Here, at 3QD, we’re divided over what to make of and where we stand on the Euston Manifesto (not that personal opinions in and of themselves matter, unlike sound reasons). But many of us are interested in the manifesto, at least in so much as it fights over what the “Left” is about. Hence our mild fixation on it. Here is one anti-manifesto view, expectedly, in Counterpunch, in what can be called, er, the Counterpunch tone.
Conclusion, quoted in its entirety: “It is vitally important for the future of progressive politics that people of liberal, egalitarian and internationalist outlook should now speak clearly. We must define ourselves against those for whom the entire progressive-democratic agenda has been subordinated to a blanket and simplistic ‘anti-imperialism’ and/or hostility to the current US administration. The values and goals which properly make up that agenda–the values of democracy, human rights, the continuing battle against unjustified privilege and power, solidarity with peoples fighting against tyranny and oppression–are what most enduringly define the shape of any Left worth belonging to.”
They have not noticed that some of their principles are contradicted by their political positions.