Perhaps the problem with radstats is defining more precisely the concept: "radical".
However, I have been following with interest in the past the developments in official statistics through this list. Thank you.
I would expect some comments about what the Spanish press informed some weeks ago as legislation encouraging to denounce suspicious citizens that was ongoing in the UK. Now instead of comment about implications it may have for official statistics data collection what is discussed refers to subjects that are radical, but opposite. Sometimes I really appreciate not having a deep knowledge of the English language! But I think I understand enough this kind of rhetoric which I heard during many years in Spain.
-----Missatge original-----
De: email list for Radical Statistics [mailto:[log in to unmask]] En nom de Martin Sewell
Enviat: dijous, 28 / juny / 2007 13:15
Per a: [log in to unmask]
Tema: Re: Let's return to what RADSTSTS is about
At 09:07 27/06/2007 +0200, Andrew Philpott Morgan wrote:
>The listholder, Alison Macfarlane, is to be
>commended for her decisive action to end
>considerable haemorrhaging of people and damage
>to the list and the Group by those who have no
>sympathy with *where we stand* or what the group is about (see below).
In terms of significant contributors to the list,
Alison's actions have caused a net loss: Ted Harding.
>Ted Harding's long summary of the debates showed
>little appreciation beyond an abstract
>argument. On balance of probability for anyone
>who lives outside the lofty confines of
>academia, Hitler is rather too significant to be trivialised as a side issue.
Ted's analysis of the chain of events was spot
on, and his time, effort and principled action
are honourable. I hope he returns.
>Indeed, much more significant is the context
>that many others noted: the anti-communism,
>anti-liberalism and eugenics race 'science'
>notions which are the hallmarks of fascist perspectives.
>
>[...]
>
>It would seem following from this that we need
>an anti-racist, anti-fascist policy. This may
>help to encourage those who left the site to
>return and engage in a discussion of *Radical* Statistics.
You're suggesting that anti-communist statements
are unacceptable, yet an anti-fascist policy
should be enforced? Marxism and Fascism have far
more in common than is generally believed (and Marxism caused the more harm).
> 'Political correctness', well, in the good old
> days disadvantage was institutionalised and
> natural common sense and social norms more
> implicit but ‘political correctness’ was
> there sure enough even if once Paddy was thick
> and Taffy was a thief. Is the complaint that
> social norms are of the wrong sort? My own
> assessment (non-statistical) is that modern
> societies require forms of values, organisation
> and controls and this is functional more than
> 'administrative', an aspect of the society
> rather simply 'ideological'. In which case the
> volume of ink has been wasted. I may be wrong,
> of course, and someone on the site may provide
> the actual evidence, and this is the difference
> between science and ideology, prejudice,
> propaganda...but this is the problem up to now.
> This is the point: this is a statistical site.
> It is what RADSTATS should be about.
Political correctness is about classifying
certain groups of people as victims in need of
protection from criticism, and dictating that no
dissent should be tolerated. It is therefore
totalitarian and compromises both free speech and
science: this is unreasonable. Suppose that
statistics showed that the Irish had a lower IQ
and the Welsh had more crime than the
English. PC dictates that such statistics should
be buried (failing that, the English should be blamed), what does Radstats say?
>Let’s return to actual statistics and then
>consider its political and socio-economic setting.
I agree, but the political setting is one of political correctness!
Regards
Martin
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
*******************************************************
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
*******************************************************
|