Comments - Wendell Berry - always relevant and poignant - Occupy Cafe2024-03-28T08:37:15Zhttp://www.occupycafe.org/profiles/comment/feed?attachedTo=6451976%3ABlogPost%3A13728&xn_auth=noAnd let us recall that this c…tag:www.occupycafe.org,2011-11-29:6451976:Comment:143092011-11-29T20:35:47.726ZRobert Riversonghttp://www.occupycafe.org/profile/RobertRiversong
<div><p>And let us recall that this conflict began when you came to "my" blog, invited me to investigate your Reconomy site (by including the link), and then falsely accused me of a logical fallacy which you demanded that I acknowledge as a precondition for any discussion of the merits of your ideas.</p>
<p>So, quite evidently, it was you who chose to create an insurmountable obstacle to dialogue with a false accusation for which you required a confession from me. This was just one more…</p>
</div>
<div><p>And let us recall that this conflict began when you came to "my" blog, invited me to investigate your Reconomy site (by including the link), and then falsely accused me of a logical fallacy which you demanded that I acknowledge as a precondition for any discussion of the merits of your ideas.</p>
<p>So, quite evidently, it was you who chose to create an insurmountable obstacle to dialogue with a false accusation for which you required a confession from me. This was just one more underhanded method of exerting control over the terms of discussion, no less than "moderating" comments which you are unwilling to hear.</p>
</div>
<p> </p> Further, what you call "perso…tag:www.occupycafe.org,2011-11-29:6451976:Comment:142482011-11-29T20:25:05.859ZRobert Riversonghttp://www.occupycafe.org/profile/RobertRiversong
<p>Further, what you call "personal attacks" are the same kind of judgements that #OWS levies against the 1%. If we refuse to tolerate such behaviors when "they" engage in them, we should be even more willing to challenge one another when we see the same dysfunctional behaviors here. </p>
<p>Further, what you call "personal attacks" are the same kind of judgements that #OWS levies against the 1%. If we refuse to tolerate such behaviors when "they" engage in them, we should be even more willing to challenge one another when we see the same dysfunctional behaviors here. </p> Also, note the protective rat…tag:www.occupycafe.org,2011-11-29:6451976:Comment:141552011-11-29T20:22:48.914ZRobert Riversonghttp://www.occupycafe.org/profile/RobertRiversong
<p>Also, note the protective rationalization about "your pages". This site is not yours - it is a public site on which you are granted the privilege of creating pages to offer your own ideas. </p>
<p>Another core issue of #OWS is that private ownership and control (particularly of ideas and public spaces) undermines democracy and the health of society.</p>
<p>So, when you claim "your pages", you are really claiming personal control over part of the public discussion space. You might have an…</p>
<p>Also, note the protective rationalization about "your pages". This site is not yours - it is a public site on which you are granted the privilege of creating pages to offer your own ideas. </p>
<p>Another core issue of #OWS is that private ownership and control (particularly of ideas and public spaces) undermines democracy and the health of society.</p>
<p>So, when you claim "your pages", you are really claiming personal control over part of the public discussion space. You might have an argument for such control over a personal blog site that you created, but no such rationalization can apply to a space dedicated to free and open public discourse.</p> Kevin,
What you really mean…tag:www.occupycafe.org,2011-11-29:6451976:Comment:141542011-11-29T20:17:33.330ZRobert Riversonghttp://www.occupycafe.org/profile/RobertRiversong
<p>Kevin, </p>
<p>What you really mean is that you won't tolerate any judgements, about either your ideas or your behavior, which reflect badly on the image you choose to present. You will censor any comments which you choose to take personally, regardless of their merit or their value to the broader discussion. </p>
<p>It is your behavior which undermines the creative potential of uninhibited and free-flowing ideas, thoughts and - yes - even judgements (the appropriate use of the mind). And,…</p>
<p>Kevin, </p>
<p>What you really mean is that you won't tolerate any judgements, about either your ideas or your behavior, which reflect badly on the image you choose to present. You will censor any comments which you choose to take personally, regardless of their merit or their value to the broader discussion. </p>
