Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Sitting here safely in Paris, I would say that eight years of Bush were a good thing. Accelerated the eventual bankruptcy of the world's most powerful terrorist state, in the process isolating it perceptibly from the rest of the Western democracies and, more importantly, inflicting lasting damaging to the image our peoples have of it. Shining beacon no more, especially since the generation which know the War is slowly dying off.

A win-win as far as I'm concerned. And, it is ridiculous to speak of a left in America. There isn't one, aside from a marginal (and purposefully marginalized) group of intellectuals (Wallerstein, Chomsky, Perry Anderson, et c.), primaily in academia.  

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill

by r------ on Sun Nov 20th, 2011 at 09:15:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Damn right.

Bush's greatest achievement was fucking up in Iraq.

"The future is already here -- it's just not very evenly distributed" William Gibson

by ChrisCook (cojockathotmaildotcom) on Sun Nov 20th, 2011 at 10:04:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Perry Anderson is English. Poor Brits. It's not as if they have a shortage of pomposity without him. By the way, if you want to read actual left-wing thinking, try E.P. Thompson's Poverty of Theory which concerns Professor Anderson quite a bit.

And it was a good thing for the far right, the global elites, and the "left". Which strikes some of us as an interesting sociopolitical phenomenon not unrelated to the class interests of "left" intellectuals.

by rootless2 on Sun Nov 20th, 2011 at 11:25:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Last time I checked, Perry Anderson was still teaching at UCLA.

The Hun is always either at your throat or at your feet. Winston Churchill
by r------ on Sun Nov 20th, 2011 at 12:00:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]
What of Krugman then? He's left enough for me. Actually, reading his books, his position on many issues seems to coincide very much with my own.

Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
by Starvid on Sun Nov 20th, 2011 at 07:13:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]
In the conventional far-right, right, center-right, center, center-left, left, far-left spectrum, Krugman is, despite his training and profession manipulating long since falsified social theories, somewhere ranging from center to center-left.

Given a right party that has elected officials attempting to take right wing actions under the cover of far right wing rhetoric, and a "left" part that has elected officials attempting to take center-right wing actions under the cover of center-left wing rhetoric, Krugman tends to be very useful in calling both the right wing out on their extremism and the center-right wing out on their actions failing to live up to their center-left rhetoric.

Of course, his economics is still neoliberal "in the long run", so there remains the genuflection to balanced budgets and loanable funds fallacies "in the long run" ... but he stretched out the Keynesian short run about as far as a mainstream economist can get away with stretching it, so as long as his attention is on the current situation through to the next half decade, there is remarkably little damage done by the long run neoliberalism.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Mon Nov 21st, 2011 at 12:32:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series