Sunday, November 5, 2023

SIGH

I am afraid my brief comment revealed my ignorance. I bow to my more knowledgeable commentators.

4 comments:

  1. The most apt take may be that the Brits sold the same piece of land twice and left it to the marks to sort it out (that and the St. Louis).

    ReplyDelete
  2. I thought this might interest you since it seems to intersect with some of your interests. It’s a snippet from a conversation between Richard Wolin and Michael Walzer:

    *******

    “I can remember the moment when it failed. In 1960, at Harvard, some of us traveled to the South and wrote about the Civil Rights Movement. We then helped to organize the Northern protests, the picketing outside of the Woolworths stores, which was meant to force them to integrate, to serve coffee at their lunch counters to black youth.
    “At one point I was invited by a group of black students to contribute to a book—a chapter about the Northern response. They produced their own personal stories of the sit-ins in the South, and I wrote an essay on what we called the Northern Support Movement. I sent in my piece, and I didn’t hear back. Finally, I received a very polite note from the black students saying that they had decided that the book should only contain articles by blacks. That was during the early 1960s. And that was the moment when I first saw identity politics at work and its consequences for the old coalitions; that was a gentle example; thereafter, it didn’t get better. . .That was the beginning, and there are many of us who can retrace the steps from civil rights to identity politics.”
    ******
    The full conversation can be accessed here:
    https://logosjournal.com/2023/the-struggle-for-liberalism-a-conversation-with-michael-walzer/

    ReplyDelete
  3. I don't think your post revealed any ignorance. The conflict is not because one group wants to exploit the labor of another group.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I posted several comments to the previous blog post.

    ReplyDelete