[lit-ideas] Re: Censorship
- From: "Mike Geary" <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 13:16:07 -0500
Brian:
>> With all due, my point is that the posts were nowhere near a majority
>> conservative. <<
That's certainly not my impression, but then, I pay more attention to stormy
skies than halcyon ones. It's much too late (deleted) to go back and do a
left-right count -- maybe Mr. Camp can oblige us. Proven wrong, I'd be
willing to apologize.
>> M.A. Camp's great failure appears to be in understanding that some in this
>> group, including its moderator, are intolerant of other points of view and
>> for the crime of not possessing those views but merely pointing out they
>> exist they are silenced.<<
I strongly disagree with Andreas' chiding or monitoring anyone on this list or
anywhere. He is the one, however, who went out and founded the list when all
of us others were wringing our hands after David Myers, objecting to leftwing
thought, closed down Phil-Lit. I thought that a was petty and fascist and
tawdry thing to do. I think the same when Andreas attempts to define what's
acceptable and what's not -- we do not need his protection. Anyone at anytime
can block M. A. Camp's posts and never know that he still exists. It is
Andreas's call, however, and if I don't like it, I can leave and start my own
list. I wish Andreas would reconsider. We're all grown ups here. I agree
with what most of the people who have weighed in on this issue have said --
that it's rude and discordant with the goals of the list to submit passages
without any comment. There are plenty of clipping services available to us
all. Ideas as ideas don't much impress me, ideas as they affect the lives of
people I know (people I know for the most part only as a voices on the list) do
interest me. A certain L. H. would submit long passages from books he was
currently reading. But he always used the passages to advance a thought or as
the springboard for a rant against Marxist-Leftist Liberals. I enjoyed reading
his posts -- well, sometimes -- because it was interesting to see how politics
and personality and life history and values and all those things that make up a
person fit together. Some people prefer not to be a person on line -- that's
their business as I see it. But it seems a waste of time. Why? one wonders.
Does anyone seriously think they're going to convert anyone else through this
list?
Mike Geary
Memphis
----- Original Message -----
From: Brian
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, October 15, 2005 12:27 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Censorship
Hi Mike, thanks for the welcome back.
I forgot to mention the recent Joe Conason article and the Katrina
rebuilding piece with the quote from Clinton's former chief of staff against
the ownership society. If you peruse the archives you'll find a high number of
moderate and leftist pieces but that doesn't make for the sexier controversy of
conservative viewpoints.
Best,
Brian
On Oct 14, 2005, at 11:25 PM, Mike Geary wrote:
Hi, Brian,
I join RP in welcoming you back.
I don't have any quarrels with M. A. Camp submitting his references to 98%
right wing bull shit essays. In fact, it was the 2% left wing essay references
that won me over. M. A. Camp obviously feels that he's fulfilling a public
service by bring to the attention of a liberal audience the thought process of
conservatives. And I can appreciate that. But I must say that though none of
the essays has made me waver in my convictions in the slightest, still I've
found that the essays by conservative thinkers not only predictable but
fulfilling all my prejudices against conservatism -- of course, that could just
be my prejudice. Who knows? Liberals, no doubt, might not be any more open
minded than conservatives, though we certainly like to think we are, but so
what? It's all about sex and money. Conservatives want money. Liberals want
sex. Each thinks each is sick. Conservatives are willing to pay for sex
(because they have money), whereas Liberals want free sex. Women are the
problem. Liberals woo women with the promise of taxing rich conservatives to
pay for child care -- the product of free sex. Conservatives take an oath of
abstinence, as Jesus would do, with payment under the table for "fuck ups".
So, you see, dear Brian, it ain't that liberals are narrow minded, it's just
that we're more fuck focused.
Hope that explains a lot,
Mike Geary
Memphis
Other related posts:
