[MD] A Confusion of Weasels

[Dan Glover]

Hello everyone

On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 8:33 PM, ARLO J BENSINGER JR <ajb102 at psu.edu> wrote:
> [Dan]
> Thanks for weighing in. It is good to hear from you.
>
> [Arlo]
> Thanks. I've been a little busy, I am rushing to try to get Northrop's E/W book
> all digitized before the fall semester begins. For what its worth, I've
> realized I take some of the stuff here too personally, and I've put my ignore
> filters on hyperdrive.

Dan:

I've been busy too, editing a couple books (for paying clients, no
less), and doing quite a lot of my own writing. It is the best writing
I've ever done (if I do say so myself). So if I seem a bit distracted,
that's why.

>
> [Dan]
> Well, as I said before, if it isn't a constructive criticism, then why even
> offer it? Is calling someone a jackass constructive?
>
> [Arlo]
> No, its not constructive. But sometimes it is necessary, I think. We all draw
> our own lines in this regard, I suppose. I agree, though, if it can be
> eliminated or gotten rid of, great (with the caveat that this also covers the
> "polite insults" and those that feel saying "but I love you" makes them
> innocent).

Dan:

Well, I am guilty of calling others some pretty harsh words myself. It
happens. And I guess sometimes it does seem necessary. And I don't see
anything wrong with some good-natured gibes. Humor is uniquely human.
But yes, you're right... to openly insult someone and then say "but I
love you" isn't right. It is bullshit. And I think everyone knows that
whether they care to admit it or not.

>
> [Dan]
> It is a discussion being read by who knows how many others. And I think that is
> something (I think) we all should keep in mind when we post here.
>
> [Arlo]
> See, this was the same argument I made for aggressively condemning Platt's
> egregious distortions. I never sought out Platt to send him "insults" off list,
> but I can tell you several people HAVE and continue to send me offlist insults
> (not Platt, just to be clear on that).

Dan:

Now that's scary stuff.

>Arlo:
> But I do agree with your general statement, and I think most here do adhere it
> to mostly. I have no problem with Steve or DMB personally, I've never felt
> either one of them were ever unnecessarily rude or insulting to me.
>
> If there is heat, it is from a friction caused by BOTH sides. I've seen DMB
> continually attacked by the (1) Bo contingent and (2) the anti-intellectual
> contingent. I am NOT saying its a one-way street TO DMB, but it most certainly
> is not a one-way street FROM him either. I'm just trying to highlight that.

Dan:

Oh yes, I agree. Bo still sends me emails condemning dmb. Silly really.

>Arlo:
> And you know, in many ways it IS the same as issues I had with Platt. And I
> take umbrage at your suggestion that poor Platt was attacked without cause or
> provocation.

Dan:

Well, I didn't mean it that way exactly. I never said "poor Platt" and
if I insinuated it, I didn't mean to. But Platt did seem to be a
"lightening rod" for lots of abuse from contributors he never even had
discussions with. Maybe it was his goofy politics that set them off, I
don't know.

My point was, this is supposed to be an intellectually-based
discussion... and as such, it seems like a certain degree of civility
and courtesy should be observed. Of course there are extremes: those
who go off the deep end and raise such a stink that they're banned
from the group. And rightly so. And there are those who never raise
much of a fuss about anything. I am not talking about either of those
groups but rather the majority in the middle.

Arlo:
>When I first joined the list I made a comment about derivative
> theories of labor alienation and the comments Pirsig makes in ZMM (to Mark
> Heyman, RIP), and spent the next few months honestly trying to fend of
> continued attacks by Platt, distortions, insults, dishonest remarks. I think
> the archives will bear out that for a time I really did try to "dialogue" with
> Platt, but all I ever got was talk-radio bombast. And, as I said, I hit a point
> where I thought "why the fuck am I trying to be nice to this idiot?"... Platt
> was the "bless his soul" type insulter, and I resent him being portrayed as a
> poor innocent nice guy attacked by mean guys who saw his as an easy target.

Dan:

Yes I tried to engage Platt too, with about the same results you had.
I chalked it up to him being from a different generation. He reminds
me a great deal of my father. And no, I am not trying to portray him
as innocent. He knew exactly what he was doing. Which tended to piss
me off too. And that is what he wanted. So, in the end, I realized
that he was just a human being, like any of us, with his faults, and
his desires, and his likes and dislikes... just like me. And the man
deserved a little respect even if he didn't give it.

>Arlo:
> Anyway, this is low zen to keep talking about, I wanted only to make some
> clarifications about my motives and reasons in this, because you or Horse
> brought it up.

Dan:

I thank you for clarifying things, and hopefully I have as well.

>
> [Dan]
> For the record, I wasn't suggesting a love-fest nor was I condemning dmb and
> Steve or anyone else, including you, Arlo.
>
> [Arlo]
> I know you weren't Dan, you're one of the fairest people on this list. I think
> your comments were appropriate and perfectly understandable.
>
> Thanks for listening.