I don’t know if you ever have a look at our Letters page, but if you don’t, you might want to. There are some very interesting letters in there – some of them are brief articles in themselves. I’ve just seen one of that kind, the one at the top of the page (at the moment), a short essay on the Whig interpretation of history and moral relativism (taking issue with an article of ours on the subject), by one Michael Davis. If I had the faintest idea who he was or how to email him, I would ask him if he would like to write an article for us. I wonder if he is the same MD as the MD who wrote some previous letters and quite a few comments here. Anyway, his letter is well worth a read.
Author: Ophelia Benson
-
Serbia Thinks Better of It
Government reverses ban on teaching evolution in schools.
-
Utopia, Freedom, the State, part 2
Norman Geras discusses three models.
-
Powell Goes One Step Farther
‘This was a coordinated effort, not just random violence.’
-
Powell Calls it Genocide
US Secretary of State says killings in Darfur constitute genocide.
-
Because Serbia Doesn’t Have Enough Problems?
Education minister orders schools to stop teaching evolution.
-
Does Truth Matter?
Unswerving allegiance to what you believe is dogmatism, not truth.
-
‘Homophobic’ artists dropped
MOBO (music of black origin) nominations withdrawn after apologies were not forthcoming.
-
Utopia, Freedom, the State
Norman Geras on the Marxian idea of a future stateless utopia.
-
Predictable, Parochial, and Philistine
Why no Xenophon, Suetonius, Kyd, Tasso, Huysmans, Cozzens?
-
Twenty Tiny Little Books
And every single one is by some dead European guy.
-
Shan’t
Okay, I give up, you win.
For months (months? weeks? years? I forget) I’ve been kind of defending CT to my colleague. Kind of – which means admitting they have a tendency to groupthink, to call people trolls just because they disagree with them, but still thinking they (CT, that is) have their good points. But I give it up.
Everyone knows that comments can get out of hand. A lot of blogs don’t have them; a lot have them only for some threads; a lot have them intermittently, disabling them when things get tiresome. It is also sometimes possible to keep things civil by asking people to be civil, and/or by deleting comments when they’re not. I’ve only deleted comments here once – but then that’s not surprising: the people who read B&W are a civil, polite, rational crowd.
So that’s one way to keep things civil. Another way is just to tell people to go fuck themselves – which seems like a fairly oxymoronic method, frankly. Seems to defeat the purpose. Also it seems ill-advised to resort to it just because you disagree with what a commenter has said, as opposed to because the commenter has gotten out of hand. Well – you know what I’m going to say. No, you don’t, quite, because I didn’t actually get sworn at – I got threatened with being sworn at. But I’m afraid I just don’t find that kind of thing conducive to interesting or rewarding discussion. I can get plenty of that kind of thing in my own living room, thank you very much, I don’t need to go elsewhere for it.
But more to the point, I find it too symptomatic of what Jerry S is talking about – too indicative of what he’s been saying all along. Too groupthinky, too orthodoxy-enforcing. So. I’ll just do my talking here, where men are men and the beer is flat.
-
Davies’ Really Dangerous Idea
Natural freedom is good enough, we don’t need the supernatural kind.
-
The Apparent High Road of Pluralism
‘Tolerance’ ends up as intolerance for rational discussion of religion.
-
Petition to End Special Status for Religion in EU
Special respect for religion disturbs the equilibrium of democracy.
-
‘Spiritual Leader’ Endorses Hostage Taking
Omar Bakri Mohammed says hostage taking okay if carried out by terrorists with a just cause.
-
Nick Cohen is All For Liberal Guilt
But a law against religious hatred is an absurd idea.
-
Churchill’s Wife’s Maid’s Sister’s Daughter
OUP, publishers of Dictionary of National Biography, inflated number of women to even things out.
-
At Least Let Us Give Them Names
The twelve Nepalese workers murdered in Iraq had names.
-
More Than Two
There are several sites that have linked to us in the past couple of days on an interestingly wide variety of subjects. I wouldn’t have thought we were all that various. I’d have thought we were focused rather than wide-ranging; narrow rather than broad. But maybe not. Maybe our subject covers more ground than I had quite realized. That’s good, if so. I like a judicious blend of breadth and depth – with just a pinch of coriander.
It was thanks to one such link that I found the articles on the assault on Kenyan author Ngugi wa Thiongo and his wife Mary Njeeri, which Robin Varghese of 3 Quarks Daily connects to Martha Nussbaum on Gujarat and the threats to historian James Laine, and to B&W on that whole large subject. One could also mention Salman Rushdie, and Naguib Mahfouz, and Rushdie’s Japanese translator. So…yes, of course all these things are connected. So the more people who see the connections and join the dots, the better. Greetings, 3 Quarks.
And there’s a new blog called No Credentials (hey, that’s my name), which mentions B&W in the same breath with Alan Sokal, which I take to be one of the best compliments we’ve ever had. There’s a lot of excellent stuff on that blog – too much to summarize or quote briefly: scroll down and read. Read Quackademism #2, and Michael Drout responds, and My favorite Marxist – here’s a bit from that last one:
Berman is different from, say, a David Harvey or a Frederic Jameson, in that he writes fluently and beautifully. Not incidentally, he is also a humane writer: The human heart–even the human soul, as he acknowledges in Adventures–is his real subject; it’s just that for his entire adult life he has believed that Marx’s vision offers the soul its best solace, its greatest hope, and so he commits all of his worldly efforts to that vision.
Well just read them all. Greetings, No Credentials.
And there’s the one at Philosophy et cetera that I mentioned below. Okay, maybe three is not several. But it’s almost several. Well maybe I just thought it was several because each one was so interesting – yes that must be it.
