[Marxism] Should all reporting in the imperialist media be dismissed (Was: Re: US helps "Rebels"....

Fred Feldman ffeldman at verizon.net
Tue Jul 12 07:56:22 MDT 2011


I
Mark wrote:
I'd be obliged if Fred would point out where I ever suggested that "all
reporting in imperialist media about Libya" should be dismissed. The
reality of this debate has been that the cheerleaders of the Libyan state
cherry-picking what they want to swallow hook line and sinker and what they
want to dismiss out of hand as mere imperialist propaganda.

Fred comments
I would be mighty obliged if Mark would show me where I attributed to 
him the statement or the position he suggest I attributed to him.  I did 
so nowhere, as far as I can see.

I wrote:  "I think Mark's suggestion that this article should be given 
the brush-off because it appeared in the Wall Street Journal are 
specious, unless he considers the NATO-backed, armed, and funded (though 
not initiated) "revolution" in Libya to be the equivalent of the 
Sandinistas as a threat to US imperialist interests." Nor did I 
attribute the position he cites to him where else in the article.

The title made a general point which was came to me out of the exchange, 
where the items he cherry-picked from the WSJ to prove that their 
article on Libya is discredited did not adequately ng make the point he 
seemed to be trying to write. I made no suggestion in the headline that 
Mark had stated or taken that position.

So Mark's implicit complaint on that aspect seems to me unfounded-

Mark also exercised his democratic right to unilaterally declare what 
"this debate" (which debate?) is exclusively about. He writes:

"The reality of this debate has been that the cheerleaders of the Libyan 
state
cherry-picking what they want to swallow hook line and sinker and what they
want to dismiss out of hand as mere imperialist propaganda."

So Mark defines the reality of the debate as for or against "the 
cheerleaders of the Libyan state."
There are only two positions permitted in the debate, and both of them 
concern not so much a position on Libya but opposition to or defense of 
"the cheerleaders."  Would I be correct then to assume that Mark has me 
down as a "cheerleader for the Libyan state"?

That would be two impllied misattributions to me In one paragraph.
Cheers,
Fred










More information about the Marxism mailing list