A Letter on Justice and Open Debate

Wed Jul 15 20:43:33 UTC 2020

https://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2020/07/wrongthink.html

It's the Intellectual Dark Singularity! Where on the same strange Tuesday,
Andrew Sullivan gets the sack from New York Magazine.

On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 10:40 AM Mark Thibodeau <jerkyleboeuf at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Bai Weiss is a human stain, not to mention an intellectual lightweight
> spewing  cliched inanities, whose own hiring was a bit of performative
> stunt tokenism meant to prove something (Zeus knows what) to conservatives.
>
> Bet the Times has no regrets about that now, eh wot?
>
> Cheers!
> Yer old pal Jerky
>
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 7:29 AM Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The Human Stain, allusion intended.
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 7:25 AM Kai Frederik Lorentzen <
> > lorentzen at hotmail.de>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Since you mention the NYT ...
> > >
> > > + ... But the lessons that ought to have followed the election—lessons
> > > about the importance of understanding other Americans, the necessity of
> > > resisting tribalism, and the centrality of the free exchange of ideas
> to
> > a
> > > democratic society—have not been learned. Instead, a new consensus has
> > > emerged in the press, but perhaps especially at this paper: that truth
> > > isn’t a process of collective discovery, but an orthodoxy already known
> > to
> > > an enlightened few whose job is to inform everyone else.
> > >
> > > Twitter is not on the masthead of The New York Times. But Twitter has
> > > become its ultimate editor. As the ethics and mores of that platform
> have
> > > become those of the paper, the paper itself has increasingly become a
> > kind
> > > of performance space. Stories are chosen and told in a way to satisfy
> the
> > > narrowest of audiences, rather than to allow a curious public to read
> > about
> > > the world and then draw their own conclusions. I was always taught that
> > > journalists were charged with writing the first rough draft of history.
> > > Now, history itself is one more ephemeral thing molded to fit the needs
> > of
> > > a predetermined narrative.
> > >
> > > My own forays into Wrongthink have made me the subject of constant
> > > bullying by colleagues who disagree with my views. They have called me
> a
> > > Nazi and a racist; I have learned to brush off comments about how I’m
> > > “writing about the Jews again.” Several colleagues perceived to be
> > friendly
> > > with me were badgered by coworkers. My work and my character are openly
> > > demeaned on company-wide Slack channels where masthead editors
> regularly
> > > weigh in. There, some coworkers insist I need to be rooted out if this
> > > company is to be a truly “inclusive” one, while others post ax emojis
> > next
> > > to my name. Still other New York Times employees publicly smear me as a
> > > liar and a bigot on Twitter with no fear that harassing me will be met
> > with
> > > appropriate action. They never are.
> > >
> > > There are terms for all of this: unlawful discrimination, hostile work
> > > environment, and constructive discharge. I’m no legal expert. But I
> know
> > > that this is wrong.
> > >
> > > I do not understand how you have allowed this kind of behavior to go on
> > > inside your company in full view of the paper’s entire staff and the
> > > public. And I certainly can’t square how you and other Times leaders
> have
> > > stood by while simultaneously praising me in private for my courage.
> > > Showing up for work as a centrist at an American newspaper should not
> > > require bravery.
> > >
> > > Part of me wishes I could say that my experience was unique. But the
> > truth
> > > is that intellectual curiosity—let alone risk-taking—is now a liability
> > at
> > > The Times. Why edit something challenging to our readers, or write
> > > something bold only to go through the numbing process of making it
> > > ideologically kosher, when we can assure ourselves of job security (and
> > > clicks) by publishing our 4000th op-ed arguing that Donald Trump is a
> > > unique danger to the country and the world? And so self-censorship has
> > > become the norm.
> > >
> > > What rules that remain at The Times are applied with extreme
> selectivity.
> > > If a person’s ideology is in keeping with the new orthodoxy, they and
> > their
> > > work remain unscrutinized. Everyone else lives in fear of the digital
> > > thunderdome. Online venom is excused so long as it is directed at the
> > > proper targets.
