>If Davis *did* admit that he fabricated things, I'm extremely >worried. Leftists cannot afford to engage in anything but scrupulous >honesty. Knowingly telling falsehoods simply discredits the work and >causes continual second-guessing. I don't have the Counterpunch article handy, but it makes the case that the errors in Davis's book are par for the course for a 500+ page book. Every few days the NY Times prints a half-dozen corrections, to put things in context. The beef with Davis is over interpretation. A hostile Salon article takes him to task for representing Bunker Hill as an anti-black gated neighborhood, when they point out there actually no gates in sight. And so on. And so on. Mostly Davis's book is about interpretation. It is an ecosocialist analysis of Los Angeles's self-destructive path. This radical interpretation has pissed off the ruling class and they find it more effective to line up generation X journalists than the Wall Street Journal editorial page. Salon is more and more falling into this niche, a space occupied also by the NY Press, a neoconservative throwaway in NYC that prints Alex Cockburn. Louis Proyect (http://www.panix.com/~lnp3/marxism.html)
