Michael writes:

> I believe that my original post in this thread identified general
> problems with the reallocation process, and my second post dealt
> with more specific details.  I don't believe that this is
> "sour grapes," "the demonizing of disagreement," nor am I
> "demonizing my neighbors because they have a different view."

> For the moment I want to emphasizes that the posts quoted here do
> not seem to me to deal directly with the issues I raised, but rather
> border on character assassination.  

I would say this is an example of what I'm talking about. 

In your original post, you wrote "What I find most distressing about this
process is that my neighbors care little what means they use as long as
their ends are achieved."

Now, to some, that might be character assassination.

It is at least mind-reading...and very unkind mind-reading at that.
Discussing process, in my view, doesn't absolve one of demonizing
disagreement.  As I wrote in my original post, "It seems like so much of our
civic discussion lately does not recognize legitimate differences of opinion
- someone must be corrupt, or selfish."

When I was neighborhood board president, I received a call from a
councilmember about the proposed Ace Hardware house move. The councilmember
was letting me know a new organization had approached him about moving the
houses. At the time, they were offering to move the houses WITHOUT NRP money
(potentially saving us money) but making them affordable.

So I told the councilmember "sounds great to me" and he should see what the
organization could do. This was really a courtesy call, because the board's
only goals at that point were saving the houses and making them affordable.
No decisions had to be made by us. The new group still would present in
front of our full board at our next meeting.

Since this was between board meetings - which is why the councilmember
called me in the first place - I notified the rest of the board so they were
in the loop.

For this, a board member who opposed moving the houses accused me of being
part of the "good ol' boy network" for having the conversation. My mouth was
agape, and still is. It hurt. Big deal, you say, I'm a big boy. Yup. And
I'll add, as a journalist, I have probably levied the same charge at others
- so it was my karma coming back.

But, from my vantage point, what was going on is that someone who didn't
like my decision (pro-house-move) had decided that my motives must be wrong
and my therefore, my actions corrupt. Not that I was a good person who had
come to a different conclusion for legitimate reasons and was proceeding
ethically.

As I said, I see this all over the place, and part of it is human nature.
There are also times when something IS really wrong, when someone does
something dishonest.

But based on several years of neighborhood involvement - and seeing some
decisions I didn't like - I believe the "demonizing of disagreement" happens
WAY more often than is justified among volunteers. It is a cancer that
drains good people of energy. It's no way to build a city.

So I guess, on some level, I too am making a process argument.

David Brauer
King Field


TEMPORARY REMINDER:
1. Send all posts in plain-text format.
2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible.

________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to