>From: David Quarter <[log in to unmask]>
>Reply-To: David Quarter <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: The Shakespeare Tragedy
>Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 23:43:04 -0500
>
> Dear Jorge,
>
> do enlighten me, "scientifically and practically",
> how my arguments are "anti americanism"?
>
> I'm all ears.
>
>
>David
>
>
>From: Jorge Bolaños <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask]
>BCC to: Subject: Re: The Shakespeare Tragedy
>Date sent: Sat, 06 Nov 2004 11:58:09 +0000
>
> > That stupid antiamericanism is the last shelter for the far left, once
>all
> > your arguments have been refuted scientifically and practically. But you
> > should keep and take care of your old ideological phantoms, winter is
>coming
> > and they can cold could bring fatal consequences for them.
> > But, I am disapointed with you.
> > So you dont recognize your hostility towards your neighbours?
> > Are you really a marxist or what?
> >
> >
> > >From: David Quarter <[log in to unmask]>
> > >Reply-To: David Quarter <[log in to unmask]>
> > >To: [log in to unmask]
> > >Subject: Re: The Shakespeare Tragedy
> > >Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 03:06:02 -0500
> > >
> > >Tim writes:
> > >
> > > "you read more into my comments than I would think
> > >supportable.".
> > >
> > > I would say, in fact, that your response below indicates exactly
> > >what I suggested: That you think primarily in terms of how the
> > >elections impacts *America*, in the narrow, middle class,
> > >eurocentric sense of the word.
> > >
> > ><<<<However, I *will* say that regardless of
> > > > your political outlook, the USA presidential election was
> > >conducted and
> > > > peacefully settled according to democratic principles.>>>
> > >
> > > Your so-called "democratic" principles are grounded in a system
> > >that priviledges the rich AND/OR the politically connected at the
> > >expense of the rest. By rich I mean having Scrooge McDuck like
> > >pockets. Poltical connectness in the U.S. requires the type of clout
> > >that would enable someone to rise from a ragged upbringing in
> > >Arkansas to being elected President of the United States. The
> > >latter *only* occurs by being attached to one of the "two" main
> > >political parties., both of which are deeply entwined with the 5 % or
> > >so of the population who controls the economy.
> > >
> > >What happens for virtually all "independent" candidate in the U.S.
> > >lacking in the funds to support their campaign is that they are
> > >barred from the TV and radio airwaves. This since the TV stations
> > >are controlled by big business or rich people who aren't interested
> > >in supporting candidates not alligned to the "two" main
> > >representatives of the rich.
> > >
> > >Lacking in money or political connectsion leaves one without the
> > >funds necessary to get a message across to the voting public -
> > >exactly what a third candidate like Nader -- by no stretch of the
> > >imagination a poor guy -- faced in this recent election and exactly
> > >why a system, such as this, precludes any real possibility of
> > >actual "choices" between candidates.
> > >
> > > Your beloved racist, classist so-called "democratic" system also
> > >either prohibits by law, or makes it virtually impossible for, a nice
> > >chunk of your population to even vote.
> > >
> > >What a pathetic excuse for a democracy!
> > >
> > >
> > > > Communicate your discontent about USA politics and foreign
> > >policy all
> > > > you like; that is or ought to be your privilege.
> > > >
> > >
> > >Translation: You can criticize my country but it means you're my
> > >enemy.
> > >
> > >So typical of the seige mentality that afflicts the majority of
> > >Americans.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Subject: RE: The Shakespeare Tragedy
> > >Date sent: Fri, 5 Nov 2004 09:03:37 -0500
> > >From: "Lillie,Timothy H" <[log in to unmask]>
> > >To: "David Quarter" <[log in to unmask]>,
> > > <[log in to unmask]>
> > >
> > > > Well, all I can say is that I think you have read more into my
>comment
> > > > than I would think supportable. However, I *will* say that
>regardless of
> > > > your political outlook, the USA presidential election was conducted
>and
> > > > peacefully settled according to democratic principles. In my book,
>if an
> > > > election is democratically held and an outcome then occurs as the
>will
> > > > of the people (whether or not I might agree with that outcome), then
> > > > that settles it.
> > > >
> > > > Communicate your discontent about USA politics and foreign policy
>all
> > > > you like; that is or ought to be your privilege.