> > >
> > > Op-eds that would have easily been published just two years ago would
> now
> > > get an editor or a writer in serious trouble, if not fired. If a piece
> is
> > > perceived as likely to inspire backlash internally or on social media,
> > the
> > > editor or writer avoids pitching it ... +
> > >
> > > https://www.bariweiss.com/resignation-letter
> > >
> > > Am 09.07.20 um 22:33 schrieb rich:
> > >
> > > good explanation for why Pynchon didnt sign. everybody so angry
> > >
> > > curious there were no really humorous quarantine stories featured in
> the
> > > NYTimes magazine 'fiction issue' this week. so serious our current
> slate
> > of
> > > established writers.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 7:32 PM Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> <
> > mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > I say everyone should ask to sign it....You in?
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 7:03 PM John Bailey <sundayjb at gmail.com> <
> > sundayjb at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > This is a gross generalisation but the old 'we need more robust
> > > debate!' complaint tends to come from people in positions of power or
> > > who are used to being heard without question, at about the point when
> > > their voice is beginning to be questioned or is simply ignored.
> > > Claiming you're being censored or cancelled or deplatformed is a
> > > terrific way of shutting down conversations and silencing critics,
> > > rather than engaging with their criticisms or bolstering your own
> > > arguments. Rowling is obviously the most current case, with defenders
> > > using the 'now now, let her speak' defence as if utterances are
> > > without consequence.
> > > Of course there are many voices that are seldom heard and are used to
> > > not being heard, but I doubt they were invited to sign an open letter
> > > in Harper's.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 4:41 AM Laura Kelber <laurakelber at gmail.com> <
> > laurakelber at gmail.com>
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > I loathe a number of the signers but agree with the content. I was glad
> > >
> > > to
> > >
> > > see Zephyr Teachout's signature. The more progressives who sign on, the
> > > less reactionary it becomes.
> > >
> > > If even signing this modest document carries the threat of
> > >
> > > excommunication,
> > >
> > > then the contents matter.
> > >
> > > The editor states that this will be printed in the October issue of the
> > > magazine, so the signature list is in flux. I suspect that most
> > > progressives won't have the guts to sign. The centrists and
> > >
> > > reactionaries
> > >
> > > on the list are preaching to their own choir and don't have to worry.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 8, 2020, 11:03 AM Jonathon Hunt <jhuntstl at gmail.com> <
> > jhuntstl at gmail.com>
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > I don't have a job right now and am exhausted after spending my day
> > > yesterday getting people out of jail who were violently arrested for
> > > protesting police violence, but after I rest a bit I may make time to
> > >
> > > read
> > >
> > > the letter as I am sure the letter signed by David Frum raises some
> > >
> > > oh-so
> > >
> > > important points about free speech.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 11:57 AM Gary Webb <gwebb8686 at gmail.com> <
> > gwebb8686 at gmail.com>
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > ***Paul Beatty lol not the dude from Deliverance
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPhone
> > >
> > >
> > > On Jul 8, 2020, at 12:37 PM, Gary Webb <gwebb8686 at gmail.com> <
> > gwebb8686 at gmail.com>
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > Has anyone read Kanye’s interview:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/randalllane/2020/07/08/kanye-west-says-hes-done-with-trump-opens-up-about-white-house-bid-damaging-biden-and-everything-in-between/#488b548047aa
> > >
> > > I kind of missed the whole Kanye thing. Some younger friends are
> > >
> > > fans,
> > >
> > > and I’ve read some very esoteric social media discussions about his
> > >
> > > albums.
> > >
> > > I probably disagree with about 99 % of what he says, but I admire
> > >
> > > his
> > >
> > > spirit. The whole interview kind of reads like Ned Beatty’s The
> > >
> > > Sellout.
> > >
> > > The birthday party lol... but it would be foolish to
> > >
> > > underestimate
> > >
> > > him,
> > >
> > > in 2016 this would be dismissed as laughable nonsense... in 2020 he
> > >
> > > gets
> > >
> > > an
> > >
> > > interview in Forbes... in 2024?
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPhone
> > >
> > >
> > > On Jul 8, 2020, at 7:25 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> <
> > mark.kohut at gmail.com>
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > It is.
