[lit-ideas] Stanley Fish, Ayers & the Manson Family

  • From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 19:50:14 -0700

Donal

 

Well I would include a bit more than that, 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 did recently, but of what they did long 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?  At 
what point did Ayers and Dorhn get a clean slate aka “rock-solid 
establishment”?  If there is a principle, why haven’t any of the Manson family 
been given a clean slate?  

 

Lawrence

 

-----Original Message-----
From:  Donal McEvoy
Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 5:08 PM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Stanley Fish on Ayers [1]

 

Skim-reading this, and not getting onto PtII (as yet anyway), may I offer the 
Poppern. conjecture that the key sentence is:-

 

"We were there not because of what Ayers and Dohrn had done 40 

years ago, but because of what they were doing at the moment."

 

Donal

Oxon

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. lit-ideas
  3. Archive
  4. 09-2008