Trudy wrote:
>Tim,
>
>I'd like to draw your attention to the fact that they are not just my
>reasons. There are others on this list who have no trouble with the
>rules and expect them to be followed. They were there from the
>beginning.
>I think to ban flaming is the least we can ask from each other and as
>for who decides - I do.
>That is my responsibility as list owner and it is also my burden.
Yes but this does not mean that activity which is "racist" should be
allowed to go uncriticised. Saying that someone is on a "racist
journey of ignorance" is not simple abuse. It expresses a legitimate
view (whether you agree with it or not) about the position and words
expressed in a particular person's posting. It is the journey, not
the person, who is spoken of as "racist" in the apparently offending
post.
Howard's "new political correctness" seeks to make any suggestion of
"racism" or "racist activity" illegitimate. No doubt the right have
been aided in their campaign on this by the excessive use of the
terns in inappropriate situations in the past, but we must not allow
all such activity to be simply swept under the carpet because we have
been bullied into acceptance of Howard's "newspeak".
Yes, words like "racism" and "racist" must be used carefully to avoid
their devaluation, but a knee jerk reaction which sees them as always
inappropriate, in my opinion, is far more dangerous. Perhaps a
discussion on appropriate use of the terms (and of the consequences
of the "new political correctness" generally) would be of value on
the list and give us something positive to take out of this matter.
There are situations where individuals will inevitably be attacked
because of the views which they express. People who post material
which is directly counter to the views of the majority in the
particular community in which they are taking part do so knowing that
they are likely to be confronted by a solid response. (I'm sure most
of us experience similar things in other forums) As long as it is
their views, not their personality, which is attacked, then the
attack is legitimate in a group such as this one. That is what
distinguishes a vigorous debate from a "flame".
>
>I must say, I am getting to the stage where I am wondering if we are
>adult enough to deal with one provocateur. It is obvious by now that
>Karen is not interested in discussions that require listening and
>consideration on both sides. We gave her the benefit of the doubt but
>she has not addressed one question or given any indication that she is
>willing to.
>I suggest that the best way to quench a fire is to starve it of oxygen.
I completely agree.
>As for Laurie, she is welcome to come back any time she is willing to
>follow the same rules as everyone else. I am not going to be put in the
>position of enforcing the rules for everyone but one person and I hope
>you don't expect me to.
Laurie, by the way, is a man. I remain completely unclear about what
"rule" Laurie has broken on this list. None of Laurie's recent posts
amount to anything that I would call "flaming". I suspect most of us,
at one time or another, have been "guilty" of making similar
forthright comments and I suspect that few of us could give any
guarantee that we won't do so again in the future.
>
>Why don't we do as Jay suggested and get back to what we are here for
>and no longer let one person distract us from that.
>Trudy
Yes, but I think the current argument highlights some very important
issues which genuinely need to be worked through. What is "racism"?
What is "racist"? If we are not allowed (or feel it is unwise) to use
the words, then what can be substituted for it? What strategies are
needed to deal with "racism' and other relevant forms of
discrimination? What are the implications of all this for the
reconciliation process? How do we deal with the very prevalent
acceptance of Howard's "new political correctness" and the underlying
uninformed, cradle based, racism of many (perhaps most) white
Australians?
>
Cheers
Rod Hagen
--
Rod Hagen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hurstbridge, Victoria, Australia
WWW http://www.netspace.net.au/~rodhagen
-------------------------------------------------------
RecOzNet2 has a page @ http://www.green.net.au/recoznet2 and is archived at
http://www.mail-archive.com/
To unsubscribe from this list, mail [EMAIL PROTECTED], and in the body
of the message, include the words: unsubscribe announce or click here
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20announce
This posting is provided to the individual members of this group without permission
from the
copyright owner for purposes of criticism, comment, scholarship and research under
the "fair
use" provisions of the Federal copyright laws and it may not be distributed further
without
permission of the copyright owner, except for "fair use."
RecOzNet2 is archived for members @
http://www.mail-archive.com/recoznet2%40paradigm4.com.au/
