[Vision2020] Intoleristas (was Re: Who Dat?)

Paul Rumelhart godshatter at yahoo.com
Sun Nov 23 18:56:08 PST 2008


Ted Moffett wrote:
> I am surprised that you were mentioned on Courtney's right-mind.us 
> <http://right-mind.us> in the context of the so called local 
> "Intoleristas."  Anyone following your comments on Vision2020 would 
> know you have consistently objected to the extent of the critical 
> focus on Christ Church and its associated businesses and schools.  
> They should regard you as a moderating influence on attacks against 
> their church.

That's what I would have thought, too. 

>  
> However, I am not surprised at all that your comment on corporations 
> and profit was taken out of context and its meaning distorted on 
> Courtney's blog.  Several of my Vision2020 posts have ended up on 
> Courtney's right-mind.us <http://right-mind.us>, with their meaning 
> distorted and then criticised; and this has happened to numerous 
> others who post to Vision2020.  As you roughly stated, you are being 
> lumped in with the "leftists" or "liberals" on Vision2020, stereotyped 
> for the sake of whatever controversial content you offer to jazz up 
> Courtney's blog.

A viewpoint they can laugh at, yeah.  I noticed nobody tried to really 
address my point, they just pointed at it and laughed.  Ah well, 
suddenly I'm back in the third grade.

>  
> They "/tend/ to paint with too broad a brush..." you wrote.  Tend?  
> They flat out do to the extreme, against those who simply defend a 
> basic US Constitutional principle, the separation of church and 
> state.  The fact your comment about Jesus and the presidency became 
> fodder for Courtney's blog is a clear demonstration.

I was giving them the benefit of the doubt :)  I don't read his blog, 
but I do sometimes follow links from Vision2020 to it.  That's where I 
ran across my post. 

>  
> Others on Vision2020 have explored the type of Theocracy advocated; 
> thus a firm defense of a secular state and separation of church and 
> state simply cannot stand.  This might explain to you why many are 
> more critical of the point of view involved here than you apparently 
> are.  However, sometimes the critics of Christ Church and its 
> associated entities find conspiracy where none exists, it seems to me; 
> and the personalized attacks are an approach I try to avoid on 
> Vision2020.

I don't follow their theology, but I know more about it than I otherwise 
would because I have a friend who is a member and we like to debate 
things.  My point has always been that I don't care how radical or 
extreme their viewpoint is, or what it would mean if they got their 
way.  They have the right to believe whatever they wish.  That goes for 
them, the KKK, those who would wish to enact sharia law, and whoever 
else is on our particular shit list at the moment.  Should they step 
outside the bounds of simple ideas and start putting their ideas into 
action, then I'm right there with the rest of you to put a stop to it.  
I don't define establishing businesses and opening schools and holding 
get-togethers in Friendship Square the type of "action" I'm referring 
to, though.

>  
> Of course, I am a total Pollyanna to expect personalized attacks to 
> disappear from public discourse, for discussion to focus on ideas, 
> reason and fact.  But faith in the improvability of humanity is an 
> underlying assumption of liberalism, so perhaps my attempts to take 
> the high ground in discussions via avoiding personal attacks reveals 
> my Weltanschauung.  Conservatives are more likely to accept that 
> inequality, poverty, war, greed, prejudice and hatred are embedded in 
> humanity, so society should not, indeed cannot, engineer these 
> realities out of existence.  The attempt is foolish, and can do more 
> harm than good.  Liberals tend to believe in the Utopian ideals of a 
> perfected humanity.

I think I'm just as Pollyanna about this as you are.  I see the bad 
side, but still hold out hope for the good.

>  
> I am inclined to agree with the conservative view on the nature of 
> humanity, at least at this point in human history.  But our species is 
> very very young; I think humanity, if we survive the impacts of our 
> ignorance and destructive impulses, will eventually make heaven on 
> Earth.  But if we cannot limit the destructive side of our nature, the 
> future is bleak.  There is thus no other option but to try, even if 
> futile.

The destructive side sells newspapers, and is useful for controlling the 
population.  That's why we see so much about it.  I feel, deep down in 
my heart, that it's overstated by quite a bit.  You can always look past 
the gruff exterior and find good in most anybody.  Sometimes they hide 
it well, is all.

Paul





More information about the Vision2020 mailing list