May I make two suggestion, DG ? While making no allowances for your faux-techno illiteracy, put a few of the red bars for comments and subscriptions in over the course of the essay. They're right there at the top of the column when you're composing. LOOK. 2, Mad Dogs and Englishmen tells me precisely nothing about your columns. In fact, it is a classic mis-direct. Come up with something better and change the name, near the bottom of Settings. Yes, you can can. We can discuss b4 you do.
Daaaaaaaavid, look at the bar at the top of the page WHEN YOU'RE COMPOSING THE ARTICLE. you know, the one with bold italics etc on it. It has a little box that says BUTTONs, that's the one you want. This is getting to be like two 90 year olds passing notes at the back of the classroom during Tech Studies...
Another strong column that bears a re-read and a real response, both of which I'll give it. Plus, a pleasure to read. Maybe you should call yourself Ornery David G ? Of course, you realize that liberals, with their grand certainties, will simply act as if you don't exist. Don't let that get you down. Keep shooting from the hip.
Jim, it is great to hear from you. I welcome your ideas. I keep losing your e mail address. I want to read you substack articles. In a private email I can why I have not been able to.
1) I appreciate your input re disseminating my stuff . I am trying to understand it.
a) I will have to look for the red bars
b) Yes, you have said that Mad dogs and Englishmen is a bad title and you may be right. I chose it because in the Spring of 68, one critic, exasperated by what seemed to be the molotov- throwing propensities of the writers at "The New York Review of Books," called the journal a place of Mad Dogs and Englishmen. He probably came up with the phrase because it is the title of a very funny Noel Coward song from the early 30's.
2) Speaking of liberalism: In the past, I considered myself well to the left of liberal. In my more grandiose moments, I fancied myself a more urbane version of Che Guevera, Leon Trotsky's Jewish offspring in America, and Mick Jagger with a microphone at a great rally for revolution.
I finally have to accept the dour and unappetizing fact that I am hardly a member of the left anymore. (Except in economics. I am in many ways a Quasi Marxist is not a full blooded red)
A. In part, my left orientation changed because the issues changed
When I first tuned into politics, at age 10, it was 1968. The savagery of our war in Vietnam made me want to throw bombs. Most people really don't know how horrible that war was. I can go on for countless pages without consulting any notes. We weren't only on the wrong side. We were the wrong side.
And after Tet, RFK was shot. And then came the Dem convention of 1968. People know that there was a police riot but they don't know how the convention was stolen from the anti war faction: In the Democratic Primaries, roughly 85 percent of the vote went to Bobby Kennedy and Gene McCarthy, both of whom opposed the war. However, at the convention, over 60 percent of the vote went for Hubert Humphrey, the pro war candidate and Lyndon Johnson's vice president. Most states did not have primaries and in many states that did have primaries the popular vote was ignored. For example, in Pennsylvania, Gene McCarthy won the primary by half a million votes. However about 90 percent of Pa's delegates went to Humphrey and 10 percent when for Mc Carthy. RE RACE: ALMost ALL of the students who were clubbed at Chicago were white. And the 200 Columbia activists who were hospitalized by the police (riot of May 1968) were overwhelmingly white. And I remember at ACT UP rallies tons of white people were getting arrested all the time. I almost never ever saw a single black person at an ACT UP rally. I once was nearly shot by a policeman. I won't go into it. But I must stress that although blacks suffer the greatest level of police, plenty of white people of gotten hell from the police
Now the issues are different: It is IDENTITY POLITICS AD NAUSEUM. Since I am white, I am attacked as privileged. I simply can't stand it.
I always thought that Marx's great insight and admonition was the imperative of breaking down tribal and national loyalties. He told us to think in terms of class, not race or religion.
Today's left is rejecting Marx in the same way that the fascists of the 30's were rejecting Marx: They champion a revival of racial and ethnic loyalties, making us regress to more barbaric eras.
B. MY left identification was fueled by romantic, violent, thrashing emotions
When I wrote an essay about a riot, I said that the Molotov cocktails
"made such a starry night," clearly alluding to Van Gogh's gorgeous Starry Night.
