[5181] in Central_America
Re: New quotes for Fri Nov 19
sethf@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (sethf@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)
Fri Nov 19 20:53:23 1993
Jessie:
Far be it from me to deny all the problems women face. But they are
HUMAN problems, faced by men also. Whites, blacks, men, women,
straights, gay. It does no good to take a division, and say all members
of this class of innocent victims, subjugated by the oppressors who
comprise the entirely of the complement. This is not social analysis, it
is the politics of self-despair masquerading as enlightenment. From this
flows the archetypes of Liberal Guilt, excusing as opposed to accusing
criminals by the color of their skins, or the refusal to examine the
militarism of the heads of nations who happen to posses two X
chromosomes (e.g. Margaret Thatcher or Indira Gandhi).
A litany of horrors can be assembled along any line:
You are white. Think of the killing of blacks, due to the hundreds of years
of slavery, discrimination, and exclusion they have undergone. Consider
the brutality, the abduction of people, the shrinking of the black
mind by the laws that forbade education, the rigid class structure that
consigned millions to deprivation and worse.
You are American. What of the devastation of the Earth, the devouring of
Third-World people and cultures, decimating the environment needed by all
of the planet? Wherefore the consumption of resources at a factor several
times greater than proportion, exhausting the resources of every nation.
You are part of the educated elite. Are these the exploiters, living off
the stolen labor of the masses, members of the parasitical intelligentsia
who takes the bread out of the mouths of peasant babies? Typing at a
machine that costs as much as the supply of childhood vaccination for
some cities, how can there be any claim of concern for social justice?
How does it feel to be identified in the oppressive categories instead of
the victim ones?
Hyperbole is no substitute for thought.
I submit you have missed the entire point of the article. It was
about the problem of regarding everything through social lines, and
viewing every dispute or disagreement through these lines. Most
importantly, it was about the fallacy of appropriating every action to
this schema. I do not say you, or anyone else in particular, are
responsible for any or all that is listed in the above. Nor am I saying
their is no greater or lesser, no division, no oppression in the world.
Rather, it is the not-thought of the fanatic, that dismisses
every question and reply with the ready armamentarium of political
litany (no matter how true or moving), that is also a serious threat. It
is the seductive idea of "Doing this injustice matters not, because it
is in service against the (or their exists) greater injustice". To wit:
"I care more about the lives that are being lost than about whether you
think I'm sterotying you unfairly.". How far can you take this? Is it
inconsequential if you commit legal libel? Physical injury? Capital
punishment? At the end of this road, it becomes "What does it matter,
they are only X's", and the pigs become the farmers all over again.
You say:
"In many situations I assume men to be guilty until proven innocent
because I know too many women who didn't, and who were beaten or raped
or killed because of it. Change that for me, and I'll change for you."
Change two words:
"In many situations I assume blacks to be guilty until proven innocent
because I know too many whites who didn't, and who were beaten or raped
or killed because of it. Change that for me, and I'll change for you."
(or vice-versa, if you prefer)
I won't call you bigoted, but I assume you are much less
comfortable with the second statement than the first.
