this conversation is going in circles and is ended. On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Robert Naiman <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 2:35 PM, Jim Devine <[email protected]> wrote: >> me: >>>> If my distinguishing between Ahmedinijad and Chávez is merely a matter >>>> of my using an ideological axe, does that say that the two regimes are >>>> substantially the same? >> >> Robert Naiman: >>> You're being deceitful, and you know it. < >> >> Asking a question is "deceitful"? Questions about the real world do >> not imply unique answers. In any event, asking a question is better >> than being insulting. (And insulting me simply encourages me to ask >> sly questions like the one I did -- because it undermines my respect >> for the insulter.) > > I note that you edited out why I thought you were being deceitful. It > was, of course, not because you asked a question. It was because you > asked a rhetorical question suggesting that I think that "the two > regimes are substantially the same," when I already made clear in > previous discussion that the views that you want to attribute to me > are not my views. > >> In any event, Robert's response makes it clearer how our approaches >> differ from each other. >> >>> You just refuse to concede the >>> point that with respect to the provision of social services to the >>> majority, they could have something in common. >> >> Robert seems to be claiming to know my thoughts better than I do, so >> that he knows what "I refuse to concede" more than I. >> >> Among other things, I _never_ denied the fact that Ahmedinijad and >> Chávez could have "something in common." It's like a Venn diagram: >> there's a Ahmedinijad set and a Chávez set and they overlap. I simply >> think that the non-overlap part of the picture is quite important and >> should not be ignored -- unless we lower our standards and accept a >> merely partial story. And this non-overlap part includes the _form and >> methods_ of the provision of social services, which cannot be >> artificially separated from the social services themselves. >> >> That is, "provision of social services" can cover a multitude of sins >> (and good stuff too). Is it Mayor Daley #1, Mayor Daley #2, Hugo >> Chávez, or some other alternative? The medieval lords and Church >> delivered social services to the peasants, but that was quite >> different from an authoritarian/paternalistic welfare state, a >> political patronage machine, a rational/bureaucratic welfare state, or >> a more participatory/democratic system (going from right to left). >> >> In general, there's a big difference between top-down (paternalistic, >> bureaucratic, and/or theocratic) provision of social services and a >> more bottom-up (participatory, democratic) provision of social >> services. That was my point (or my "axe"). To make the contrast >> extreme (and more abstract), social services delivered at the point of >> a gun by theocratic thugs [*] are different from those voted on and >> partially controlled by their beneficiaries.Note that in the first >> case, the thugs delivering the services are likely to deliver a chunk >> of them to themselves. In the second case, the thugs are under popular >> control. >> >>> You're just exhibiting >>> a stubborn attachment to your own previously expressed position. >> >> I haven't noticed Robert changing his position, either. But I don't >> really care whether he changes his position or not. I aim my >> e-missives on pen-l not just at the person I'm responding to but also >> at the "third persons" who read them. They might learn something or >> have something to contribute. >> >> Because I am talking to third persons, I try not to use personal >> pronouns to refer to the person I'm discussing with. I can't say that >> I'm totally successful. By not using personal pronouns, I'm also >> trying to avoid personal insults: I address ideas, facts, logic, etc. >> instead. >> -- >> Jim Devine / It's time to Occupy the New Year! >> >> [*] As far as I know, I am not describing the Iranian method of >> distributing social services here. As noted, I am not an expert on >> what's happening inside Iran. >> _______________________________________________ >> pen-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l > > > > -- > Robert Naiman > Policy Director > Just Foreign Policy > www.justforeignpolicy.org > [email protected] > _______________________________________________ > pen-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
-- Jim Devine / It's time to Occupy the New Year! _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
