Rick Reuben wrote:The Left

Name a dozen influential 20th-century American:

-leftist labor organizers

-leftist political agitators

-grassroots (leftwing) political organizations/parties

-reforms resulting from leftwing agitation

-leftwing periodicals

-leftwing intellectuals

If you can't do this in fairly short order you're in no position to say fuck-all about "The Left," its legacy, or its "principles."

How many intellectuals become complacent, or how many labor unions dissolve into nothing but formalities that work hand in hand with management? This left/right is meaningless.

Mark Hansen wrote:Do you really need the drama this is bound to start up? It almost seems like its what you really want, not a dialogue.

Hasn't he explicitly stated that on occasion?

clocker bob wrote:

guardian 1/24/07 wrote:The director of public prosecutions, Sir Ken Macdonald.

Partner in Matrix Chambers, left-orientated barrister's chambers, which he founded with Cherie Booth (aka Mrs. Tony Blair).

Groups they have represented/defended include CND and the IRA.

What was that about the left?

Rick Reuben wrote:

camilo wrote: I like to think the Left's failure stemmed from an inability to adapt to the political landscape and the loss of its principles.

And what's the first boulder that knocked the other principles down? Choosing to listen to money over people. Buying into globalist hogwash. Money is the prime mover. Please stop making excuses for them. The Left lost its principles when it sold them.

I can't totally disagree with you that the Left has sold out. What we may have to agree to disagree about is the method and motivation.

However, I can't agree with you that the Left was ever pro-globalism. Leftist groups have always been anti-globalism and continue to be so. True, we had a Centrist president that pushed for globalism, but he was hardly speaking for any Leftist groups.

It was the pro-corporate Right that pushed for globalism. They saw the end of tariffs as a green light to exploit cheap overseas labor and weak environmental laws.

guardian 1/24/07 wrote:Sir Ken warned of the pernicious risk that a "fear-driven and inappropriate" response to the threat could lead Britain to abandon respect for fair trials and the due process of law.

Sir Ken pointed to the rhetoric around the "war on terror" - which has been adopted by Tony Blair and ministers after being coined by George Bush - to illustrate the risks.

He said: "London is not a battlefield. Those innocents who were murdered on July 7 2005 were not victims of war. And the men who killed them were not, as in their vanity they claimed on their ludicrous videos, 'soldiers'. They were deluded, narcissistic inadequates. They were criminals. They were fantasists. We need to be very clear about this. On the streets of London, there is no such thing as a 'war on terror', just as there can be no such thing as a 'war on drugs'.

Uh, gee, you think?!?

I can't believe it's taken this long for a politician to muster enough balls to put forth this argument. Of course it couldn't have happened here in America.

I can't agree with you that Clinton is to the Left of Center. Perhaps that says something about our perspectives. GATT NAFTA, CAFTA were all opposed by the Left. Group of Eight conferences are violently protested by Hard Leftists because Leftists are opposed to globalism. Who constitutes the "fake Left"?

I am afraid it is I who is being bored by your revisionist, untenable and incredible defense of the Right. However, I will not take my ball and go home. I'm still willing to discuss it.

And there you go again. What the fuck is a "neo-liberal"? How can you allow yourself to put the letters together to concoct such an inane concept?

But they are no elites. You lose again.

Hand Camilo a rake so he can pull over your chips.

fake left & then real left, who is remaining, where did they leave to, what happened to the right, who made who, ain't nobody told you, who turned the screw, who made who?

I don't understand your assertion that to have any political power makes you fake. I don't understand your distinction between the Left and the fake Left and why their agendas would differ so greatly. I don't understand why you would want to interject the notion of a fake Left. That notion seems rather moot. I can't think of a single Leftist "fake" or otherwise who supported or supports globalism.

I still stand by my assertion that there is no effective Left in America today. The Left is broken, bankrupt and discredited. There are many individuals who are Leftists but they are unable to muster any real power. The anarchists and other agitators came largely from without our borders.

Lastly, it makes you appear juvenile when you scream and insult. There's no need to call someone a "half-witted inside the box thiking dupe". I think I've shown you a great deal of restraint.