[Vision2020] NYTimes: The Big Hate
Joe Campbell
philosopher.joe at gmail.com
Sun Jun 14 21:35:43 PDT 2009
Paul,
It is hard for me to figure out where our disagreement lies. I've
never criticized anyone whose beliefs have never been manifested in
any kind of action. After all, how would I know?
Nor do I mind disagreement. It would be difficult to be successful in
the field of philosophy if I didn't tolerate disagreement! Goggle
"Joseph Keim Campbell free will" if you don't believe that I'm
successful. That's my area.
Part of your problem is that you seem to equate belief with speech but
the two are not the same. There is a big difference between someone
who BELIEVES that I am fat and someone who SAYS that I am fat,
especially if he says it in a way that he doesn't care whether or not
I hear it. Someone who says it, not caring whether I hear it, is being
offensive. Offensive speech is an ACTION, not just a BELIEF.
I am not in favor of laws against offensive speech, loving free speech
as I do. But I obviously have no problem criticizing offensive speech.
After all, any criticism is just more SPEECH.
Paul, what more have I DONE as opposed to SAID in this regard than,
say, Pastor Wilson? (I'm just using him as a local example of the kind
of hate speech I'm talking about here.)
You can't complain about what I SAY about Wilson or about anything
else I say if what I say is no more than my BELIEFS -- for those are
innocuous and beyond criticism. That is why you think you don't need
to speak out against Wilson, right?
On the other hand, if you agree that if someone SAID I was fat, I'd
have a right to complain about it, then you'd have to agree that I
have a right to complain about Wilson. After all, talk about slavery
"As it Was" has got to be even more offensive to blacks in general
than talk about my fatness is to me. Still, my complaints are no less
speech (or writings, in either case) than are his offensive words.
So what I don't get is why you remain more or less silent about
Wilson's hate speech yet have no problem criticizing me. The story so
far does not wash.
Joe Campbell
On Jun 14, 2009, at 5:15 PM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com>
wrote:
> Joe,
>
> I'm not Dan, but I'd like to answer this one.
>
> My response to this is somewhat ironic, because I admonished you
> earlier for drawing lines in the sand. But... there is one line I
> do draw:
>
> What goes on inside your skull is your own business.
>
> So if someone does believe that the holocaust never happened, then I
> do think they are entitled to their opinion. The same thing goes
> with the supposed Shangri La of southern slavery. I may think they
> are wrong (which, as it happens, I do), but they are still entitled
> to their opinions. They are entitled to speak about it publicly,
> and they are entitled to try to sway others to their cause. People
> who believe differently are free to critique their ideas.
>
> I'd hate to live in a world where not simply stating a contrary
> opinion, but even just holding a contrary belief is not acceptable.
> Paul
>
> Joe Campbell wrote:
>> Dan,
>>
>> Are you saying that people are ENTITLED to believe that the
>> holocaust never happened? That seems like a radical view to me. I
>> feel comfortable drawing the line on the other side of crazy,
>> thank you very much.
>>
>> I find it interesting that you and Paul and others have no trouble
>> calling me out for my beliefs -- I'm biased because I think
>> historical revisionism is wrong, or whatever your reason was --
>> but you don't want to say anything against those who deny the
>> holocaust or who claim that slavery wasn't so bad.
>>
>> That is one strange -- or politically convenient -- set of beliefs!
>>
>> Joe Campbell
>>
>> On Jun 14, 2009, at 2:46 PM, "Dan Carscallen" <areaman at moscow.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Joe,
>>>
>>> I think people are entitled to their opinion.
>>>
>>> I don't necessarily have to agree with their opinion. Nor do I
>>> have to
>>> agree with yours.
>>>
>>> As Paul wondered earlier, why do we have to draw lines in the
>>> sand? Why
>>> must we search for divisiveness? I'd just as soon get along.
>>>
>>> DC
>>>
>>> p.s. my initial post was lighthearted in nature. I thought you'd
>>> "get"
>>> it. Sunil and Carl would have!
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Joe Campbell [mailto:philosopher.joe at gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2009 2:27 PM
>>> To: Dan Carscallen
>>> Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] NYTimes: The Big Hate
>>>
>>> Is it that I'm biased or that you are too afraid to buck the Wilson
>>> camp for fear of losing votes?
>>>
>>> Well, we can test it.
>>>
>>> Don't you think that Wilson's revisionism about US slavery is just
>>> as
>>> bad as the denial of the holocaust; if not, why not?
>>>
>>> My guess is you won't answer this question -- which is a bit of the
>>> very problem I'm trying to note.
>>>
>>> Joe Campbell
>>>
>>> On Jun 14, 2009, at 1:27 PM, "Dan Carscallen" <areaman at moscow.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Joe,
>>>>
>>>> Your bias is showing.
>>>>
>>>> DC
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com
>>>> [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com] On Behalf Of Joe Campbell
>>>> Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2009 1:21 PM
>>>> To: g. crabtree
>>>> Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] NYTimes: The Big Hate
>>>>
>>>> I haven't heard of half these people. Of these, most are not
>>>> mainstream in the Fox is; of the others they are not as bad as Fox.
>>>> Nor do I expect someone who defends Wilson's book in slavery to be
>>>> able to notice how offensive Fox is.
>>>>
>>>> Joe Campbell
>>>>
>>>> On Jun 14, 2009, at 10:41 AM, "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> If you imagine that MSNBC with Olbermann, Madow, and Mathews,
>>>>> Newsweek and Evan Thomas, and taxpayer funded NPR with Jeffery
>>>>> Dvorkin, Nina Totenberg, Terry Gross and Michele Norris doesn't
>>>>> put
>>>>> a particularly and decidedly liberal spin on its "information"
>>>>> then
>>>>> you're even thicker than I previousimg20090614171449533ly
>>>>> imagined. No mean feat, that.
>>>>>
>>>>> g
>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Campbell"
>>>>>
>>>> <philosopher.joe at gmail.com
>>>>
>>>>> To: "Paul Rumelhart" <godshatter at yahoo.com>
>>>>> Cc: "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com>; <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>>>>> Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2009 5:41 AM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] NYTimes: The Big Hate
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Paul,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And what does this have to do with anything I've said? You're
>>>>>> obviously reading something into my post that I did not say.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fox news is a disgusting example of bias, different in degree
>>>>>> from
>>>>>> any other news organization, IMO. That you would follow Tom's
>>>>>> post
>>>>>> with some claim that "Everyone does it" strikes me as
>>>>>> irresponsible since it just muddys the water. Not every
>>>>>> organization is biased in the way Fox is. Someone needed to
>>>>>> point
>>>>>> that out and I did so. That is all there is to it. I made no
>>>>>> comments about conservative news organizations in general, just
>>>>>> the one bad apple.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Joe Campbell
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jun 14, 2009, at 1:21 AM, Paul Rumelhart
>>>>>> <godshatter at yahoo.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Joe Campbell wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is precisely why I'm disagreeing with Paul. Folks like you
>>>>>>>> have got him convinced that the NY Times is as bad as Fox News.
>>>>>>>> What a joke!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nowhere did I say that the NY Times is as bad as Fox News.
>>>>>>> All I
>>>>>>> said was that all news has bias. That includes both the NY
>>>>>>> Times
>>>>>>> and Fox News, but it says nothing about the amount of bias
>>>>>>> relative to each other.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You've drawn a line in the sand. There is a "right" that
>>>>>>> watches
>>>>>>> only Fox News, and there is a "left" that reads only the NY
>>>>>>> Times. The truth is, that line doesn't really exist as a line.
>>>>>>> If you really look at it, the right and left ideologies cover
>>>>>>> so
>>>>>>> much territory that you can't help but agree with a few
>>>>>>> concepts
>>>>>>> "across the line".
>>>>>>> If we're ever going to come back together again as a country, we
>>>>>>> have to throw that crap out the window. All of us have to do
>>>>>>> this. Instead of looking for where we might agree, we're
>>>>>>> highlighting the differences.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Paul
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> =======================================================
>>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>>> http://www.fsr.net
>>>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>>> =======================================================
>>>>
>>>> =======================================================
>>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>>> http://www.fsr.net
>>>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>>> =======================================================
>>>>
>>> =======================================================
>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>>> http://www.fsr.net
>>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>> =======================================================
>>>
>>
>> =======================================================
>> List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the
>> communities of the Palouse since 1994. http://www.fsr.net
>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>> =======================================================
>>
>>
>
>
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list