[Peace-discuss] WaPo: Liberals, Dems, Women Abandon Afghan War

[C. G. Estabrook]

Chomsky, who's frozen out by most of the US media -- including self-described
progressive media -- publishes in many small journals whose politics he doesn't
agree with.  (In fact, I don't think The Progressive [sic] has published
anything by him for five years, altho' I think they should.)

Supporting by subscription or donation a magazine with the politics that The
Progressive has recently revealed is another matter.  (And I was proud to have
known its former editor, the late Erwin Knoll.)  Similarly, I didn't subscribe
to or support The New Republic, altho' I had before, after it was bought by a
member of the Israel lobby (even though he was something of a family friend).

Norman Finkelstein asks, "Should decent people subscribe to The Progressive?,"
and I agree with his implied answer, in the light of the material that he
produces at <http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=3&ar=67>.

I don't think you can have read that material, or else you would know that (a)
The Progressive's holocaust-denial slur was not five years ago (that was the
date of the Chomsky interview I cited in an earlier post), and (b) the substance
of the debate is hardly "water over the dam," as you say.

But I'm intrigued by your remark, "Why Estabrook reveals his animus now is
disturbing, but not surprising."  What do you think the reason is?

What is it that disturbs while not surprising you? --CGE


Brussel Morton K. wrote:
> Yes, /The Progressive/ is a prominent and valuable progressive magazine.
> 
> Its dispute with Finkelstein was indeed despicable, as outlined below, but I
> think that by now, five years on, it is largely water over the dam, and can
> be justly put aside, if not forgotten, in view of its current positions on
> U.S. wars, imperialism, Israel-Palestine, civil rights, etc.. Estabrook
> evidently has not been reading that revue. People like Howard Zinn, Naomi
> Klein and many others still consider and support it as a bastions of
> progressive thought, and I am fairly sure they are not ignorant of the
> dispute with Finkelstein.  I would guess that Chomsky does too.
> 
> Why Estabrook reveals his animus now is disturbing, but not surprising.
> 
> --mkb
> 
> 
> 
> On Aug 21, 2009, at 9:20 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
> 
>> Why the [sic] on The Progressive:
>> 
>> http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=3&ar=67 
>> <http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=3&ar=67>
>> 
>> 
>> C. G. Estabrook wrote:
>>> [From an interview in The Progressive [sic] five years ago.  Full text at
>>>  <http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/200405--.htm>.  --CGE] ...
>> _______________________________________________