Queer Theory



Will writes from Washington, D.C. (well, Arlington, Virginia). You can reach him at willblogcorrespondence at gmail dot com.

Related Post Roulette

5 Responses

  1. Avatar Jack Ross says:

    I guess I took for granted that the substantive grounds were a given. And I think it should be a given that Kirchick is obsessed with Israel period.Report

  2. Avatar Ken says:

    A+ thread title.Report

  3. Avatar Roque Nuevo says:

    Just out of curiosity: could you take a crack at a “more substantive criticism” of the piece by Kirchik you link to? I couldn’t see anything I can imagine anyone would describe as “batty.” He’s just defending Joe Lieberman’s national security philosophy by placing it in the leftist internationalist tradition. I can imagine how someone might disagree with Kirchik’s analysis of Lieberman but I just can’t see how this is “batty” (outside reality). Kirchik isn’t the only one to have thought that the original liberal/leftist “interventionist” drive to overthrow the monarchies/dictatorships/tyrannies has been appropriated by the right.Report

  4. Avatar Dan Summers says:

    Kirchick’s foreign policy views are, indeed, batty. However, the vitriol he often inspires apparently gives people carte blanche (or, perhaps more accurately, the perception of it) to let their inner homophobia percolate out.Report

  5. Avatar Roque Nuevo says:

    So far, I’ve learned that Kirchick is, indeed, homosexual–and that homosexuals are, indeed, gay–but, even looking past the tortured syntax, indeed, I can’t find anything to call “batty”–especially in the piece cited by Will here. Indeed, there could have been a lot to disagree with back in 2007 (when the piece was written) but nothing I can see that’s “batty.” Indeed, most of it seems like just common sense to me.Report