>re: totalitarian? nope, won't fly either...
agreed. misuse of the word in a common sense way: as in someone demanding conformity to a particular interpretation of a theory. so BS to chaz's claim that i'm being a left conservative. i'm am simply criticizing yoshies' intolerant approach to dialogue with other listmembers--a conversation that we have often on LBO and other marxist oriented lists. it's not an attack, and if you want to see it that way, so be it. but what does it mean to claims that someone is ''on the attack" every time someone suggests that a lister change thier approach or tone it down.
as for the rest it stands, apparently huh? cause no one suggested that i was wrong in my characterization there. again, none of this means that i don't respect yoshie. i tried many times to engage her in a conversation and could finally do nothing more than simply laugh at the intolerance and utter failure to actually engage anyone in a conversation for the most part, except catherine who i enticed to the list precisely because i thought yoshie might find catherine interesting--as well as the other australians such as ange and rob. all i really meant by that post was that precisely that which yoshie rejected in her own list practices was being deployed by people she often flamed or attacked to register their concern that she'd left the list--a concern registered more or less strongly depending on the lister. so i thought it amusing. now were yoshie subbed i'd have no doubt that she'd launch into a rant about how tolerance is a liberal capitalist ideal yadda yadda. a rant in fact that i often have a great deal of sympathy for, but the performative contradiction would be similarly amusing--and i'm sure forcefully and well written.
so this is my last ode to yoshie--and it is that. but then i'm no flabby pluralist, nor am i a polemical or defensive pluralist.
kelley "handsomely equipped to fail"