[eDebate] ans Warner (3)
Thu Apr 10 08:33:31 CDT 2008
I always, in my public writing, trust to the other participants to render their best judgments about me and what I write.
The "ballot" is inevitable, Ede, and it is rendered in practices and in ideas.
The big-picture in this thread was:
Mr. Love asked us to list for him what we did to challenge domination and oppression. Almost no one took him up on the challenge.
I did because I thought his question sincere and reasonable. I listed 4 things:
1) evidence and reasoning to challenge ideology
2) public opposition to religiosity
3) valuing individual persons rather than cohorts
4) Community College
I did so honestly, respectfully, and forthrightly. That is what I think I do to challenge domination and oppression. True, I did state that was more than Mr. Love did, and I shouldn't have made that comparison, but it was because I thought his challenge to the community implied that we did little.
Warner jumped in, mischaracterizing my response as an "attack" and raging against claims I didn't make and demanding solvency evidence and serving notice. I characterized your answer as dishonest and demagoguery. I didn't call names or curse, I only pointed out that he was, in fact, trying to create discord and opposition where there was none.
Warner's response was to escalate with hate, name-calling, and cursing, going all-in with an imaginary screenplay trying to script Mr. Love and I in various roles of opposition and competition. At one point in Warner's little fantasy he put Love and I in a boxing ring. He even had a follow-up post which goaded with more incendiary nonsense, offering odds about my response which demonized me further.
I answered by listing the ways that Warner was spewing hate and dehumanizing and name-calling. I then pointed out the obvious: Warner needed to frame the discussion between Mr. Love and myself as conflict, opposition, and violent struggle and since reality did not conform to what he needed it to be, he rescripted it into that explicitly and before our eyes.
Ede, I earlier wrote that almost no one will engage in discussions about race with you because you will not conduct them honestly. You have amply demonstrated once again that is a wise decision. That does not, however, foreclose potentially productive dialog. Towson just won CEDA Nationals and it is clear that their final round arguments are very different in style and substance than the unproductive and ugly exchanges of the past. Those 2 young men are attempting to engage in a dialog about issues they care about deeply.
Get out of their way, Ede.
Use video conversation to talk face-to-face with Windows Live Messenger.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mailman