Menu
339 Old Peaceniks Update Debate
Eric Walberg and Metta Spencer were on different sides of a divide within the global peace movement during the 1980s. Here’s where they stand today.
Panelist:
• Eric Walberg
Comments
To Post a Comment
Please wait a few seconds for the comments to load at the bottom of this page. Then read the ideas other people have shared and reply or add your own knowledge. The space for comments is in a pale font. It’s good to give your comment a title by selecting it and clicking the “B” (for “boldface”). And you can italicize passages with the “I”, indent, add hyperlinks (with the chain symbol) or even attach a photo or graphic from your hard drive by clicking the paperclip at the right side of the space. Have fun with it!
Head Office
- Box 248, Station P Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5S 2S7
- 1-416-789-2294
- project@peacemagazine.org
Walberg sounds like a postmodernist!
I was struck by the discrepancy between Walberg’s opposition to postmodernism (he says he believes there’s a difference between good and bad and that one has to fight for what is good!) and his unwillingness to fight for people being repressed by a foreign government. He obviously has an antiquainted vision of the world as inevitably divided into nation states. We have to get past that!
hi clayton
my approach to dealing with heavy-handed govts is not to point the finger and condemn, but to try to find common ground. what’s the point of telling, say, raisi, to be nice? iran is the only govt brave enough to take on imperialism, both US and Israeli. we can’t impose anything on anyone, but we can encourage. you can discuss human rights issues privately.