Patrick wrote > however, she has, very consistently in the last 18 months, brought up the > subject of anti-Americanism whenever anyone has expressed doubts about our > foreign policy. and, i repeat, any criticism of bush almost invariably gets > a vague comment about anti-Americanism on the list from kakki.
In my heart and mind I have not done that. I may go back through the archives to audit myself on this. But if everyone who feels offended is honest themselves, they need to consider whether they are projecting something else on me that did not originate with me. > > kakki: I think I have only used that term here twice in the past couple of > years Patrick said: and that's just a lie. kakki lied. My recall is responding to articles sent from certain journalists who I feel have shown a pattern of being against the U.S. every time they write. I am not deliberately lying. This is my recall. It may be faulty and I might go back and see if I contradict myself, but in my heart and mind I would never accuse anyone here of being anti-American for their personal opinions about Bush or war. I think that would be an absolutely ignorant stance to take. > between lister comments and non-lister writing posted here in her comments. > each of us who has posted criticism of bush 43 has felt accused by kakki of anti-Americanism. That's wild to me because I have not done that, even if some think I implied it or wanted to think I implied it. I won't deny that I have questioned some of the views or opinions put forth here, but it's not my style or inclination to just write someone off as being "anti-American." But you know Patrick, I was so shocked by your post the other night that I spent the last few days consumed with trying to determine where this perception may come from. Funny enough, your invocation of McCarthyism led me to wrack my brain trying to come up with an answer. I had an "aha" moment when I recalled (being almost old enough to recall) that the term McCarthy used was "Un-American." THAT term, to me, has a completely different connotation from "anti-American." You can disagree with me here, but I am going from my own definitions of the meanings of both terms. To say someone is "un-American", to me, implies a citizen or perhaps resident of the U.S. who somehow does not fit someone else's proscribed idea of what it is to be a legitimate, genuine "American." McCarthy/McCarthyism is a perfect example of the extremely dark underbelly of political correctness. He stunned and repelled me then and now. To say someone is "un-American" because they dissent in their own damn country is the lowest form of oppression. On the other hand to say an opinion expressed by someone outside the U.S. is "anti-American" is fair game for dispute. We have had a number of people from other countries here who indeed have said that some outside the U.S are, by their words, "anti-American." It is to those sentiments, especially in the time immediately 9/11, that I found issue with. I didn't use the term at all with Chomsky, but rather said I felt he was contemptuous of the "average" American because of the views he puts forth. That is a whole other discussion that, at this point, I'd just as soon let die. > dissent IS patriotism, in a healthy democratic society. I have a friend here on the list for a long time whose politics are completely different than mine. I am so glad that politics never get in the way of our friendship, just like 90% of my friends offlist who may disagree with me on politics. This friend is amazed on some of the attacks on me here and had a theory that perhaps some people are getting some kind of backlash (maybe being accused of being un-American or anti-American) in their other lives outside the list for dissenting and then project on me all their anger, deserved or not. >she responded, "maybe I'm too dense" and "i'm not an intellectual" come on. My perception is that it is some intellectuals who revere Chomsky. What did you want, Patrick? For me to flame you off the face earth instead? I thought my response, while maybe not entirely submissive to your accusations against me, was not extremely offensive in the larger scheme of things. > i don't believe for a second that kakki was unable understand > my viewpoint. she was dishonest, again. You are entitled to your opinion of my reaction. But you may give me too much credit. I'm not some wonder woman who can handle simultaneous attacks which came to me out of left (no pun intended) field when I was focused on specifically discussing Chomsky after a long day. I was honestly perplexed by your accusation. > when are we supposed to think you are stupid, and not responsible for your > views? I am human and indeed sometimes "stupid" as to understanding what someone is accusing me of. I cannot be put into a box, just as I hope I would not put you or anyone into a box, Patrick. > you CAN NOT have it both ways. Never asked for having anything both ways. This is just a discussion list for me. I don't like being flamed, but have become much more numbed to it than I used to. But it is an imperfect medium here. You can't tell when I am smiling or laughing or my tone. We cannot sit on end for hours straight in person and work out just exactly where we all are coming from. I am hopeful that in the end, people do not have to be so polarized and in a war with each other. I am involved in screaming political matches with my friends (not to mention family members) all the time in real life, real time, and at the end we have not demonized each other and love each other very much. My brain or the way it works or perceives things may never be an exact match for some here. That does not make me evil or disingenous or whatever is proscribed in someone else's rule book. Rather than you demonising me or attacking me because I don't match their perceptions, maybe you should just take it as someone else who filters things differently, as I try to do with those here when I don't understand their thought processes. I never deliberately try to attack people here when I don't understand them. I find it curious sometimes, that the people I try the least to offend, feel I am personally offending them. Believe me, I always feel like I'm walking on eggshells with some of them. Some think I am being passive-aggressive which disturbs me, because I abhor passive aggressive people. All I can think is that there is a problem with my writing style which gets misinterpreted perhaps, as cold or too clinical. There are two problems maybe - I try to be polite to people and then it may seem I sound forced or insincere. I also am immersed in legal writing all day and maybe there is some coldness in that style of writing that may carry over here and put people off. See Patrick, I am certainly not all that smart to have it all wired here from the communications end. Kakki
