the political version of a Utah polygamist
sect.) I thrill at their irrelevance, because it might give those of us who
are motivated by more than posturing pseudo-intellectualism a chance.


But you are not interested in socialism except in the sense that Michael
> Harrington was for it. You are a liberal, not a socialist. That confusion
> has existed since the early part of the 20th century. In the thousands of
> words you have unleashed on this poor mailing list, you have never once
> addressed the question of *economics*. It does not make sense to talk about
> socialism without addressing the mode of production. Cuba was forced to
> tighten controls over the political system because it tightened controls
> over the economy. When American corporations saw their assets being returned
> to the Cuban people, they promoted military aggression. If Latin American
> history in the 20th century has taught us anything, it is that radical
> economics invites American intervention. In order for American intervention
> to be successful, it needs an open door into the political process of the
> country it seeks to overthrow. It uses the NED and other such subversive
> institutions in order to corrupt the political process. Marc Cooper and the
> bourgeois media promote the right of the NED to throw millions of dollars
> around in Cuba in order to create "dissident" movements. I can understand
> why you would support this right since both of you look at the world through
> the eyes of the millionaires who employ you. How sad that 1960s radicals
> could end up in such a groveling, sycophantic state. Just look at Cooper's
> tirade at Jeremiah Wright today to see how far to the right people like you
> have traveled.

Michael Balter
Contributing Correspondent, Science
Adjunct Professor of Journalism,
Boston University

Email:     [log in to unmask]