here
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
A Commentary on the Passing Scene by Robert Paul Wolff rwolff@afroam.umass.edu
My Stuff
https://umass-my.sharepoint.com/:f:/g/personal/rwolff_umass_edu/EkxJV79tnlBDol82i7bXs7gBAUHadkylrmLgWbXv2nYq_A?e=UcbbW0
Coming Soon:
The following books by Robert Paul Wolff are available on Amazon.com as e-books: KANT'S THEORY OF MENTAL ACTIVITY, THE AUTONOMY OF REASON, UNDERSTANDING MARX, UNDERSTANDING RAWLS, THE POVERTY OF LIBERALISM, A LIFE IN THE ACADEMY, MONEYBAGS MUST BE SO LUCKY, AN INTRODUCTION TO THE USE OF FORMAL METHODS IN POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY.
Now Available: Volumes I, II, III, and IV of the Collected Published and Unpublished Papers.
Now Available: Volumes I, II, III, and IV of the Collected Published and Unpublished Papers.
NOW AVAILABLE ON YOUTUBE: LECTURES ON KANT'S CRITIQUE OF PURE REASON. To view the lectures, go to YouTube and search for "Robert Paul Wolff Kant." There they will be.
NOW AVAILABLE ON YOUTUBE: LECTURES ON THE THOUGHT OF KARL MARX. To view the lectures, go to YouTube and search for Robert Paul Wolff Marx."
Total Pageviews
Search This Blog
Philosopher's Stone
Blog Archive
-
▼
2023
(228)
-
▼
August
(30)
- STILL
- GAME ON!!
- LUCK
- STILL
- MORE THOUGHTS WHILE WAITING FOR JUDGE CHUTKAN TOI...
- ANNIVERSARIES
- THIS AND THAT WHILE I WAIT FOR JUDGE CHUTKIN TO RULE
- BIG NEWS WHEN YOU ARE EIGHTY-NINE
- THIS AND THAT
- STILL HERE, A LITTLE THE WORSE FOR WEAR
- STILL
- STILL
- STILL
- THIS IS WORTH READING
- STILL
- I HAVE READ IT
- MORE ON THE SAME TOPIC
- I CONTINUE
- NUMBERS
- MORE ON INEQUALITY
- AS I WAIT
- A RESPONSE
- THAT''S IT
- STILL
- STRANGE FACT
- STILL
- I WILL REPEAT
- MORE THOIUGHTS ON THE INDICTMENT
- AT LAST
- FIGHT FIERCELY, HARVARD
-
▼
August
(30)
About Me
- Robert Paul Wolff
- As I observed in one of my books, in politics I am an anarchist, in religion I am an atheist, and in economics I am a Marxist. I am also, rather more importantly, a husband, a father, a grandfather, and a violist.
8 comments:
MS allowed me to post two of his responses. See them at the link at the top here:
http://michael.www2.50megs.com/
I've glanced briefly at Marc's long statements. I'm only going to address here what he says about me (and perhaps not all of it, since I only took a short look).
Marc claims that I think Jack Smith has an "open and shut case." That is a lie, a total fabrication: I never said or implied that I think Smith has an open and shut case. Indeed I wrote in the relevant thread that experienced prosecutors sometimes make mistakes, because everyone does. I don't know whether Smith has made a mistake here or not. In the entire thread, I never made a single comment that dealt directly with the strength or weakness of the indictment. I invite anyone to read all my comments in the relevant thread, including the one toward the end of the thread in which I wrote that I should not have speculated about trial strategy (and thus retracted a couple of earlier comments that contained such speculation).
Marc should stop lying about what I wrote re the strength or weakness of Smith's case; to repeat, I didn't say anything about the strength or weakness of Smith's case. Marc should stop willfully misrepresenting what I said, and Michael Llenos should stop, in my opinion, posting documents that contain those misrepresentations.
P.s. I'm letting all my comments in that thread stand as I wrote them and have not deleted any of them, so anyone interested can read all of my comments in that thread and decide for themselves whether Marc is accurately representing what I said.
Forget M.S.
It was awful enough when we had to encounter him directly. Can his surrogates please just stop 'surrogating' for they are just carrying forward some of the problems that attached to his own postings. Please have some pity on R.P.W. whose blog was regularly directly hi-jacked by said M.S. and whose blog is now being indirectly hi-jacked.
I suggest R.P.W. that you simply remove all references to M.S. including this one. Thanks.
P.S. I'm glad you're still Here.
Michael Llenos,
Thank you for posting what Marc has to say on these issues.
It's really weird that someone (in this case, Marc) is somehow part of the conversation, but banned from expressing his or her point of view.
That does not mean that I agree with all that Marc says, just that he is a voice within this conversation, like it or not.
Nothing is stopping Marc from setting up his own blog and posting his statements there. Nothing is stopping Marc from emailing those statements to whomever he wants.
Marc has every right to express his views. And I have every right to object in the strongest possible terms to his misrepresentation of my views. I was going to quote directly from Marc's document, but M. Llenos seems to have taken his site offline -- at any rate I couldn't reach it a few minutes ago.
At one point early in the document, Marc writes that a number of people -- and he includes me in that number -- believe Smith has an open-and-shut case. I never said that or anything construable as that. If Marc wants to take issue with what I actually wrote, that's fine (and to some extent he has already done that in some comments that RPW removed). What is not fine is for him to attribute views to me that I don't hold and never expressed. That really, really pisses me off.
LFC: take it up with Marc; no one here cares if Marc misrepresented your views. You want Marc to disappear from this "blog" (now little more than a rolling set of comments by a handful of people), stop referring to him.
S.W.
You're very welcome. Marc is a good man and a good lawyer. One of the most cogent writers on the WEB.
Post a Comment