Add new comment

Submitted by Jason on Fri, 19/09/2008 - 19:01

I didn't just say it's insulting- though personally I do find it pretty insulting to be called by the name of a murderous barbaric distortion of politics that has had an effect on immediate family members. I'm not sure that is demagogic.

Demagogy s appealing to emotions in the absence of rational argument. I have made plenty of rational points about how we don't have to choose between two evils, about how an attack on Iran is not only a disaster for those killed but a triumph for reactionaries and far from defending the interests of Israeli Jews helps imperil them. However, I do think it is entirely relevant to point out that Stalinism like the crimes of the Iranian dictatorship has been responsible for – and in the latter case continues to be responsible for horrific crimes beyond most of our experiences (perhaps my wife’s father’s experiences aren’t directly relevant admittedly- it was just an example and it was on my mind as she has recently been to visit him).

But as I never once said any of the points Cathy falsely claims I did say how can I directly argue against them in my post responding to hers?

You don't have to choose between two evils- the Iranian dictatorship or imperialism.

There is an alternative- supporting working class resistance in Iran, Israel/Palestine, and Middle East as whole as a whole and here.

And what's with the final riposte- "It's called being honest.
Try it sometime."

Firstly, there is nothing honest about misrepresenting my political position and claiming I said things I never did and never would.

Secondly, 'try it sometime'- where have I been dishonest?

Can we not get over this kind of playground banter?

(And anyway you started it!)

PS That parenthesis was a joke in case anyone is tempted to pull me up on it!

This website uses cookies, you can find out more and set your preferences here.
By continuing to use this website, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms & Conditions.