<p>It is your behavior which undermines the creative potential of uninhibited and free-flowing ideas, thoughts and - yes - even judgements (the appropriate use of the mind). And, far worse, your censorious behavior is in diametrical contradiction to the very core of the #OWS movement (even as you, yourself, have articulated it). </p>
<p>I have zero tolerance for secrecy, control, censorship or manipulation - and even less tolerance for hypocrisy and intellectual dishonesty. A site dedicated to open conversation and the exploration of ideas should do likewise.</p>
<p>[And note that you are welcome to say anything you want on my blog pages, regardless of merit, style or even intent - and you have no qualms about taking advantage of my openness while refusing to reciprocate.]</p>
<p> </p> I appreciate your taking the…tag:www.occupycafe.org,2011-11-29:6451976:Comment:145022011-11-29T19:34:51.763ZKevin Parcellhttp://www.occupycafe.org/profile/KevinParcell
<div class="xg_user_generated"><p>I appreciate your taking the time to consider my post, but I do not permit comments on any of my pages that contain personal attacks of any kind, regardless of the merit of other opinions expressed. If you delete the passages that offer your opinions about people, then please resubmit.</p>
<p>Very few forums tolerate such posts because most people will not stay in communities that permit it. I suspect that the moderators here will realize that and delete such…</p>
</div>
<div class="xg_user_generated"><p>I appreciate your taking the time to consider my post, but I do not permit comments on any of my pages that contain personal attacks of any kind, regardless of the merit of other opinions expressed. If you delete the passages that offer your opinions about people, then please resubmit.</p>
<p>Very few forums tolerate such posts because most people will not stay in communities that permit it. I suspect that the moderators here will realize that and delete such messages or accept that this site will eventually die.</p>
<p>I wonder how many more people would be participating in discussions here now if personal attacks were prohibited.</p>
</div> This is the comment I attempt…tag:www.occupycafe.org,2011-11-29:6451976:Comment:144032011-11-29T17:30:35.999ZRobert Riversonghttp://www.occupycafe.org/profile/RobertRiversong
<p>This is the comment I attempted to post to Kevin Parcell's <a href="http://www.occupycafe.org/profiles/blogs/a-suggestion-for-your-consideration">http://www.occupycafe.org/profiles/blogs/a-suggestion-for-your-consideration</a> but which has been blocked for "moderation":</p>
<p><em>"There is generally an assumption that the "specific purpose" of any movement must first be put forward. Recent research and recent history shows that this is a mistaken assumption."</em></p>
<p>Clearly, you have…</p>
<p>This is the comment I attempted to post to Kevin Parcell's <a href="http://www.occupycafe.org/profiles/blogs/a-suggestion-for-your-consideration">http://www.occupycafe.org/profiles/blogs/a-suggestion-for-your-consideration</a> but which has been blocked for "moderation":</p>
<p><em>"There is generally an assumption that the "specific purpose" of any movement must first be put forward. Recent research and recent history shows that this is a mistaken assumption."</em></p>
<p>Clearly, you have not studied the vast sweep of social and political history. Nor do you seem to understand the nature and evolution of social-change movements. </p>
<p>A broad social movement does not coalesce around a "specific purpose" but around a shared sense of what is wrong, and that is precisely what sparked both the Tea Party and #OWS. </p>
<p><em>"#Occupy is rooted in the wide belief among people in existing democratic states that the voice of the people has been usurped by a minority."</em> </p>
<p>That is hardly the basis of the OWS movement. It is, rather, a widespread belief that the resources of society are skewed almost entirely to a very small minority to the detriment of the overwhelming majority. It is fundamentally an economic complaint, not a political one. That's why it began at Wall Street rather than DC. </p>
<p>But no successful social movement remains at that initial inchoate stage. There are many historical analyses of the stages of movements, with anywhere from 4 to 8 identifiable steps toward success. A sense of grievance provides the broadest common denominator for initial formation, but that must shift to a common sense of purpose, with specific goals and strategies if it is to have legs. </p>
