The Village Voice's Roy Edroso
pokes fun at me, among other conservative bloggers, for
defending an AIG executive whose resignation letter was published
in the New York Times:
"At AIG, just like everywhere else," generously allows the
American
Spectator, "there are people who are suffering as a
result of the irresponsibility and sins of others." But most of
us who have been struck by the fragments of the solid-gold
speculative bubble -- burst by AIG, among others -- don't get
Op-Eds in the Times. If you get a shit deal
from your job, neither the Times nor Dagny Taggart
will rush to comfort you -- which probably just proves to these
folks that your pain is less important than that of a 17-year high-finance
veteran whose spectacular early retirement (to whatever
miserable hovel such a career affords) now breaks their hearts.
Look, I'm angry about the government bailing out AIG and the idea
of rewarding undeserving executives with bonuses, but Edroso's
Tom Joad sermonizing does nothing but convey his own contempt for
people of means. The point isn't that this particular AIG
executive is a hero, but that AIG has 116,000 employees around
the world, and it's unfair to paint all of them with a broad
brush as if each of them is equally responsible for the damage
the company did to our financial system. Also, while not
everybody who loses their job gets space on the NY Times op-ed
page, the op-ed page, as well as the news page, as well as the
rest of the media, consistently gives voices to those
dispossessed by the economic crisis -- those losing their jobs
and homes, those without health care, and those who are
struggling to stay afloat. For weeks, the media has been
pummeling AIG and all of its executives who took bonuses. These
people have been villianized, persecuted by Congress and the NY
Attorney General's office, and yet we haven't heard from any of
them. Giving one of them a forum in the NY Times to make his case
in a way that adds nuance to this ugly situation does not seem
unreasonable to me.