[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page

Re: Scott Elliots Cynical Ridicule

mgremillion@selu.edu wrote:
> 
> 6 May 1997 07:02:26 CDT@
> Date: Tue, 06 May 1997 06:52:35 -0500 (CDT)
> Subject: Racism and Name Calling
> To: CEDA-L@Cornell.EDU
> Message-id: <01IIJGM3UKMEAKTO33@selu.edu>
> Organization: Southeastern Louisiana University
> MIME-version: 1.0
> Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
> 
> I'm glad I offended some people. First thing, Debbie I've seen you > argue some pretty funky stuff just to pick up a ballot. How do you > sleep at night knowing youwon a round on a Clinton Disad. Second, bad > arguments often win rounds. I can just see a judge explaining to Cal > Fullerton "Yeah, you win the nuke war impact on the bottom but you are > dopping the d-rules on the bottom saying I should never vote for an > immoral policy regardless of the outcome. Racism is immoral therefore > you lose. It may
> Third, How more real world can our argumentation be? Just pull up a > transcript on a Federal or State legislative debate on Affirmative > Action or Schools,
> or taxation (Hell, in Louisiana mandatory car insurance has been > branded as
> a form of racism). Believe me working on Collective guilt works > wonders in the real world. The majority of programs for set asides are > promised upon collective guilt. The whole idea of "my people were > oppressed, give me a buck" is a plea
> for help based upon guilt. So, it may be stupid, but it is how the > "real
> world" argues all of the time. So many people want the civil rights > topic becuase of its "real world" impacts, well why not look to how > the real advocates present their arguments. 


I sit here wondering if you and others have lost the ability to do real
research?  Since when did the Congressional Record or "Legislators"
become the epitome of good debate and good evidence.  Since when is this
the "real" world?  What I think most are arguing for is that we have a
unique opportunity to investigate, debate, and understand the
transformative nature such a topic would provide.

Our ability to evaluate the discursive, the personal, the institutional
or structural, and certainly the political will allow us to uncover the
masked nature of institutional racism, inter-personal prejudice, and
structured misinformation and misrepresentation.

To simply play the cynic because you believe that good evidence resides
in the Record or because you don't believe in the ability of our
community members to rise to the challenge of intellectual adulthood is
saddening.  Maybe we ought to shake things up and give a swift kick in
the ass to those who are unwilling to play nice.

mitch, putting on my boot.
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page