When I was young and healthy, I would get up in the morning, have some strong coffee, turn on the Rolling Stones' "Street Fighting Man." and I wanted to run through the streets calling for upheaval, disorder. I wanted to shout at the top of my lungs: Let the first be last and the last be first. For various reasons, I identified with the downtrodden. I never felt privileged. and I wanted to ride of wave of righteous revolution to redemption. I am sort of tired and I might be making little sense so I will turn in.
David, it will take me a year to respond to all of this. It's really great that you're doing something because of something else in '68 but isn't it time to update just a wee bit ?
In regard to your comment, "David, it will take me a year to respond to all of this. It's really great that you're doing something because of something else in '68 but isn't it time to update just a wee bit ?" let me say this:
1) Apparently, you are complaining that I am speaking of things that transpired in 1968, which was a long time ago. May I remind you, however, that:
a) In the US, people bring suit for allegations of sexual harassment that transpired 50 years ago.
b) Black people are still complaining about slavery, which ended in 1863 and 65.
c) My people, the Jewish people, are still attacked for allegedly killing Jesus, who was actually killed by the Romans and that's a whole lot further back than 1968.
2) You said it will take you a year to respond to all of this. All of what. What allegation, issue or fact pattern are you referring to.
3) You said that it is great that I am doing something. What are you referring to. I have done many things. Indeed, within just the past 24 hours, I have ejaculated on two occasions, moved my bowels, eaten large amounts of disgusting junk food, cursed at obnoxious cab drivers, and surfed the internet.
Cher David, you misconstrue. Do you really not realize the length of your comment or the sheer number of issues it raises, without taking into account the follow-up rebarbative from the Author, you ? How can anyone answer all that ?
Just this comment, "Now the issues are different: It is IDENTITY POLITICS AD NAUSEUM. Since I am white, I am attacked as privileged. I simply can't stand it." would take a considerable amount of time. Try to make it a little easier to engage. You're like the lawyer who's raising legal arguments, entering papers and pounding the desk - all at the same time.
May I make two suggestion, DG ? While making no allowances for your faux-techno illiteracy, put a few of the red bars for comments and subscriptions in over the course of the essay. They're right there at the top of the column when you're composing. LOOK. 2, Mad Dogs and Englishmen tells me precisely nothing about your columns. In fact, it is a classic mis-direct. Come up with something better and change the name, near the bottom of Settings. Yes, you can can. We can discuss b4 you do.
Daaaaaaaavid, look at the bar at the top of the page WHEN YOU'RE COMPOSING THE ARTICLE. you know, the one with bold italics etc on it. It has a little box that says BUTTONs, that's the one you want. This is getting to be like two 90 year olds passing notes at the back of the classroom during Tech Studies...
Another strong column that bears a re-read and a real response, both of which I'll give it. Plus, a pleasure to read. Maybe you should call yourself Ornery David G ? Of course, you realize that liberals, with their grand certainties, will simply act as if you don't exist. Don't let that get you down. Keep shooting from the hip.
Jim, it is great to hear from you. I welcome your ideas. I keep losing your e mail address. I want to read you substack articles. In a private email I can why I have not been able to.
1) I appreciate your input re disseminating my stuff . I am trying to understand it.
a) I will have to look for the red bars
b) Yes, you have said that Mad dogs and Englishmen is a bad title and you may be right. I chose it because in the Spring of 68, one critic, exasperated by what seemed to be the molotov- throwing propensities of the writers at "The New York Review of Books," called the journal a place of Mad Dogs and Englishmen. He probably came up with the phrase because it is the title of a very funny Noel Coward song from the early 30's.
2) Speaking of liberalism: In the past, I considered myself well to the left of liberal. In my more grandiose moments, I fancied myself a more urbane version of Che Guevera, Leon Trotsky's Jewish offspring in America, and Mick Jagger with a microphone at a great rally for revolution.
I finally have to accept the dour and unappetizing fact that I am hardly a member of the left anymore. (Except in economics. I am in many ways a Quasi Marxist is not a full blooded red)
A. In part, my left orientation changed because the issues changed
When I first tuned into politics, at age 10, it was 1968. The savagery of our war in Vietnam made me want to throw bombs. Most people really don't know how horrible that war was. I can go on for countless pages without consulting any notes. We weren't only on the wrong side. We were the wrong side.
And after Tet, RFK was shot. And then came the Dem convention of 1968. People know that there was a police riot but they don't know how the convention was stolen from the anti war faction: In the Democratic Primaries, roughly 85 percent of the vote went to Bobby Kennedy and Gene McCarthy, both of whom opposed the war. However, at the convention, over 60 percent of the vote went for Hubert Humphrey, the pro war candidate and Lyndon Johnson's vice president. Most states did not have primaries and in many states that did have primaries the popular vote was ignored. For example, in Pennsylvania, Gene McCarthy won the primary by half a million votes. However about 90 percent of Pa's delegates went to Humphrey and 10 percent when for Mc Carthy. RE RACE: ALMost ALL of the students who were clubbed at Chicago were white. And the 200 Columbia activists who were hospitalized by the police (riot of May 1968) were overwhelmingly white. And I remember at ACT UP rallies tons of white people were getting arrested all the time. I almost never ever saw a single black person at an ACT UP rally. I once was nearly shot by a policeman. I won't go into it. But I must stress that although blacks suffer the greatest level of police, plenty of white people of gotten hell from the police
Now the issues are different: It is IDENTITY POLITICS AD NAUSEUM. Since I am white, I am attacked as privileged. I simply can't stand it.
I always thought that Marx's great insight and admonition was the imperative of breaking down tribal and national loyalties. He told us to think in terms of class, not race or religion.
Today's left is rejecting Marx in the same way that the fascists of the 30's were rejecting Marx: They champion a revival of racial and ethnic loyalties, making us regress to more barbaric eras.
B. MY left identification was fueled by romantic, violent, thrashing emotions
When I wrote an essay about a riot, I said that the Molotov cocktails
"made such a starry night," clearly alluding to Van Gogh's gorgeous Starry Night.
When I was young and healthy, I would get up in the morning, have some strong coffee, turn on the Rolling Stones' "Street Fighting Man." and I wanted to run through the streets calling for upheaval, disorder. I wanted to shout at the top of my lungs: Let the first be last and the last be first. For various reasons, I identified with the downtrodden. I never felt privileged. and I wanted to ride of wave of righteous revolution to redemption. I am sort of tired and I might be making little sense so I will turn in.
P.S. it is not enough to "Identify" with the downtrodden. You have to be with them.
David, it will take me a year to respond to all of this. It's really great that you're doing something because of something else in '68 but isn't it time to update just a wee bit ?
In regard to your comment, "David, it will take me a year to respond to all of this. It's really great that you're doing something because of something else in '68 but isn't it time to update just a wee bit ?" let me say this:
1) Apparently, you are complaining that I am speaking of things that transpired in 1968, which was a long time ago. May I remind you, however, that:
a) In the US, people bring suit for allegations of sexual harassment that transpired 50 years ago.
b) Black people are still complaining about slavery, which ended in 1863 and 65.
c) My people, the Jewish people, are still attacked for allegedly killing Jesus, who was actually killed by the Romans and that's a whole lot further back than 1968.
2) You said it will take you a year to respond to all of this. All of what. What allegation, issue or fact pattern are you referring to.
3) You said that it is great that I am doing something. What are you referring to. I have done many things. Indeed, within just the past 24 hours, I have ejaculated on two occasions, moved my bowels, eaten large amounts of disgusting junk food, cursed at obnoxious cab drivers, and surfed the internet.
Cher David, you misconstrue. Do you really not realize the length of your comment or the sheer number of issues it raises, without taking into account the follow-up rebarbative from the Author, you ? How can anyone answer all that ?
Just this comment, "Now the issues are different: It is IDENTITY POLITICS AD NAUSEUM. Since I am white, I am attacked as privileged. I simply can't stand it." would take a considerable amount of time. Try to make it a little easier to engage. You're like the lawyer who's raising legal arguments, entering papers and pounding the desk - all at the same time.