[lbo-talk] the autumn of the communes?

[// ravi]

On Oct 31, 2011, at 7:43 AM, Charles Turner wrote:
> I think Ms. carpet bomb's suggestion to create a "filter file" is precisely what shouldn't happen. Why not a practice little civility instead of building an electronic suburb here? Everyone in their little filtered hamlets bickering about the neighbors.
> 
> I mostly blew by these threads because they were too painful to read. Not sure if Michael Smith would agree that style and content are inseparable, but I was heartened to see his apology, which I appreciated all the more because it seemed unnecessary, hence simply self-reflective and considerate.
> 

This is good, but what exactly counts as civility? The utterances of “asshole” and “fuck you” offer neat markers that others can point to: “S/he did it first”, but are they really the start of the uncivil behaviour? Also civility is nice, but what of “good faith”? How many argue with an acknowledgement of the possibility that the other person might in fact be right and oneself wrong?

You may say that the lack of actual email filters somehow unites us, but I suspect that’s not the case. Consider the practise of talking past the person but about the person: there is a dispute about some issue. X takes one position and Y takes the opposing view. Others join in. Soon you will notice this behaviour: X finds a Z who agrees with him, and they embark on a discussion of Y, why he or she is deluded or wrong, what his or her mental states are, etc. In the more ballsy instances this approach is used directly in response to X. By constructing a psycho-strawman of X, s/he - and importantly, his/her substantive points - are effectively eliminated i.e., filtered out from view. Little groups can then bicker about their neighbour(s) in broad unfiltered daylight.

	—ravi