In his response to my article in The Language Teacher (Pennycook, 1997), Craig Sower (1998) has three main lines of critique: that language is more than a political act; that Marxism is not an adequate frame of analysis for looking at imperialism, language rights, or language classrooms; and that the notion of an an emergent Western world culture is ethnocentric. Ultimately, he recommends that we take a critical look at Critical Applied Linguistics (CALx). I do not really disagree with any of these points: I agree that language is more than a political act. I agree that Marxism is a problematic framework for looking at many things, and that we should not adhere to a simplistic view of Western imperialism (which I thought was the point of my opening paragraph). Finally, I agree that we should be critical about Critical Applied Linguistics. But, in making these valuable points, I find Sower's understanding of language, politics, and CALx rather unsatisfactory.