Tuesday, September 9, 2008

Stanley Fish, Ayers and the Manson Family

Lefty writes,

Come on, Lawrence. Dr. Fish’s point is that the people were in his house not because of what he and Bernardine did 40 years ago because of what they did and are doing nowadays.

Lawrence replies,

Well I would include a bit more than that from Fish’s narrative as I indicated, but what you write brings up a recollection of another 60s set of activists, the Manson family. Some of the Manson family have turned their lives around, so it has been testified during their parole hearings. They are not in jail because of anything they are doing nowadays, but of what they did 40 years ago.

Aside from the legal loopholes that allowed terrorists from our upper class (Ayers & Dohrn) to go free while retaining terrorists from lower classes (the Manson family) to remain incarcerated, what principle, if any, should apply here?

Should someone be given a clean slate at some point in time after a crime terrorist crime? At what point did Ayers and Dorhn get a clean slate aka become “rock-solid establishment”? If there is a principle, why haven’t any of the Manson family been given a clean slate?

Are any of the recent plaints in support of Ayers and Dohrn in response to their having joined the Leftist Academic “establishment.” Heck, maybe that’s what Fish meant by “rock-solid establishment.”

Lawrence Helm

No comments: