Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: jalisco555
Great discussion. This is a debate that's been going on for a long time, not just in the conflicts of the sixties and seventies between the New Left and its critics, but in the discussion between New Dealers, Communists, Socialists and Trotskyists a generation earlier, and still earlier in the opposition of bohemian radicals like Randolph Bourne to establishment, pro-war liberals like Walter Lippmann during the First World War.

Walzer, like his late colleague Irving Howe, has a divided conscience. They both came out of an environment very similar to neo-conservatives like Kristol and Podhoretz and with age they can't help but be disappointed by younger leftists repeating the same old mistakes, but their left-wing emotional ties and self-identification overpowered their intellectual qualms about leftism.

The neo-conservative parallel suggests the complexity of the problem: to break with irrational and harmful illusions without simply surrendering to power and the hope of exercising it. From the outside, it looks just like another silly conflict between the loony left and the cynical and opportunistic left, but those inside necessarily take it more seriously.

19 posted on 03/22/2002 6:47:52 PM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Noumenon; x; jalisco555; Billthedrill; KantianBurke; My Identity; ffrancone; beckett
In a new thread: There Be A Decent Left? Michael Walzer s Second Thoughts , I have posted David Horowitz's analysis of this article by Michael Walzer.
20 posted on 03/26/2002 12:02:49 AM PST by ThePythonicCow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson