|
June 15, 2005
Serial attack wingnut attacks again!
While I'm not exactly sure what the correct definition of "wingnut" or wingnuttery is, the phrase is almost always intended as an insult; the clear implication being that the "wingnut" is both an extremist as well as not mentally stable. Nat Hentoff is someone I greatly respect (regardless of whether I might agree with him on every issue), and when I saw him accused of "wingnuttery," I was more than a little bothered. Not that I really needed to defend him. Nat Hentoff is a big boy who can certainly take care of himself without my help. But then I saw what the same accuser said about Kim du Toit: I remember once having a long conversation with an idiot student over Du Toit's awful "pussification" essay. A quick perusal of his "blog" confirms that he fulfills all of the requirements of the selection committee: His blogging is both "rank" and "incompetent". When I can find more cogently argued, logical, and reasonable arguments six beers into an evening from 6 of 7 patrons at my dad's favorite sports bar in Nebraska, it means that you're not making much of a contribution. At the bar, at least I can get drunk.Like Hentoff, du Toit can certainly defend himself, and he had fun doing so. But I dislike ad hominem attacks and the hurling of insults, so at the time I thought I should at least say something in defense of Hentoff and du Toit. (If I'd known who the "idiot student" was I'd have probably defended him too.) Now I see the same blogger claiming that in my defense of Hentoff and du Toit, I "attacked" their attacker. Did I? After quoting from the piece that earned Nat Hentoff the "wingnut" label, I said this : There's more, and while I know everyone's tired of reading about the Schiavo case, seeing Nat Hentoff accused of "wingnuttery" -- by the same people who've just honored Kim du Toit with this breathtakingly ingenious exercise in academic wit -- made me feel obliged.I suppose the phrase "breathtakingly ingenious exercise in academic wit" was sarcastic, and maybe I shouldn't have been sarcastic. (Under the circumstances at the time, it seemed rather gentle and restrained.) But is a sarcastic characterization of a vicious attack really an attack? I meant it as a defense of Kim du Toit, who was called "rank," "incompetent," and "pathetic" by a teacher who simultaneously called his student an "idiot." It's name-calling, and I don't like it. I objected to it then, and I object to it now. If objecting to the use of insults is an attack, then I guess this objection to the objection has to also be called an attack. If it is, further discussion is about as productive as calling each other names. posted by Eric on 06.15.05 at 03:41 PM
Comments
You didn't attack anyone. You made fun of their writing. Everyone writes stupid stuff. (Obviously it's the percentage that keeps or loses readers.) People who can't stand for their writing to be critisized need to work with Congress to get their beliefs enshrined into enforcable law. :-) Huggy · June 16, 2005 12:14 PM |
|
December 2006
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
December 2006
November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Laughing at the failure of discourse?
Holiday Blogging The right to be irrational? I'm cool with the passion fashion Climate change meltdown at the polls? If you're wrong, then so is God? Have a nice day, asshole! Scarlet "R"? Consuming power while empowering consumption Shrinking is growth!
Links
Site Credits
|
|
I admire Nat Hentoff, who has always been a consistent defender of the First Amendment and other Constitutional rights, including the right to life. Kim du Toit has style also, as does Mrs. du Toit. I should mention that Kim du Toit fought against apartheid in South Africa before he moved to the United States, and Nat Hentoff had always been thought of as a man of the Left when I was growing up. It was the Left that left him.