[Peace-discuss] Fw: Support The Nadler Initiative Against The Planned Bush Blanket Pardons

E. Wayne Johnson ewj at pigs.ag
Thu Dec 11 17:05:06 CST 2008


We were taught that prophesying is the delivery of exhortation, 
edification, or comfort,  rather
than in the common connotation of prediction, and that is the sense in 
which I meant in "prophesy".

I suppose that the critic is examined by all.


LAURIE SOLOMON wrote:
>
> First, your quote obviously assumes a set of values and value 
> judgments which one can agree or disagree with.  I am sure that one 
> can find just as many good quotes suggesting the  opposite. 
>
>  
>
> Second, critics point out (or can point out)strengths as well as 
> weaknesses, rights as well as wrongs, missed alternatives as well as 
> recognized alternatives in their analysis of how things work, what 
> assumptions are needed to make them work, and what prerequisites are 
> necessary for the recognized phenomena to be meaningful and valid.  
> However, they have no obligation to do so or to be "fair and balanced" 
> just for the sake of being "fair and balanced."  Critics do not have 
> to engage in prophesy or prediction, nor do they have to exhort action 
> or inaction.  The certainly do not have any obligation or 
> responsibility to show anyone how they could do better.  It is enough 
> to reveal the assumptions being presumed and quality of what is being 
> or has been done.  If anything, a good social critique -- if it 
> exhorts anything -- exhorts the audience to engage in the analysis and 
> to attend to the findings of the analysis .  Based on conclusions that 
> the audience may draw from the analysis, it calls for the audience to 
> consider the implications of the conclusions; but it does not 
> necessarily require the critic or the audience to come up with 
> particular or specific concrete courses of action, remedies to 
> problems, solutions to issues,  or analytic or practical answers to 
> questions.  They may opt to do so and they may even opt to make those 
> recommendations public; but they are no more obligated to do so than 
> they are to  do the critique itself or make it public.
>
>  
>
> Thirdly, a social critic may engage in an exegesis of a situation, a 
> policy, a philosophy, etc. to see how it works, how it solved internal 
> problems or contradictions, if it is logical or illogical while not 
> necessarily seeing the subject of the exegesis as being the analytic 
> or practical problem which is in need of a solution. Seeing the 
> subject of the exegesis as a problem in need of a remedy or solution, 
> a given course of future action , or modification or not seeing it as 
> such will always be a value judgment which the critic logically is not 
> required to engage in.  There is no reason why a social critic has to 
> be also a social activist or has to make recommendations to social 
> activists, become their strategists or tacticians, or serve as 
> "legitimizers," " rationalizers," "justifiers," or "apologists" for 
> the reforms and actions  undertaken by social activists.  If I sit 
> down and observe a community and upon analysis find that there is a 
> lack of solidarity in that community, as an analyst isn't it enough to 
> report the findings of my analysis without offering an evaluation as 
> to if that is good or bad, productive or not, etc. or furnishing a set 
> of alternatives and solutions to the lack of solidarity or ways to 
> keep solidarity from occurring in the future.  In other words, social 
> critics do not necessarily also have to be participants I or involved 
> in the subjects of their study and analysis.
>
>  
>
> *From:* E. Wayne Johnson [mailto:ewj at pigs.ag]
> *Sent:* Thursday, December 11, 2008 3:31 PM
> *To:* jencart13 at yahoo.com
> *Cc:* 'John W.'; LAURIE SOLOMON; peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> *Subject:* Re: [Peace-discuss] Fw: Support The Nadler Initiative 
> Against The Planned Bush Blanket Pardons
>
>  
>
> Certainly the critic, partly as prophet, partly as teacher, plays an 
> important role, but
> good prophesying exhorts to action.  I appreciate your insightful 
> critiques, Laurie, but
> finally we must take action.
>
> I was immediately reminded of this  quote---
>
> /"It is not the critic who counts;
> not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles,
> or where the doer of deeds could have done them better.
>
> The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena,
> whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood,
> who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again;
> because there is not effort without error and shortcomings;
> but who does actually strive to do the deed;
> who knows the great enthusiasm, the great devotion,
> who spends himself in a worthy cause,
> who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement
> and who at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring 
> greatly.
> So that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls
> who know neither victory nor defeat."
> /
>
>
>
>
> Jenifer Cartwright wrote:
>
> Ahhh, well, that certainly explains what's at the root of my 
> difficulties w/ so many of the peace-discuss contributors: 
> they're social critics who see their role as analysis, period!!! No 
> interest or focus on solutions, just critical analysis. Wow. Thanks, 
> Laurie, very enlightening!
>
>  --Jenifer
>
>  
>
> --- On *Thu, 12/11/08, LAURIE SOLOMON /<LAURIE at ADVANCENET.NET> 
> <mailto:LAURIE at ADVANCENET.NET>/* wrote:
>
>     From: LAURIE SOLOMON <LAURIE at ADVANCENET.NET>
>     <mailto:LAURIE at ADVANCENET.NET>
>     Subject: RE: [Peace-discuss] Fw: Support The Nadler Initiative
>     Against The Planned Bush Blanket Pardons
>     To: "'John W.'" <jbw292002 at gmail.com> <mailto:jbw292002 at gmail.com>
>     Cc: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>     <mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>     Date: Thursday, December 11, 2008, 12:26 PM
>
>     I don't think we can do so from within the system; the
>     probabilities of doing so from outside the system are very slim
>     for the present.  I think that the economy, environment, and
>     government need to get a whole lot worse before anything will be
>     possible; so we probably should be contributing to making things a
>     whole lot worse in order to realistically stand a change of
>     changing thins for the better.
>
>      
>
>     However, I do not see it as the social critic's job to do anything
>     more than analyze situations; they have no obligation to furnish
>     solutions or courses of action to remedy flaws and problems that
>     their analysis suggest.  Social criticism is analysis (taking
>     apart to understand the working so as to reveal strengths and
>     weaknesses, it is not merely  being negative -- although there is
>     rarely any reason to point out the good in social criticism since
>     thoswe factors are typically already known and accepted). 
>
>      
>
>      
>
>     *From:* John W. [mailto:jbw292002 at gmail.com]
>     *Sent:* Thursday, December 11, 2008 11:27 AM
>     *To:* LAURIE SOLOMON
>     *Cc:* E. Wayne Johnson; peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>     <mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>; unionyes
>     *Subject:* Re: [Peace-discuss] Fw: Support The Nadler Initiative
>     Against The Planned Bush Blanket Pardons
>
>      
>
>      
>
>     On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 11:13 AM, LAURIE SOLOMON
>     <LAURIE at advancenet.net <mailto:LAURIE at advancenet.net>> wrote:
>
>     I am inclined to concur with this.  I think that such an effort
>     could only come from either someone who has supreme confidence in
>     the system and its working in a just and ethical fashion and faith
>     in the integrity of the players or someone who is a fool.  Take
>     your pick.  People seem to enjoy playing Candide rather than face
>     realities.
>
>     Dear Laurie,
>
>     Please list all of the ways in which, in your opinion, we as
>     individuals can realistically make a positive difference in the
>     world.  Here, I'll get you started:
>
>     1.
>     2.
>     3.
>     4.
>     5.
>     6.
>     7.
>     8.
>     9.
>     10.
>
>
>
>      
>
>          *From:* peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net
>         <mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net>
>         [mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net
>         <mailto:peace-discuss-bounces at lists.chambana.net>] *On Behalf
>         Of *E. Wayne Johnson
>         *Sent:* Thursday, December 11, 2008 9:49 AM
>         *To:* unionyes
>         *Cc:* Peace-discuss List
>         *Subject:* Re: [Peace-discuss] Fw: Support The Nadler
>         Initiative Against The Planned Bush Blanket Pardons
>
>          
>
>         Interesting.
>
>         But note that Congress had good reason to Impeach Bush and go
>         after his gang,
>         but they did not.
>
>         The most obvious reason why they did not go after Bush was
>         that the opposition party wanted to retain
>         the Anti-constitutionally broadened Executive powers, and let
>         the aspersions for doing that fall on Bush.
>
>         So what makes you think that all your cards and letters are
>         going to make the opposition party go
>         after Bush now that the reins of government power are falling
>         into their hands?  They have little
>         to gain by pursuing Bush at this point.
>
>
>         unionyes wrote:
>
>          
>
>         ----- Original Message -----
>
>         *From:* theteam at peaceteam.net <mailto:theteam at peaceteam.net>
>
>         *To:* activist.thepen at gmail.com
>         <mailto:activist.thepen at gmail.com>
>
>         *Sent:* Thursday, December 11, 2008 7:39 AM
>
>         *Subject:* Support The Nadler Initiative Against The Planned
>         Bush Blanket Pardons
>
>          
>
>         Ask Your House Member To Co-Sponsor H.Res.  1531 Against The
>         Bush Preemptive Pardons
>
>         Another day, another non-denial denial that Bush is planning
>         midnight preemptive blanket pardons for his entire gang,
>         including himself.  In an article in the New York Times the
>         other day, current attorney general Mukasey is quoted as
>         asserting it would not be "necessary".  Please take careful
>         note he did not say it wouldn't happen, because unless we
>         speak out now it WILL.
>
>         The best shot we have is H.Res.  1531 which puts the
>         administration on clear notice that there will be strong push
>         back from Congress if they attempt such a scurrilous stunt. 
>         Please submit this action page to ask your House member to
>         sign on as a co-sponsor of this measure.
>
>         Support H.Res.  1531 Action Page: 
>         http://www.usalone.com/hres1531.php
>
>         We all know that George Bush as someone without even the guts
>         to face his own music, he who sent more that four thousand
>         brave Americans to their senseless graves, for a premeditated
>         and knowing lie in Iraq, tens of thousands of American
>         crippled and mutilated for life, trillions looted from our
>         economy, and he doesn't even have the simple courage to risk
>         the accountability of having to defend his numberless crimes
>         in a fair trial.
>
>         It is now known that Nixon seriously considered pardoning
>         himself, but even he was not THAT despicable.  George Bush
>         most certainly is.  And remember that his administration has
>         been infested with Nixon era cronies like Cheney and Rumsfeld,
>         so it is no surprise that the malfeasance of the Nixon era has
>         been magnified in the last eight years.
>
>         Nixon infamously said, "If the president does it that means it
>         is not illegal", conveniently after his own blanket pardon by
>         the way.  That has been their creed.  The entire Bush
>         administration has been one ongoing criminal enterprise since
>         day one, a wrecking ball to the Constitution and rule of law,
>         with torture, illegal surveillance, obstruction and perversion
>         of justice in the firing of U.S.  attorneys, not to mention
>         national level election fraud, the naked treason of outing
>         Valerie Plame, and on and on.
>
>         And the only way we can make sure nothing like this EVER
>         happens again is to demand full accountability, so that all
>         America truly understands what a miserable, lying, cowardly
>         creep we were so foolish as to allow get away with stealing
>         two successive presidential elections.
>
>         Please call on your members of Congress to immediately sign on
>         to H.Res.  1531, and let's have a real national debate on the
>         coming greatest outrage of all, before they get away with that
>         too.
>
>         Support H.Res.  1531 Action Page: 
>         http://www.usalone.com/hres1531.php
>
>         And you can also still get an "Impeach Both!!!" cap from the
>         return page from the action page submission.  We're not going
>         to say "while supplies last", because we'll manufacture as
>         many as you can wear, right up until the last minute.  Another
>         600 are going out today, for a total of upwards of 2,000 more
>         in just the last two weeks.  So if you have already requested
>         yours, it is most likely already on the way.
>
>         Please take action NOW, so we can win all victories that are
>         supposed to be ours, and forward this alert as widely as possible.
>
>         If you would like to get alerts like these, you can do so at
>         http://www.usalone.com/in.htm
>
>         Or if you want to cease receiving our messages, just use the
>         function at http://www.usalone.com/out.htm
>
>      
>
>     _______________________________________________
>
>     Peace-discuss mailing list
>
>     Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net <mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>
>     http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
>               
>
>
>
>  
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>   
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net <mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
>   
>
>  
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20081211/6541dd8a/attachment-0001.htm


More information about the Peace-discuss mailing list