Inconsistent Radical

In a Boston Phoenix article, Chris Lehmann gives a by-the-numbers Marxist critique of The New York Times' endless series on class in America. Lehman, like a good radical, understands in our liberal society, the Times is as much a part of the Establishment as George W. Bush--they're merely two sides of the same coin, with a paramount interest in protecting the prerogatives of the ruling class.

Now there's nothing wrong with attacking the Times from the left (okay, there is--it means your analysis is way off, especially economically), but at least be consistent. If you believe our society is founded on the rich getting richer, always at the expense of everyone else, keep your blinders on and go at it.

But Lehmann disappointed me. He states that class is destiny in America, particularly for groups such as "poor black voters in Ohio and Florida." Ohio and Florida? I realize some far leftists like to spice up their economic analysis with a little racial resentment, but really, for a Marxist to partake in the paranoia of mere big D Democrats is enough to make you lose faith in radicalism.