Contributors

Tuesday, June 21, 2011

The Conversation (Part The Second)

Continuing the FB discussion with my friend Jim.

Mark: Well, it's your page which means I have no say in what you keep or delete so no offense taken whatsoever. Let's see if we can look at this from another angle. Take a look at this story.

Teacher Blogged About 'Rat-Like' Students

In one posting on her blog she called her students, "out of contol," and "rude, lazy, disengaged whiners."

How exactly do the unions, bureaucracy and political cronyism cause this? What this women describes happens quite often in classrooms. While I find some of the things she said a bit harsh, she's mostly on the mark. This is what teachers have to deal with every day, Jim. Every day. The origin of this problem is a much larger problem with our entire society. It's a failure of parents, community leaders, schools, and peer groups. This is what happens when you allow the mass media to socialize your children.

Go to a school and ask young people to tell you...honestly...if they think they could win American Idol. You will be shocked by the answer. This is what they have been brought up to believe is LIKELY to happen. We have become a quite a bizarre culture when people think that the solution to their problems is winning the lottery.

So, when you characterize the education system in the way you do, you miss key points. Referring me to Sowell is simply further proof that you have embraced an ideology which excuses, encourages and falsely justifies dismissing any liberal point of view. This isn't arrogance on my part but encouragement to continue the work that you are doing in your community.

Essentially, the key problem with education is our overly indulgent society. We don't recognize the importance of education anymore. It's the Michael Jordan Generation. Yesterday, Jim put this video up on his FB wall.



"We want to pay you millions of dollars so we can avoid solving our problems." The last minute and a half or so is the MJG exactly. Until this changes, "failing" schools are going to continue to fail. Of course, he doesn't see this connection.

Jim: Mark, you are again missing the point. The point is not the article about schools, or what's going on in schools. If you'd tried to fairly read what I actually said, you'd see that we share a lot in common. But you are quick to misrepresent and then dismiss any viewpoint with which you disagree. It's lazy, simplistic, dishonest, and arrogant, and it makes discussion impossible.

And now you assert that I've embraced an ideology which dismisses liberal points of view -- because I read a book by Sowell? What is more illiberal than dismissing a book one hasn't read with an easy ad hominem attack? "Oh, it's by Sowell. I already know what it says." Who has the closed mind?

Yet you've decided that I'm the unthinking doctrinaire. And it's obvious that's what you've thought for a while, given your usual dismissal of anything that doesn't validate your views, and your unwillingness to even try to understand why people think differently from you -- you already know why. They can't have arrived at their beliefs through thoughtful analysis or reason; people who disagree with you are simply unthinking dupes and narrow-minded ideologues.

You don't shout people down with a bullhorn like the street-level illiberal thugs, but the effect is just the same.

Since you really believe that I've embraced an ideology which justifies dismissing liberal views (ironic, given that's what you're doing to me), then there really is no point in further discussion.

I'd like to be your friend, but friendship is based on trust and respect -- neither of which you have for me.

Mark: I don't think that about you at all, Jim. I really don't. You have focused in on the criticisms and ignored the compliments. Please go back and read the positives and weigh them accordingly with the other points. I would also urge you to read these words.

I do agree that there are problems with unions, bureaucracy and cronyism. But that is only a part of a much larger problem. Liberal and progressive points of view do have merit and I think you need to ask yourself if Sowell would accept any of them. Honestly, he wouldn't. I have read him extensively and it's frustrating to me that you would use him as an example for parameters that you are quite clearly beyond.

I can't stress this enough. Without you, a community would be lost. That's how much of an effect that someone like you can have in what ails our society!

Jim: Mark, that is exactly and clearly what you communicate. Go back and re-read your comments. The compliments mean little when what you repeatedly express is arrogant dismissal, scornful disdain, and the most uncharitable reading of what I write. I don't recognize hardly anything I believe in the words you put in my mouth. I'm tired of being the target for your bashing of some generic conservative stereotype you've created in your mind.

I have a hard time thinking of a situation in which you have taken seriously the appeals like this which I've made to you -- appeals to step outside your wordlview and try to fairly understand and interact with others who disagree with you. I've not said liberal points of view are without merit; you are the one who is incapable of granting that conservative views can have any merit. You consistently communicate that conservatives only hold their positions through ignorance, apathy, selfishness, and naivete. You've just told me that in this discussion, in fact.

I'm being defensive, or intemperate? You've told me that if I thought harder and looked more broadly at issues, if I studied as you have, then I could come to the insights you've reached. But since I haven't (which you know, how?), I'm only capable of spouting GOP dogma. Again, your assumption is that any thinking person who looks at an issue will agree with you. It's hard to imagine a more disrespectful, dismissive, arrogant response.

