Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

roachboy · 03-01-2006, 09:46 AM

politics is a strange place--i find that i have a number of modes in which i operate here, at least one of which (the denunication of the lumpenconservatives) i see as not really functioning as i would prefer.
i think i am going to retire it.
but i should explain why that move happens.

for marx, the lumpenproletariat was a social group that he understood as having "no political consciousness" that moved "whichever way the wind blows"---he calls them a "sack of potatoes" at once point. which i like. i adapted the term to dismiss the type of post that i find the most irritating---those which simply recycle the conservative talking points of the moment, that offer no background, demonstrate no thought, provide no possibility of interaction beyond name-calling and spitball throwing.

i take this style of posting to be little more than trolling--but i also suspect that the folk who pull the string sbehind this type of posting persona are smarter than they let on, so it becomes sometimes interesting to see if they will come out to play a little and actually lay out arguments and defend them.
usually they do not, and it is across the exchanges that happen at the point where this becomes clear that complaints about pesonal attack come in.

there is nothing to do with these posts.
to my mind, they function to drag down the level of discourse in here.
so they become annoying.
from time to time, i drop my usual baroque niceness and move into total dismissal mode.
so it is within that that the category operates.
i generally know exactly who i am referring to when i use the term--but this limited usage does not translate when i write---i have registered this (sometimes, like anyone else, i am slow to see things), so i'm retiring it.

mea culpa, i guess: but the fact is, so far as i am concerned, that the irritant is the lowering of the quality of discussion and the solution is to raise the quality of the posts.

i do not see the usefulness of requiring, or even trying to require a greater level of tolerance for stupid posts. i do not think politics a simple matter of opinion. i think there is a social world..i think politics is about the social world...i think it is legitimate to gather and present information about the world, process the politics of folk with whom i disagree, and juxtapose that processed understanding with information about the world with the aim of generating a basic critique of the position.
that is what political discussion is about.
and i would find it far less alienating to still be here if there was a more consistent possibility of the same kind of approach being taken by folk who disagree fundamentally with my positions.

so if the collective wants to change something about the politics forum, perhaps it could start with some kind of pressure being exerted to raise the intellectual quality of the posts. once that started, i think you would find the flaming to stop---there'd be no need for it---no place for it---because conversations could actually happen.

so it follows that i fundamentally reject the attempts to reduce politics to a matter of opinion, and to attempt, on that basis, to talk about "respect for the opinions of others" not because the politics articulated in a given post is coherent, but simply because it is the opinion of another.

concretely, if i could ask one thing it would be for folk from the right to stop posting as if the discursive framework within which they operate is some kind of natural horizon, is self-evident--when they do that they are not talking to anyone except themselves.

you do not see this kind of approach from the various positions that work outside the conservative frame of reference. this is not a request that anyone abandon their basic positions: more that the assumption be in place that conversation in this space involves a diversity of positions and that it is therefore a good thing if something like a complete position is outlined--because politics is about debate/conversation across positions, not simply within them.

so: you can complain about the lack of consistent respect shown across postions in the context of an increasingly impoverished intellectual space, or you can try to address that impoverishment that is the source of the snippiness. personally, i think that the former is the wrong way around.

but hey, that's just my opinion, man.

03-01-2006, 09:46 AM	#31 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	politics is a strange place--i find that i have a number of modes in which i operate here, at least one of which (the denunication of the lumpenconservatives) i see as not really functioning as i would prefer. i think i am going to retire it. but i should explain why that move happens. for marx, the lumpenproletariat was a social group that he understood as having "no political consciousness" that moved "whichever way the wind blows"---he calls them a "sack of potatoes" at once point. which i like. i adapted the term to dismiss the type of post that i find the most irritating---those which simply recycle the conservative talking points of the moment, that offer no background, demonstrate no thought, provide no possibility of interaction beyond name-calling and spitball throwing. i take this style of posting to be little more than trolling--but i also suspect that the folk who pull the string sbehind this type of posting persona are smarter than they let on, so it becomes sometimes interesting to see if they will come out to play a little and actually lay out arguments and defend them. usually they do not, and it is across the exchanges that happen at the point where this becomes clear that complaints about pesonal attack come in. there is nothing to do with these posts. to my mind, they function to drag down the level of discourse in here. so they become annoying. from time to time, i drop my usual baroque niceness and move into total dismissal mode. so it is within that that the category operates. i generally know exactly who i am referring to when i use the term--but this limited usage does not translate when i write---i have registered this (sometimes, like anyone else, i am slow to see things), so i'm retiring it. mea culpa, i guess: but the fact is, so far as i am concerned, that the irritant is the lowering of the quality of discussion and the solution is to raise the quality of the posts. i do not see the usefulness of requiring, or even trying to require a greater level of tolerance for stupid posts. i do not think politics a simple matter of opinion. i think there is a social world..i think politics is about the social world...i think it is legitimate to gather and present information about the world, process the politics of folk with whom i disagree, and juxtapose that processed understanding with information about the world with the aim of generating a basic critique of the position. that is what political discussion is about. and i would find it far less alienating to still be here if there was a more consistent possibility of the same kind of approach being taken by folk who disagree fundamentally with my positions. so if the collective wants to change something about the politics forum, perhaps it could start with some kind of pressure being exerted to raise the intellectual quality of the posts. once that started, i think you would find the flaming to stop---there'd be no need for it---no place for it---because conversations could actually happen. so it follows that i fundamentally reject the attempts to reduce politics to a matter of opinion, and to attempt, on that basis, to talk about "respect for the opinions of others" not because the politics articulated in a given post is coherent, but simply because it is the opinion of another. concretely, if i could ask one thing it would be for folk from the right to stop posting as if the discursive framework within which they operate is some kind of natural horizon, is self-evident--when they do that they are not talking to anyone except themselves. you do not see this kind of approach from the various positions that work outside the conservative frame of reference. this is not a request that anyone abandon their basic positions: more that the assumption be in place that conversation in this space involves a diversity of positions and that it is therefore a good thing if something like a complete position is outlined--because politics is about debate/conversation across positions, not simply within them. so: you can complain about the lack of consistent respect shown across postions in the context of an increasingly impoverished intellectual space, or you can try to address that impoverishment that is the source of the snippiness. personally, i think that the former is the wrong way around. but hey, that's just my opinion, man. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite