The Seven Deadliest Sins I Committed in 2006
I set them out in my Chronicles column this week.Why, I keep getting asked, have I suddenly decided to go after the left? Never mind that nothing sudden has happened here, and never mind whether it’s really the “left” I’ve been going after. I reckon I owe everybody an explanation.
That's what I attempt.
So, in hindsight, is there anything in those seven columns I wish I’d written differently?
I deeply regret to say, no. Not one dang word.
posted by Terry Glavin at 1:06 PM
6 Comments:
One should, of course, always hold one's own to a higher standard, and I for one would not fault you for that. But it should be remembered that every political movement has its own loons, crackpots, and nutcases. This will never change, and they will always be there to criticize, and they should certainly be noted. But it shouldn't be assumed that they are representative.
At any rate, if I may, I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Socialist International, and of the NDP, and of the true spirit of warmest solidarity.
I was going to make roughly the same point as double-plus-ungood, that it is important to avoid lumping fringe nutcases in with the larger progressive movements, and that includes the anti-war left. I also strongly disagree with you on the apartheid wall.
I completely agree with you on 9/11 conspiracy theorists, though, and am glad to have met Clemente Apak at human rights functions.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
When I talk about the anti-war left, I am talking not only about people in key positions, as you say, but rank and file members, volunteers, people who merely attend anti-war events. I have problems with some of the elites in the anti-war movement myself, how they seem to have been unduly influenced by certain intersts. That said, it is unfair, as double-plus-ungood says, to suggest that they are representative of the anti-war movement.
Well, I disagree with you that it's not an apartheid wall. I would also say that I have seen several pictures of the wall, and it sure looks like concrete to me. Maybe there are wire sections. I don't know, maybe they ran out of money for a good solid concrete wall from end to end.
It wasn't my intention to delve into this issue on this thread, but if you insist...
OK, lets drop the semantics. I wish I hadn't split hairs in the first place with you on this because Palestinians who are kept behind it probably don't really care what word you use for it.
Some of it is concrete. Some of it is barbed wire. In the end, you can call it a fence or you can call it a wall. All of it is impassible. As far as I am concerned, none of it is justifyable. And, as the International Court of Justice in the Hague rightly determined, it is illegal under international law.
I've been meaning to say, besides, that I hope your kid's doing fine. That must have been traumatic all round, buddy.
Thanks Terry, I appreciate that. He's seems to be mostly recovered now except for some ongoing leg pain. Kid must be made of rubber or something.
Regarding the wall, my own opinion is that the Israelis have every right to build whatever wall they want on their land to ensure their security. The problem is where they've put portions of it. They seem to have snagged some extra land in the process, which creates some confusion as to whether the purpose is security or annexation, or both.
Post a Comment
<< Home