Ken Delaughter

Charles Walts cwalts
Tue Feb 16 08:45:01 CST 1999

Hey ken, can you backchannel me, I have a question for you

Charles Walts
ACU Debate
cwalts at

>From  Tue Feb 16 10:03:31 1999
Message-Id: <TUE.16.FEB.1999.100331.EST.>
Received: from LIST.UVM.EDU by LIST.UVM.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8c) with
 spool id 26736 for EDEBATE at LIST.UVM.EDU; Tue, 16 Feb 1999 10:03:57
Received: from ( []) by (AIX4.2/UCB 8.7/8.7) with ESMTP id KAA10742 for
 <edebate at>; Tue, 16 Feb 1999 10:03:56 -0500 (EST)
Received: from Mjstannard at by (IMOv18.1) id RMGHa04795
 for <edebate at>; Tue, 16 Feb 1999 10:03:31 -0500 (EST)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 3.0.1 for Mac sub 84
Message-ID: <9737ad76.36c988c3 at>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 1999 10:03:31 EST
Reply-To: Mjstannard at AOL.COM
To: Team Topic Debating in America <EDEBATE at LIST.UVM.EDU>
From: Matt Stannard <Mjstannard at AOL.COM>
Subject: class/identity/individualism

I would like to ask those who eschew group identity in favor of individual
identity where they get their data.  Most sociologists assume that classes do
have particular perspectives and preferences, unique to their class, not
simply the individuals in that class; that there are "class identities."
Communication and anthropological studies support the notion of collective
group experiences of oppression.  It seems like the individualist analytical
side is at least as guilty of political bias as the collectivist side.  Can
someone at least provide criteria which justifies supporting one over the

long beach

More information about the Mailman mailing list