<p>Such goals and strategies are already emerging, both from the general assembly process and from small group "think tanks" like this NING site. The 99% Declaration and its National General Assembly is, perhaps, the most concrete example of that next step. </p>
<p>The third step will require actively organizing support for a program or agenda, and then staging actions to both popularize it and push it forward. If OWS never progresses beyond listening to everyone's voice, then it will build nothing but a Tower of Babel.</p> Kevin Parcell - you're a hypo…tag:www.occupycafe.org,2011-11-29:6451976:Comment:141442011-11-29T17:11:02.727ZRobert Riversonghttp://www.occupycafe.org/profile/RobertRiversong
<p><strong>Kevin Parcell - you're a hypocrite and an intellectual coward.</strong> And niether is that an ad hominem argument, since it is a logical conclusion based on your actions here rather than an attempt to undermine your arguments.</p>
<p>Kevin Parcell falsely accuses me of making ad hominem arguments as an excuse to avoid an honest debate about the merits of his Reconomy proposal, and blogs about the centrality and importance to OWS of "listening to every voice" while moderating (viz.…</p>
<p><strong>Kevin Parcell - you're a hypocrite and an intellectual coward.</strong> And niether is that an ad hominem argument, since it is a logical conclusion based on your actions here rather than an attempt to undermine your arguments.</p>
<p>Kevin Parcell falsely accuses me of making ad hominem arguments as an excuse to avoid an honest debate about the merits of his Reconomy proposal, and blogs about the centrality and importance to OWS of "listening to every voice" while moderating (viz. censoring) comments to his home page and his blogs.</p>
<p> </p> "...then what is the NET bene…tag:www.occupycafe.org,2011-11-29:6451976:Comment:143052011-11-29T16:36:08.084ZRobert Riversonghttp://www.occupycafe.org/profile/RobertRiversong
<p>"...then what is the NET benefit?"</p>
<p>Even when I don't intend it, I'm a punographer.</p>
<p>"...then what is the NET benefit?"</p>
<p>Even when I don't intend it, I'm a punographer.</p> The Internet itself had becom…tag:www.occupycafe.org,2011-11-28:6451976:Comment:141232011-11-28T23:40:46.583ZRobert Riversonghttp://www.occupycafe.org/profile/RobertRiversong
<p>The Internet itself had become "the most significant surveillance machine that we have ever seen," Assange said…"It's not an age of transparency at all ... the amount of secret information is more than ever before," adding that information flows in but is not flowing out of governments and other powerful organizations. "The technology gives and the technology takes away," he added.</p>
<p>The important question to ask about any technology is not "does it benefit we the people" but "who…</p>
<p>The Internet itself had become "the most significant surveillance machine that we have ever seen," Assange said…"It's not an age of transparency at all ... the amount of secret information is more than ever before," adding that information flows in but is not flowing out of governments and other powerful organizations. "The technology gives and the technology takes away," he added.</p>
<p>The important question to ask about any technology is not "does it benefit we the people" but "who benefits most". If the WWW offers unprecedented connectivity but also traps us into a digital web that is easily mined by powers and principalities, then what is the NET benefit?</p>
<p> </p> I think Berry's we never real…tag:www.occupycafe.org,2011-11-28:6451976:Comment:137952011-11-28T23:03:59.616ZDavid Eggletonhttp://www.occupycafe.org/profile/DavidEggleton
<p>I think Berry's <em>we never</em> really means <em>enough of us did not</em>, since Illich, his readers and some influenced by them did consider that technology had trapped our neighbors and ourselves. Not enough of us got the word out.</p>
<p>What important messages are we failing to share and spread today?</p>
<p>I think Berry's <em>we never</em> really means <em>enough of us did not</em>, since Illich, his readers and some influenced by them did consider that technology had trapped our neighbors and ourselves. Not enough of us got the word out.</p>
<p>What important messages are we failing to share and spread today?</p>