|
otto:
first off, the "things you didnt say" in your post resulted in speculations (trying to figure out what you were trying to say) because you didnt actually spell out your argument. all the "so what you are saying is..." statements were basically trying to figure out what you were on about.
one of the other ways to look at the op was/is to think about the relations that *might* persist between the ways in which southeastern states used the discourse of "states rights" in the reconstruction period (and after) and their usages now.
this doesn't have to be a party-line issue.
the other possible issue--whether your "racism is racism" claim means anything outside the narrow world of ward connerly and so forth---is another matter. that one would probably be more predictably partisan, were you to push that way--but feel free to do as you like if you want to continue an interaction. personally, i have no committment either way--ball's in your court.
so if you want to reframe and have a conversation, then fine--but in the last post from you, you didnt go anywhere near that direction, preferring instead to do a "yeah well you're a democrat and your party has had racists involved with it too"---which bizarrely enough could be read as conceding the point that host is making while at the same time trying to disable the position from which he makes that point.
o yeah---for what it's worth, i dont particularly identify with the democratic party---i understand myself politically as well to the left of them---and that's one of many reasons why i found the approach you took in no. 24 to be so odd---i could see you trying to stuff people into a little box and then attack the box.
i cant speak for host as to his relation to the democratic party, but i suspect that it's not all that different. just saying.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|