You can agree with Louis, but it must be admitted that for two weeks Wojtek has been pointing out a flaw in the argument and it took this mocking of the argument to get other than insults from Lou. The argument put forward by Jim B. and Lou does not have any explanatory power. In fact, as Wojtek was pointing out for those who can read is that the logical conclusion of the argument is a racist one. For pointing out the inherent racism of the argument he gets called a racist by Lou. And around and around we go. ----Original Message Follows---- From: "Charles Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [PEN-L:11889] Re: units of analysis (was: wojtek) Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 14:57:07 -0400 I agree with Louis on this issue. Wojtek regularly uses formulations that are not just offensive in form, but white supremacist in content. Then he tries to defend his analyses by accusing his critics of "moralizing" and "intellectual or cultist thirdworldism" , posturing as if he is merely being a militant materialist. It should be possible to openly criticize this as just what it is without being accused of unfair play or flaming. If anything the initiation of any flaming is by Wojtek, not his critics. It is not legitimate scientific method to ban from this list criticisms of racism and white supremacist theory, as if just by being on a progressive list, listers don't truck in left racism. Categorization of analyses as racist is scientific and not primarily sensitivity training. The idea that there are no racist theories or statements on these lists , properly and openly labelled as such, is outrageous. Banning criticisms of racism as bad manners is racist. Charles Brown >>> Louis Proyect <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 09/28/99 01:16PM >>> >Not only is "dummies" pretty mild, but I read Wojtek as using the word in >the specific way of saying "if you take the Blaut perspective seriously one >can lambaste the third-world as being inhabited by dummies." It is mild to you, but--trust me--to an Argentinian or Brazilian leftist it would be highly insulting, in or out of context. Part of the problem with PEN-L is that there is not a single regular poster from a legitimate colonized country. And the last time somebody who even had a marginal connection to such a country--Henry Liu--was here, he resigned in protest over what he regarded as naked racism. Now I know that most people here are glad that he is gone with his constant rejoinders, but I can assure you that anybody from Jamaica, Brazil, Uganda or the Philippines who showed up might have similar reactions, but would not be so vocal in their objections. >I don't believe words can be ripped out of context, the way some people >want to ban HUCK FINN because of its use of the n-word. It's not a matter >of putting a spin on anything. The context is Wojtek's hatred for "third worldism" in general, which was articulated a couple of weeks ago in his excitement over the prospects for a law and order "white hope" Mayoral candidate in Baltimore. >BTW, I don't understand your attack on Wojtek as a "professor." Are >professors always wrong? My problem with Wojtek is that he acting unprofessorial. I try to imagine how language like "third world dummies" would go over here at Columbia in a room with Gayatri Spivak, Manning Marable and Edward Said in attendance. Even uttered in a "sarcastic" fashion, it would earn the speaker nothing but opprobrium. I guess the standards on PEN-L are a lot more lax. Louis Proyect (http://www.panix.com/~lnp3/marxism.html) Rod Hay [EMAIL PROTECTED] The History of Economic Thought Archives http://socserv2.mcmaster.ca/~econ/ugcm/3ll3/index.html Batoche Books http://members.tripod.com/rodhay/batochebooks.html http://www.abebooks.com/home/BATOCHEBOOKS/ ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
