[Peace-discuss] Fw: Support The Nadler Initiative Against The
Planned Bush Blanket Pardons
LAURIE SOLOMON
LAURIE at ADVANCENET.NET
Fri Dec 12 10:47:28 CST 2008
I am assuming that your notion of "prophesy" is coming out of some religious
tradition. Mine comes from a more secular tradition. Nevertheless, I never
said that prophesy was an integral part of social criticism or a necessary
part of it; I think that was your addition, which I accepted as being an
option for the social critic.
If I needed to construct a definition from the online sources, it might read
as follows:
Prophecy, generally, describes the disclosing of information
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information> , revelations, and
interpretations that are not known to the prophet
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prophet> by any ordinary means (including
everyday commonsense reasoning and observations as contrasted to the
analytical questioning and deconstructions of everyday commonsensical
appearance or instances of practical concrete reasoning and observations).
It may or may not involve visions of the future or predictions as to
outcomes and consequences; but it does not have to. Thus, it would imply
elements of delivering edification and maybe exhortations to action; these
in turn may or may not furnish the listener or reader with comfort. But
those elements are side effects of the acts of prophesy as far as I am
concerned; the core is to reveal possible hidden meanings and truths that
lie beneath the everyday interpretations of our world and its events through
criticism or analytical analysis (those who are religious or believe in
magic or the like might add that the revelations are derived from god,
spiritual sources, intuition, etc. as well as analytic criticism and
analysis.
From: E. Wayne Johnson [mailto:ewj at pigs.ag]
Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2008 5:05 PM
To: LAURIE SOLOMON
Cc: jencart13 at yahoo.com; 'John W.'; peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] Fw: Support The Nadler Initiative Against The
Planned Bush Blanket Pardons
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 <mailto:LAURIE at ADVANCENET.NET>
<LAURIE at ADVANCENET.NET> wrote:
From: LAURIE SOLOMON <mailto:LAURIE at ADVANCENET.NET> <LAURIE at ADVANCENET.NET>
Subject: RE: [Peace-discuss] Fw: Support The Nadler Initiative Against The
Planned Bush Blanket Pardons
To: "'John W.'" <mailto:jbw292002 at gmail.com> <jbw292002 at gmail.com>
Cc: 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; 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>
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] 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
To: 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
http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss
_____
_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
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/20081212/6e4a3906/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list