tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6306829387313142135.post633004293678355280..comments2013-06-06T08:38:17.516-07:00Comments on Written in Red: A Funny Thing Happened On The Way To The Left ForumDaniel Wolffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03407946864480183129noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6306829387313142135.post-48630071548803862162013-06-06T08:38:17.516-07:002013-06-06T08:38:17.516-07:00Thanks, Walter! I can understand how causality wil...Thanks, Walter! I can understand how causality will rarely be so cut and dry, but it's not difficult to see the order in which who does what. Even the notorious Radical Republicans like Thaddeus Stevens and Charles Sumner tended to qualify their abolitionism with a policy of containment. Not until 1860, after Harpers Ferry, were they willing to fold the union over permitting slavery to continue in the South. Can we really not credit the Browns and Garrisons of the world with introducing a more confrontation position into the conversation?Daniel Wolffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03407946864480183129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6306829387313142135.post-73046920295473661932013-06-06T08:18:31.327-07:002013-06-06T08:18:31.327-07:00I love this. As a person who knows less history th...I love this. As a person who knows less history than I should, I always hate when writers couch arguments in mystified chronology and causality. It frequently seems more geared to ending discussions than engaging them. This kind of clear-cut factual rebuttal, while still shaming me for not being more well-read, is greatly appreciated. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6306829387313142135.post-2665338415095822342013-06-06T07:43:32.033-07:002013-06-06T07:43:32.033-07:00Oh I'm afraid the Lenin comment was my editori...Oh I'm afraid the Lenin comment was my editorial comment on Kilpatrick using terms like ultraLeft, which he takes from the charmingly titled Left-Wing Communism: An Infantile Disorder. So I'll take the blame of dismissive tone on that count, but only to note I was returning in kind.<br /><br />Have to say, I did get a kick out of how quickly he identified with your unflattering characterization in spite of holding up "socialist/Marxist" Fred Hampton as a positive example. You seemed to touch a nerve.Daniel Wolffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03407946864480183129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6306829387313142135.post-62248324508309650862013-06-06T07:16:38.838-07:002013-06-06T07:16:38.838-07:00"All the bullying rhetoric of Lenin with none..."All the bullying rhetoric of Lenin with none of the political relevance!" this with being called "silly"... how very dismissive! as if I am a child, as if I have no authority to speak and they have all the authority by conferral of their platform and acceptance by the "right sort of people"... Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6306829387313142135.post-24877364228422768452013-06-06T07:10:45.026-07:002013-06-06T07:10:45.026-07:00"I can't say Jacobin doesn't have its..."I can't say Jacobin doesn't have its moments."<br /><br />They definitely do which is what makes crap like the tweet you're replying to so annoying. I even think Kilpatrick had a point about the essay. I really hate the idea of 'radical' as an honorific title based on self-sacrifice, even martyrdom. But that's no excuse for revisionist history, or taking one more swing at the monolithic 'purity cult' of ultras standing in the way of revolution. I can't stand the either/or-ing going on now on both sides. I'm with you on the 'multi-faceted' strategy. I just want people to stop talking shit. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6306829387313142135.post-36808821892718877182013-06-06T06:54:48.636-07:002013-06-06T06:54:48.636-07:00Thanks! I offered Kilpatrick a reply, but he might...Thanks! I offered Kilpatrick a reply, but he might have blocked me so who knows if he'll see it. It is nice not counting my characters so I'll try to keep up on the long form.<br /><br />And I would recommend everyone reading the Bady piece in its entirety. I can't say Jacobin doesn't have its moments.Daniel Wolffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03407946864480183129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6306829387313142135.post-51293197074829880162013-06-06T06:40:01.704-07:002013-06-06T06:40:01.704-07:00I'm glad you blogged this. This is a thorough,...I'm glad you blogged this. This is a thorough, thoughtful reply and I give you credit for keeping to the facts and generally overlooking Kilpatrick's shitty manners. He seemed to make more of an effort yesterday -- perhaps they're refining the unique movement strategy of telling everyone to their left how much they suck -- but his bad faith kept bleeding out. This nonsense is getting old. <br /><br />Glad you put your readers and me on to Aaron Bady''s excellent Jacobin piece on Lincoln. <br /><br />I hope you keep blogging now that you've reopened. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6306829387313142135.post-56534488783178880342013-06-06T06:26:02.150-07:002013-06-06T06:26:02.150-07:00Much appreciated on both!Much appreciated on both!Daniel Wolffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03407946864480183129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6306829387313142135.post-7732167227422912282013-06-06T06:25:00.222-07:002013-06-06T06:25:00.222-07:00great article! typo with "1946", should ...great article! typo with "1946", should be "1846", of course.Anatole Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09475202797984385346noreply@blogger.com