Until you can demonstrate any willingness to understand, fairly articulate, and respectfully interact with opposing viewpoints, I'm not interested in discussion. The door is open anytime you want to walk through it on those terms.

I had one more response after this which he has since responded to and I will put them both up tomorrow.

10 comments:

juris imprudent said...

I'm tired of being the target for your bashing of some generic conservative stereotype you've created in your mind.

I know you read these words M, what I don't know is how you can filter them out. All talk of self reflection is hollow and false if you cannot understand these words and how they apply to you. It is like telling a devout believer that there is no God - the words just flow right past their ears.

This just truly boggles my mind.

Heinz Kohut said...

My God. That man of God has pretty much summed you up Mark.

This has got to be a cathartic moment for you.

I almost envy the self-realization that must be rocking your world right now.

This man of God has just told you everything you've been hearing from a majority of your posters for the last several years.

Good to see it Mark. I'm looking forward to future disagreements after this "new" info has really settled in.

Anonymous said...

On an amusing note, I prefer to imagine that he deleted your post from his facebook wall because you DID tell your minister 'friend' he sucked a corporate cock.

If so, perhaps you aren't really that great of a person, Mark.

Add that to your blown mind.

Mark Ward said...

Well, I was wrong about something and did come to understand how differently people perceive things from a vastly different point of view. But it won't be in the way you think and I know you won't like it.

Sorry to disappoint you but my mind's not blown.

Haplo9 said...

A good opportunity for some introspection Mark, not that I think you'll take it. Consider, though, that there are two separate sets of people who have no contact with each other - the conservative-ish people who regularly comment here and this Jim guy. They seem to both be saying the same thing about you. And yet, they can't have compared notes ahead of time. What possible explanation could there be for both parties independently coming to the same conclusion about you?

Serial Thrilla said...

It makes no sense to compare the two. Jim knows Mark personally and most here do not. Mark also dated Jim's wife which means you have to factor in the bias. He's probably pissed that you were lovey dovey with her before he was.

Also, numbers of people all agreeing about one person does not matter. All of you could be wrong and Mark could be right. That's the essence of the problem here that seems to be lost on some of you. You want him to fail because he has discovered some very key flaws in your ridiculous ideology and the only way you can see to counter him is personal attacks and pretending that Republicans really don't say the things they do and you really don't support them. It's pretty chicken shit if you ask me.

Now comes the part where you accuse me of running away from threads just like you do with Mark all the time. It's the same thing. You have nothing to debate because most of your ideas have been miserable failures so you attack the person.I don't debate people with losing ideas and who use such tactics. Say something useful-hell, even different and you might get me to stick around more often. Until then, I'll hop in and defend Mark who is a very astute guy. Mark counters what people say, not who they are. It's not like he attacked him out of the blue which is what you are saying with your fake outrage. Jim said something completely moronic and we hear garbage like this all the time from the right.

Anonymous said...

"numbers of people all agreeing about one person does not matter"

He's right. Especially if it's called 'consensus'.

There is your defender, Mark. Read his post with a critical eye and do some self-reflecting.

juris imprudent said...

Alright Serial Thriller, leftist propagandist and Dennis Kucinich ass-licker. I don't have to read what you say, I already KNOW your opinion before you write it. I will tell you what your opinion is and how absurd it is for you to believe it. Sooner or later, you will thank me for showing you the error of your ways.

Anonymous said...

Jim said something completely moronic and we hear garbage like this all the time from the right.

And what did he say that you are referring to? That teachers unions are all about protectionism, cronyism and self-interest, even at the expense of students?

What part of that is inaccurate, and why?

Mark, Jim conceded that material culture was a big part of the problem. However I didn't see either one of you come up with a solution that will work across broad swathes of the educational system. Fine and good, I don't expect you to solve everything personally, but nonetheless, a solution for the problem you are grumbling about isn't generally available to either of you yet. Your response however was that "Until parents and community leaders re-assert themselves as the primary agents of socialization, union problems won't matter."

In other words, you told him that until you fix the problem neither of you can fix, you can't be bothered with putting any effort into fixing, or even acknowledging, the cronyism, self-interest and protectionism, all problems you can do something about. You completely copped out on him, by effectively saying you don't care about the wall that can be climbed until we first get over the one that can't.

And you wonder why he feels like he's been dismissed out of hand?

Joel Elaine Rifkin said...

"Now comes the part..."

It always does, when you post Serial THRILLA!

But throwing it out there pre-emptively justifies your not coming back to defend your assertions....

newman!