Tuesday, April 18, 2006

Euston Manifesto: The comments are more amusing than the 'Manifesto':

"Do we need another warmongers charter?"

"I don’t think this is a left-wing manifesto at all. I think it is a neo-conservative one, with some vague, sugary liberal coating about human rights."

"Pretentious and hilarious in equal measure. The ‘Euston Group’ is a 21st-century attempt at creating another Bloomsbury Group, albeit with even more elitism and even less influence. Despite all the pompous posturing, all it does is create “a new Website”.

"As for the Manifesto itself, it is very telling that the only topics that are dealt with in any real depth are…the Iraq War and Islamic terrorism."

"Oh dear! History has passed them by and they find themselves beached with Bush, Blair and the zionists. So why not set up another “left-wing” group? Trouble is, who apart from those listed would be attracted?"


PooterGeek said...

"The comments are more amusing than the 'Manifesto'"

You're right. Browsing round the Web I'm beginning to wonder if we wrote some of the criticisms ourselves in order to better make our case, so many of them read like parodies of the kinds of thinking we distance ourselves from in the text.

None of the ones you quote make any attempt to address the substance of our document. This seems to be typical so far and is truly heartening. Thanks for the link.

Bernard said...

'Substance' of your argument? What substance? 'Spear carriers for the Pax Americana'?

The manifesto is practically a definition of neoconservatism: ex- leftists, socialists and Trotskyites who, seeing the failure of Bolshevism and supremacy of the US, switch sides simply to duplicate the "disastrous history of left apologetics", this time over the crimes of Bushevism and Blairism.

It's Trotsky, the founder of the Red Army (Commander-in-Chief?), about to carry the revolution (democracy?) by force into all the capitals of Europe (the middle east?)

That there might be a problem with militarism, authoritarianism and imperialism, that this might be a negation of democracy and human rights, never seems to have been considered.