> > >
> > > Like all those political purity tests I read about in the "bad'
> > >
> > > movements
> > >
> > > of history, LOL.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 7:15 AM Mark Thibodeau <
> > >
> > > jerkyleboeuf at gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > I know that one of the signers taking her name off is a trans
> > >
> > > advocate,
> > >
> > > for whom the presence of JKRowling and Jesse Signal probably
> > >
> > > represent
> > >
> > > a
> > >
> > > bridge too far (causing her to demand that her name be removed
> > >
> > > AND
> > >
> > > beg
> > >
> > > her
> > >
> > > Twitter followers to please forgive her for the incalculable
> > >
> > > damage
> > >
> > > that
> > >
> > > affixing her name to such a diabolical document has no doubt
> > >
> > > already
> > >
> > > wrought upon The CommunityTM.
> > >
> > > It's all just so ridiculously lunatic.
> > >
> > > Jerky
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 8, 2020, 7:06 AM Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > Agree, Hasty and virtually ad hoc..and FOR intellectuals in
> > >
> > > the
> > >
> > > PUBLIC
> > >
> > > SPHERE--see Habermas---
> > > and academic sphere mostly. I doubt if he was asked.
> > >
> > > What is so unexpectedly infuriating is how contentious this
> > >
> > > has
> > >
> > > already
> > >
> > > become, Matty
> > > Yglesias has been complained to his mannagement about BY A
> > >
> > > COLLEAGUE....??
> > >
> > > A couple other "liberals" are now regretting they signed
> > >
> > > because of
> > >
> > > some
> > >
> > > non-liberals (it seems) who signed, which
> > > is kinda self-refuting, no?
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 6:37 AM Mark Thibodeau <
> > >
> > > jerkyleboeuf at gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > i dunno... the list of signatures is actually kind of small,
> > >
> > > in my
> > >
> > > opinion.
> > > Small enough that I don't consider the lack of Pynchon's name
> > >
> > > (or
> > >
> > > Delillo's, or Vollmann's, or Price's, all of whom have
> > >
> > > actually
> > >
> > > contributed
> > > pieces to Harper's in recent years) to be particularly
> > >
> > > noteworthy.
> > >
> > > For what it's worth, I agree with the general sentiment of
> > >
> > > the
> > >
> > > letter
> > >
> > > AND I
> > > wear antifa t-shirts tees (figuratively... I don't actually
> > >
> > > own any
> > >
> > > sloganwear),
> > >
> > > Cheers!
> > > yer old pal Jerky
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 6:24 AM Kai Frederik Lorentzen <
> > lorentzen at hotmail.de>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > So many smart people signed this necessary letter, ---
> > >
> > > Pynchon
> > >
> > > didn't.
> > >
> > > Was he just too lazy? Didn't they ask him? Or does he really
> > >
> > > wear
> > >
> > > 'antifa'-t-shirts?
> > >
> > > + Our cultural institutions are facing a moment of trial.
> > >
> > > Powerful
> > >
> > > protests for racial and social justice are leading to
> > >
> > > overdue
> > >
> > > demands
> > >
> > > for police reform, along with wider calls for greater
> > >
> > > equality and
> > >
> > > inclusion across our society, not least in higher education,
> > >
> > > journalism,
> > >
> > > philanthropy, and the arts. But this needed reckoning has
> > >
> > > also
> > >
> > > intensified a new set of moral attitudes and political
> > >
> > > commitments
> > >
> > > that
> > >
> > > tend to weaken our norms of open debate and toleration of
> > >
> > > differences
> > >
> > > in
> > >
> > > favor of ideological conformity. As we applaud the first
> > >
> > > development,
> > >
> > > we
> > >
> > > also raise our voices against the second. The forces of
> > >
> > > illiberalism
> > >
> > > are
> > >
> > > gaining strength throughout the world and have a powerful
> > >
> > > ally in
> > >
> > > Donald
> > >
> > > Trump, who represents a real threat to democracy. But
> > >
> > > resistance
> > >
> > > must
> > >
> > > not be allowed to harden into its own brand of dogma or
> > >
> > > coercion—which
> > >
> > > right-wing demagogues are already exploiting. The democratic
> > >
> > > inclusion
> > >
> > > we want can be achieved only if we speak out against the
> > >
> > > intolerant
> > >
> > > climate that has set in on all sides.