> > > >
> > > > Tim
> > > >
> > > > Timothy Lillie, PhD
> > > > Associate Professor
> > > > The University of Akron
> > > > Zook Hall 322
> > > > Akron OH 55325-4205
> > > > 330-972-6746 (voice)
> > > > 330-972-5209 (fax
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: David Quarter [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> > > > Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 12:31 AM
> > > > To: Lillie,Timothy H; [log in to unmask]
> > > > Cc: [log in to unmask]
> > > > Subject: Re: The Shakespeare Tragedy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I'm *somewhat perplexed* by Tim's statement that:
> > > >
> > > > Why are they [the Mirror] so
> > > > > thin-skinned at a democratic (there are, so far at least, very few
> > > > > reported problems in voting) outcome?
> > > >
> > > > Pexplexed in the sence that the statement's hard to rectify with the
> > > > position of someone claiming allegiance to the social model,
> > > > "somewhat" in that it is less hard to fathom when seen in the
> > > > context of it being said by an American.
> > > >
> > > > AT least, the impression I got of the social model -- someone
> > > > please correct me if I'm wrong -- is that the political is never
> > > > divorced from the social. The two are seen as connected. Yet the
> > > > impression I get of your statement, Tim, is quite the opposite: that
> > > > what happens in the U.S. only matters. That, for you, the human
> > > > (social) consequences of the U.S. (political) elections is only to
>be
> > > > interpreted within the confines of the U.S. state, divorced from
>its
> > > > impact on the rest of the world. What you label, the "democatric
> > > > outcome" for the U.S. should supercede all other concerns.
> > > >
> > > > Not that I imagine most citizens outside the U.S would in principle
> > > > be against this idea. The notion of the American people/America
> > > > being content solely with their own democratic outcomes would for
> > > > most be a welcome breath of fresh air...surely, something to make
> > > > Osama ecstatic about, that is, of course, if it were indeed the
> > > > pattern. Alas, this couldn't be further from the usual method of
> > > > comportment of the U.S state. The fact is today, a few wealthy
> > > > states, lead by the U.S. as self annointed "leader of the free
>world",
> > > > makes decisions which generally affect the rest of the world
> > > > citizens, the majority in fact, in a negative way.
> > > >
> > > > Take Iraq, for example. Since the U.S., along with the British et
>al.,
> > > > first turned against Saddam Hussein (formerly a client of your
> > > > country) an estimated 1.6 mllion Iraqis have been killed. They have
> > > > died b/c of 10 years of vicious, brutal sanctions imposed on them
> > > > under the reign of the father of your currently-elected president,
> > > > sanctions which were then enthusiastly tightened under your
> > > > subsequent president's (Clinton's) watch. And, in case you forgot,
> > > > since Bush junior's took the decision to invade and occupy Iraq,
> > > > countless more Iraqi people have died.
> > > >
> > > > More generally, billions of human beings are affected each an every
> > > > day by decisions taken on your country's behalf -- from as far
> > > > away regions as South America all the way to the far east. For
> > > > example, the farmers of India forced off their land by your -GMO
> > > > multinationals;
> > > >
> > > > ; The millions of Africans brutalized by military dictatorships or
> > > > leadership supported by your government (often by way of the CIA),
> > > > people who, in their state of suffering, have been denied basic
> > > > resources such as shelter and medicine, i.e., resources which
> > > > western countries, but, more recently, cheifly your own
> > > > government., either refuse to share with Africans or forcefully
>steal
> > > > from them under the cloak of corporate "exporting" to the west.
> > > >
> > > > There are many more examples to list.
> > > >
> > > > What I would argue is that as long as the world continues to be
> > > > affected adversely by the policies carried in the name of the U.S
> > > > state, it seems only uncumbent upon us, as our democratic duty
> > > > as citizens outside the U.S. (as well as for Americans who oppose
> > > > the system) to communicate, by whatever means possible, our
> > > > discontent toward your country's cherised "democratic outcomes".
> > > >
> > > > DOQ
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Date sent: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 08:58:23 -0500
> > > > Send reply to: "Lillie,Timothy H" <[log in to unmask]>
> > > > From: "Lillie,Timothy H" <[log in to unmask]>
> > > > Subject: Re: The Shakespeare Tragedy
> > > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > >
> > > > > I'm standing a bit outside all this, since my connection to the
> > > > > British world of disability studies has recently been weaker than
>it
> > > > > once was but it seems to me that the discussion is likely a good
>one
> > > > > if it results in a bit more civility in discussion of competing
>views.
> > > >
> > > > > Of course, it likely will not seem that way to the person or
>persons
> > > > > who are personally savaged and I *know* that many
>diversity-sensitive
> > > > > and inclusionary folks are VERY thin skinned when they feel they
>are
> > > > > being criticized. Their immediate response, in my view, has been
>to
> > > > > cry victim and demand an apology...while feeling that their
>critiques,
> > > >
> > > > > regardless of how personal they are are somehow justified.
> > > > >
> > > > > Why do I mention this here? Because of the headline Bob refers to
>in
> > > > > the Daily Mirror figuratively weeping over the "dumbness" of
> > > > > fifty-nine million Americans in choosing someone not acceptable,
> > > > > apparently, to the Daily Mirror. I don't know the Mirror's
>politics
> > > > > but from the reported headline they are obviously left of
>center.....
> > > > > Why are they so thin-skinned at a democratic (there are, so far at
> > > > > least, very few reported problems in voting) outcome? The answer
>might
> > > >
> > > > > be: because they think that people who don't share their view,
>like
> > > > > those attacking Shakespeare personally, are simply stupid and
>evil.
> > > > > Tell that often enough to someone and that person stops listening
>to
> > > > > you.
> > > > >
> > > > > So be careful of how critiques are framed: even righteous liberals
> > > > > (and conservatives, for that matter, who in my view are similarly
> > > > > constructed) can be vicious and bigoted when *their* precious
>views
> > > > > are critiqued.
> > > > >
> > > > > Timothy Lillie, PhD
> > > > > Associate Professor
> > > > > The University of Akron
> > > > > Zook Hall 322
> > > > > Akron OH 55325-4205
> > > > > 330-972-6746 (voice)
> > > > > 330-972-5209 (fax
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
> > > > > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bob
> > > > > Williams-Findlay
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 6:45 AM
> > > > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > > > Subject: The Shakespeare Tragedy
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I find myself strangely caught between Shirley's world and
>Havor's.
> > > > >
> > > > > Early this week Tom and I had an exchange of words; my posting on
>the
> > > > > List concerning his Ouch article was detailed and reasoned, I
>felt. On
> > > >
> > > > > Ouch itself, I admit I reacted from the gut and penned off a
>short,
> > > > > journalistic style sound-bite response.
> > > > >
> > > > > Tom characterised this as "personal abuse" and suggested I
>should've
> > > > > focused on his "views"; my retort was that I believe a person's
>style
> > > > > of delivery is as much a part of the debate as are the views the
> > > > > individual expresses. I, therefore, stood by my decision to
> > > > > characterise Tom as behaving like a Victorian Headmaster when he
> > > > > addresses the Disabled People's Movement.
> > > > >
> > > > > The problem is where do you draw the line? I hear what Shirley is
> > > > > saying; but am I being hypocritical by saying that I think she was
> > > > > unwise to voice it in the manner that she has?
> > > > >
> > > > > Today, the British newspaper, the Daily Mirror, ran the headline
> > > > > something
> > > > > like:
> > > > > Are 59,000 Americans that Dumb?
> > > > >
> > > > > I believe this is no different; my thought processes went there,
>yet
> > > > > the price of liberty requires us to accept the challenge of the
> > > > > unthinkable.
> > > > >
> > > > > Personally, I have distanced myself from Tom's views because many
> > > > > contradiction some of the core values I have; no doubt what I do
>and
> > > > > say outrage some people also.
> > > > >
> > > > > It's hard not to be outraged and to want to scrap with those who
>you
> > > > > feel threaten or undermine what you hold dear. I'm not saint in
>this
> > > > > field and I've been attacked several times for my outspoken
>bluntness
> > > > > during a counter-attack.
> > > > >
> > > > > This said, I believe there's a great deal of validity in what
>Havor
> > > > > was saying. Anger is a poor companion in a battle for people's
> > > > > attention.
> > > > >
> > > > > Bob Williams-Findlay
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ________________End of message______________________
> > > > >
> > > > > Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List are
>now
> > > >
> > > > > located at:
> > > > >
> > > > > www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> > > > >
> > > > > You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
> > > > >
> > > > > ________________End of message______________________
> > > > >
> > > > > Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List are
>now
> > > >
> > > > > located at:
> > > > >
> > > > > www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> > > > >
> > > > > You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >________________End of message______________________
> > >
> > >Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List
> > >are now located at:
> > >
> > >www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> > >
> > >You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Horóscopo, tarot, numerología... Escucha lo que te dicen los astros.
> > http://astrocentro.msn.es/
> >
>
>________________End of message______________________
>
>Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List
>are now located at:
>
>www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
>
>You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
I have replied Mr Quarter, privately, as it was a private conversation.
Sorry about that
Jorge
_________________________________________________________________
Horóscopo, tarot, numerología... Escucha lo que te dicen los astros.
http://astrocentro.msn.es/
________________End of message______________________
Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List
are now located at:
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
|