>
>
> >
> > Thanks for a lecture, but I know people's ambivalence, etc.,
firstly, it wasn't a lecture. it was "data" and it should be addressed as such: limited empiricism of the kind you engaged in when you said that your experience talking to people suggested X about their political position. no, you don't recognize "ambivalence etc" because, well, you wouldn't write it AS "ambivalence, etc" and expect that to suffice for your understanding of people's ways of thinking on the topic. you would actually be capable of fleshing it out. writing it as "ambivalence, etc" suggests to me you don't have a clue what a taxicab driver or bedpan washer might fucking tell you about how to address the healthcare problem in this country.
>and I
> > "don't beat them over the head with the pessimism and with the
> > constant attacks on the inadequacy of their ways of thinking or
> > expressing themselves." My activist work consists not of discussing
> > the ins and outs of the Korean War on e-lists but of supporting local
> > strikers, organizing protests against racial profiling, etc.
you yourself told us you beat soli folks over the head not to long ago when you stepped in to tell them just how screwed up they were. very proud of yourself you were for exposing their false consciousness, they're boug lib ways of thinking, blah blah.
in the archives. check it out.