> > >
> > > The free exchange of information and ideas, the lifeblood
> > >
> > > of a
> > >
> > > liberal
> > >
> > > society, is daily becoming more constricted. While we have
> > >
> > > come to
> > >
> > > expect this on the radical right, censoriousness is also
> > >
> > > spreading
> > >
> > > more
> > >
> > > widely in our culture: an intolerance of opposing views, a
> > >
> > > vogue
> > >
> > > for
> > >
> > > public shaming and ostracism, and the tendency to dissolve
> > >
> > > complex
> > >
> > > policy issues in a blinding moral certainty. We uphold the
> > >
> > > value
> > >
> > > of
> > >
> > > robust and even caustic counter-speech from all quarters.
> > >
> > > But
> > >
> > > it
> > >
> > > is
> > >
> > > now
> > >
> > > all too common to hear calls for swift and severe
> > >
> > > retribution
> > >
> > > in
> > >
> > > response to perceived transgressions of speech and thought.
> > >
> > > More
> > >
> > > troubling still, institutional leaders, in a spirit of
> > >
> > > panicked
> > >
> > > damage
> > >
> > > control, are delivering hasty and disproportionate
> > >
> > > punishments
> > >
> > > instead
> > >
> > > of considered reforms. Editors are fired for running
> > >
> > > controversial
> > >
> > > pieces; books are withdrawn for alleged inauthenticity;
> > >
> > > journalists
> > >
> > > are
> > >
> > > barred from writing on certain topics; professors are
> > >
> > > investigated
> > >
> > > for
> > >
> > > quoting works of literature in class; a researcher is fired
> > >
> > > for
> > >
> > > circulating a peer-reviewed academic study; and the heads of
> > > organizations are ousted for what are sometimes just clumsy
> > >
> > > mistakes.
> > >
> > > Whatever the arguments around each particular incident, the
> > >
> > > result
> > >
> > > has
> > >
> > > been to steadily narrow the boundaries of what can be said
> > >
> > > without
> > >
> > > the
> > >
> > > threat of reprisal. We are already paying the price in
> > >
> > > greater
> > >
> > > risk
> > >
> > > aversion among writers, artists, and journalists who fear
> > >
> > > for
> > >
> > > their
> > >
> > > livelihoods if they depart from the consensus, or even lack
> > >
> > > sufficient
> > >
> > > zeal in agreement.
> > >
> > > This stifling atmosphere will ultimately harm the most vital
> > >
> > > causes
> > >
> > > of
> > >
> > > our time. The restriction of debate, whether by a repressive
> > >
> > > government
> > >
> > > or an intolerant society, invariably hurts those who lack
> > >
> > > power
> > >
> > > and
> > >
> > > makes everyone less capable of democratic participation. The
> > >
> > > way
> > >
> > > to
> > >
> > > defeat bad ideas is by exposure, argument, and persuasion,
> > >
> > > not by
> > >
> > > trying
> > >
> > > to silence or wish them away. We refuse any false choice
> > >
> > > between
> > >
> > > justice
> > >
> > > and freedom, which cannot exist without each other. As
> > >
> > > writers we
> > >
> > > need
> > >
> > > a
> > >
> > > culture that leaves us room for experimentation, risk
> > >
> > > taking,
> > >
> > > and
> > >
> > > even
> > >
> > > mistakes. We need to preserve the possibility of good-faith
> > >
> > > disagreement
> > >
> > > without dire professional consequences. If we won’t defend
> > >
> > > the
> > >
> > > very
> > >
> > > thing on which our work depends, we shouldn’t expect the
> > >
> > > public or
> > >
> > > the
> > >
> > > state to defend it for us. +
> > >
> > > https://harpers.org/a-letter-on-justice-and-open-debate/
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> > >
> > > --
> > > Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> > >
> > > --
> > > Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> > >
> > > --
> > > Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> > >
> > > --
> > > Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> > >
> > > --
> > > Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> > >
> > > --
> > > Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> > >
> > > --
> > > Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> > >
> > > --
> > > Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > --
> > Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
> >
> --
> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>