On a few issues.
Friday, August 24th, 2007I think I know, at least in parts, where Nick Benton is coming from with this, with concerns to “a Dennis King”. I only suggest that it is not necessary for everybody to be singing “Kumbaya”, or on “the same page”. An interesting thing for one to do is to run to the index of King’s book and go to “Benton, Nicholas” — which I have not done, though I have for “Kronberg, Kenneth”. But keying in on this:
a Dennis King, in particular, who in his most recent posting, presents himself as the originator of the materials viz. Kronberg, etc., that he outlines in his typically brutish fashion.
and the source for this (whether or not it is Benton himself does not really concern me) makes a little more sense:
For whatever it is worth, the Washington Post obituary listed all those Larouche items without mentioning the connection to Larouche for any of the activities, which I believe was there before the FCNP. The sourcing of Dennis King is attributable to the bear bones fact that the relevant parts of the morning briefing are at his website in its entirety.
In fact, I blame King’s one-dimensional, profoundly flawed book on LaRouche for the fact that many more former members have been intimidated against going public with their experiences in the organization. Who wants to be branded an anti-semitic fascist, even if now outside the organization? […]
I cannot sit back and watch this Dennis King continue trying to define my life from that era or this. He views ex-members as a meal ticket and his latest offering shows very little remorse or correction to his earlier, destructive work.
Then again, from a different angle the comments on his myspace page consist of:
Well Nick, I have to say that this article would make Chip Berlet proud. Shame it ruins your credibility.
AND
Being a slut has never been easy Nick. Be careful, uncle Rupert (Murdoch) is watching you!
The Murdoch reference a pure and undistilled present-day Larouchism — visa vie the current line of attack on myspace.
From parts known elsewhere:Â Some of us dropped out with vague ideas of carrying out the battle to save the world on our own terms in a better way perhaps than Larouche. The trouble is, without Lyn the battle lines quickly disappear.
Where, for instance is the line dividing those for and against technological progress? Who are the ones calling for genocide in Africa as a form of population control?
How are we to come to terms with the fact that the most technologically advanced nations have the lowest birth rates? Genocide via advancement?
Most of us stayed in the org longer than we should have because we believed the mantra that “no one else is doing what we areâ€. It took me nearly a decade to accept the fact that what we were doing was…. nothing.
 Tony Papert, as SDS member and a spokesman for teh executive committee of the students Strike Coordinating Committee at Columbia, on both the circulation of the Rudd paper and The New Republic article, that “somebody fabricated this to make it look like a Communist Conspiracy.”
May 13, 1968 NY Times “Some Columbia Trustees Urge Study of October Plan for Sit-In”.
Or, if you want, I could say what The Sparticist had to say about “Lynn Marcus”, but I’m stuck at the mid-1980s with a random paragraph reflecting on an anecdote of a debate with Marcus’s group, and concerning firstly the down-fall of Healy and secondly a seemingly more important task of knocking around Tim Wolhforth — such is the pettiness of these Left wing polemics, it seems.




August 5, 2007 8:11 PM