| | Kat—no apology called for. And better "ugliness" than blandness. But for the most part, it's not ugliness. It's a mixture of legitimate outrage, impatience, passionate valuing & the occasional excess on the part of people on fire for their convictions. This is not the end of the world; it is what will save the world.
The "gouging" thread exposed a surprising degree of ignorance of Ethics/Markets 101 in some surprising quarters. This was pointed out, sometimes furiously. Those under siege for unawareness of ethical & economic nostrums that most of us here would take for granted got upset. They thought they were being faulted for their desire to see the amelioration of the suffering of fellow-human beings. They responded to those who tried to enlighten them re Ethics/Markets 101 with charges of "callousness," "bloodthirstiness" & the like. And so, as these things tend to do when so stoked, the matter turned into an epic battle, spiced by personal rivalries, animosities, love affairs & Galt-knows-what. That's the way of it. In the process, an incipient divide between the limp & the erect that had already become apparent during the Culture of Therapy/Victimhood discussions became more pronounced. That's the way of it too. There is, as yet at least, no call for anyone to leave or be made to leave. There is vigorous disagreement that sometimes gets inappropriately personal. Big deal. Boo-hoo. We should revert to closing down dissent (ARI) or politely drinking tea with the little finger extended while making small-talk (TOC). Over my dead body!
In the "gouging" dispute, the anti-"gouging" side got well & truly thrashed. They should have the good grace to acknowledge that the thrashing was deserved. Rather than snarl like cornered rats at those who enlightened them, they should be grateful. Equally, those who did the enlightening should demonstrate their good faith by not rubbing salt into wounds inevitably inflicted. The newly-enlightened were not bad; they were merely mistaken or uninformed.
SOLO will never be PC. Terms like "womanish" will never be banned, unless it's to substitute a better term like " old womanish." SOLO is for people with big brains, big hearts, thick skins, hearty senses of humour ... and overpowering senses-of-life. Such people are always going to have fierce disagreements with each other. That, too, is the way of it. The current culture counsels counselling in the face of such rambunctiousness; SOLO, while boasting some eager in-house therapists, would encourage folk in the first instance to toughen up & grow up.
Occasionally, to be sure, there is real ugliness, exemplified by pomo-wankers of whom there are a couple on this very thread. Their vileness is self-evident & inconsequential. Their stench is so clearly alien to the spirit of SOLO that SOLO is not in the least bit tainted by it.
You have the spirit Kat, as does MSK, as does Andy Postema (to mention but one of the heroes of the"gouging" debate—Rick P is another). Yet you & MSK are at Andy's throat. Part of life's rich tapestry, no doubt ... but I'd urge you to sort it! Andy is not a troll or a Randroid; he's a star, just as you & MSK are stars. In different parts of the firmament, to be sure, but stars. So shine on, & belittle not another's gleam.
Linz
|
|
m
-n
sh)
m
