[Marxism] The Execrable David Horowitz on Bettina Aptheker Memoir
ok.president+marxmail at gmail.com
Sat Nov 11 23:53:53 MST 2006
On 11/12/06, Walter Lippmann <walterlx at earthlink.net> wrote:
Christopher Phelps's review is not Bettina Aptheker's book.
Of course it is not.
However, you said: "No one to my knowledge has described Bettina's
statements as "hard truths". Kevin then replied, "Then apparently you did
not read Christopher Phelps' review, which, among other things said, "Incest
is only the most painful of a series of hard truths about Herbert Aptheker
that we confront in Intimate Politics." "
Since you had said that "no one" has described the statements in the book as
"hard truths", a mention of Christopher Phelps is quite justified at this
point, because Phelps is someone who had used that very expression.
> You've already made it clear that you reject what she says, even though
> you haven't read it.
No, Kevin said that the accusation is "unsubtantiated". That, as has
already been pointed out, does not imply "false" or "to be rejected". It
means exactly what it says: that the charges have not been "substantiated".
> The failure to acknowledge that misogyny is a profound problem in the
> culture of the United States is rather telling.
Please consider the illogic of this. An analogy might help.
Racism is a profound a problem of US culture. But that does not mean that,
if a black person accuses a white person of something terrible, we should
immediately rush to the judgement that the white person must be guilty,
until and unless the charges have not been "substantiated". To do so would
be political correctness of the worst, knee-jerk kind.
"Innocent until proven guilty" is a time-honored principle. The US
government violates this principle in the case of Guantanamo detainees.
Should we also violate this principle?
More information about the Marxism