[Peace-discuss] Re: [Peace] Re: Peace Digest, Vol 42, Issue 20

[C. G. Estabrook]

Ricky--

Let's be clear about what happened here.  Matt did not write, "You have 
put a comment on a list reserved for announcements, and you shouldn't do 
that" (which would have been persnickety enough).

Instead, he entered the argument over the AAEI position and criticized 
the substance of what I wrote, by characterizing it as an "ideological 
critique of events that other progressives have organized."  (Have you 
noticed that "ideological" is the current euphemism for red-baiting?)

He was in fact right in his substantive comment about what the issue is 
-- namely, Is the AAEI position in fact progressive? The first line of 
my answer insisted that being progressive is precisely what needed 
thinking about (and that's hardly a g.p.a.)

Of course, it's a fine debating technique to assert your position and 
then declare no further statements should be made in this venue...

I'll be happy to enter this disingenuity sweepstakes and leave it to the 
judgment of the candid reader.

Regards, Carl


Ricky Baldwin wrote:
> Carl,
> 
> I'm sorry but now you're being disingenuous.  You know
> perfectly well that there is a forum for such
> discussions and that no one has tried to block it.  I
> think you probably also know that the gratuitous
> personal attack was your first line:
> 
> "If you think you can be 'progressive' without
> thinking about it, fine."
> 
> You know Matt and know him to be thoughtful, a
> critical thinker in fact, and no slave to progressive
> fashion. And I think you can read his
> complaint/request well enough to know that he is
> explicitly not saying that events can't be critiqued:
> 
> "If you want to critique it, do it in the venues
> available to you--please not on peace
> announce-digest."
> 
> Ricky
> 
> --- "C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at uiuc.edu> wrote:
> 
>> Ricky--
>>
>> Matt was offended that he had to have in his in-box
>> my questioning of 
>> the wisdom of the demonstration Bob was promoting. 
>> This, to Matt, was 
>> an "ideological critique of events that other
>> progressives have organized."
>>
>> He clearly thought that such questioning was
>> "unproductive behavior," as 
>> you say, but it seems to me that thinking about what
>> is in fact 
>> progressive is one of the things AWARE should be
>> doing.  It's clearly no 
>> more a "gratuitous personal attack" than his
>> objection to my "critique."
>>
>> --CGE
>>
>> Ricky Baldwin wrote:
>>> ...
>>> People often try out the "peace-discuss" list,
>> then
>>> decide that the traffic is to heavy.  Part of what
>>> clogs it, of course, is gratuitous personal
>> attacks
>>> and other unproductive behavior - like Carl's
>> note... 
>>> --- "C. G. Estabrook" <galliher at uiuc.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>>> If you think you can be "progressive" without
>>>> thinking about it, fine.
>>>> If however you think you want to figure out
>> what's
>>>> going on -- and what
>>>> can be done about it -- you should participate in
>>>> the discussion.  --CGE
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Matt Murrey wrote:
>>>>> I purposely got off the peace-discuss list
>> because
>>>> I am not
>>>>> interested in reading the ideological critiques
>> of
>>>> events that other
>>>>> progressives have organized.  If you don't want
>> to
>>>> attend don't show
>>>>> up.  If you want to critique it, do it in the
>>>> venues available to
>>>>> you--please not on peace announce-digest.
>> Thanks,
>>>> Matthew Murrey...
>>>>
> 
> 
> 
>       ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Luggage? GPS? Comic books? 
> Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search
> http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs=bz