Time to be Tattled on

It seems there is someone so annoyed by the position that context matters that it is highly likely he will contact my department to ... to ... report me?  Inform them that I blog? 

I'm not sure.  I admit to being baffled by the threat of tattling. Is this a common tactic among online leftists?  I wouldn't think so—I'm a leftist frequently online, and I've never considered contacting someone's employer—but it seems to be happening everywhere now. 

Scrolling through my comments in that thread, I'm trying to identify which reprehensible thing I said this person will include in his missive.  Maybe it was this:

When people emerge from the woodwork claiming that the link-as-endorsement policy isn't operative on a particular blog, it means that the basic context ... has been misunderstood.

Imagine a situation in which Blogger X posts a link and excerpt to every antisemitic slur written by Author Z. When a prominent Jew dies, this person posts a link and excerpt to despicable obituary Author Z wrote. A friend of the prominent Jew sees Blogger X's post and starts a campaign to have Blogger X fired.

Would you say that the friend of the prominent Jew did his due diligence? Do you not shudder at the thought that you could be fired on the basis of someone else's ignorance?

Perhaps my quick take on Speech Act Theory offended:

Context is part of the meaning of any statement. If a waiter at an Italian restaurant asks if I would like some cheese on my pasta, I could reply "I do." I utter those exact same words in another context, I enter into a legally binding agreement to have and hold someone so long as we both shall live. I stress the notion of due diligence here because, well, because I don't want to marry my waiter or ask my wife-to-very-soon-be for cheese.

It could have been my disgusting opinion on racism:

You missed my subtle point.  All racism is vile. Some of it is criminal too, and it can lead to amorality, but vile is vile. No need to be all nuanced about it.

Now that I think about it, though, it must have been my refusal to engage him in a debate about the history of racial politics in America. I mean, he spent all that time "teaching" me things I already know, and I didn't respond to them for the simple fact that they were irrelevant?  I'm surprised he's stopping with my department.  Why not just contact the FBI already?

Comments

[Chris Clarke]

Jeff Goldstein misinterpreted my post and then agreed with his misinterpretation of it. He said one or two generous things about me and — not wishing to be an asshole — I thanked him for those, while implying I disagreed with his take.

And because I didn't walk over there with guns blazing to fisk Jeff's reading of the post, or issue an impassioned rebuttal on my blog — the same behavior you decry in ilyka, oddly — I am apparently now to be added to your list of Conservative Provocateurs with ilyka.

Which is hilarious, given a rather prominent section of the post of mine you link to:

Saying that every time one discusses a bad thing, one is obliged to point out that it is a bad thing, and that bad things are bad, and that failure to point this out every single time is an offense punishable by witch hunt, firing, ostracism and the like? Fuck that noise.

I recognize that some of the very Progressive Bloggers who most need to read those last two sentences will likely have missed them because their eyes have glazed over in the absence of blink tags to denote the important points of this essay, so let me repeat them in bold type for the clue impaired:

Saying that every time one discusses a bad thing, one is obliged to point out that it is a bad thing, and that bad things are bad, and that failure to point this out every single time is an offense punishable by witch hunt, firing, ostracism and the like? Fuck that noise.

When I wrote that, I had a moment's misgiving about being too nasty. And here you went out of your way to prove my snark was justified.

Of course Jeff's not the only person who had a tweaked reading of my post. Saying, as did many of the PW guys, that I reject in that post the "progressive history of activism" — when I explicitly said I did not, in paragraphs three and four of my post?

Again, for your convenience:

My politics haven’t changed except in the incremental, nuance-building way they would have anyway, generally sliding me further left, which some may not have thought possible. I’ll certainly still be writing about those politics when I’m moved to do so. And more importantly, I’ll continue to exercise those politics in what we once quaintly referred to as the “real world.”

But though I may be a person with “progressive” politics who writes, among other venues, on blogs, I wish to inform you that I am no longer a “Progressive Blogger,” and thus my continued membership in the Progressive Blogosphere is inappropriate.

Congratulations, Rich. You have the reading comprehension skills of a Protein Wisdom commenter.

You accuse me of being a person who pumps up conflict. I will note that though you publicly slandered someone I love, I have not, despite recent best blogosphere practices, tried to get you fired, nor in fact taken this conversation to any other venue. Nor have I gone searching the blogs of the world for things you've said, or for things people have said about things you've said with which you have not expressly disagreed, to bolster my argument against you. And now I'm walking away, leaving you with the opportunity to take the last word, and trusting those patient people who've read this far to make their own competent judgments about whether either of us is a Twoo Pwogwessive.

[Sheelzebub]

And because I didn't walk over there with guns blazing to fisk Jeff's reading of the post, or issue an impassioned rebuttal on my blog — the same behavior you decry in ilyka, oddly — I am apparently now to be added to your list of Conservative Provocateurs with ilyka.

Chris, the only Twoo Pwogwessive is the person who obsessively reads and comments on conservative blogs that link to you, apparently.

[R.L.Page]

Well, "Ilyka," I guess it's true what they say: -- you just can't take the Goldstein out of the girl.

[R.L.Page]

Well, "Ilyka," I guess it's true what they say: -- you just can't take the Goldstein out of the girl.

[R.L.Page]

Oh well ... some things bear repeating.

[Rich Puchalsky]

Chris, sure, I'll take the last word. I note that Scott disagreed with Jeff Goldstein and his commenters -- not with guns blazing or an impassioned rebuttal, but with a simple statement that the stereotype of liberal commenters as a group that they were building up wasn't accurate, as illustrated by his own interactions with them. Quite effective, I'd say. As for thanking Jeff for his generous comments, I've never seen a Republican fail to be generous when agreeing with someone that those liberals are all wrong, misinterpretation or not. It certainly didn't have to be very far misinterpreted. It's funny; when people repeat conservative tropes, like "Vigilantism: It's the new core liberal value", the supposed bitter humor is rather beside the point.

As for whether I think that you're a Conservative Provocateur -- well, no, you don't act like one. If you had good reading skills yourself today, you'd see that I didn't claim that Ilyka was one either, only that she was acting like one. But your previous history as a Progressive Blogger yourself is dotted with incidents in which you behave exactly as you have here -- this time it's Twoo Pwogwessives, others times it's been other things. You were pissed off by what I wrote about Ilyka, fine; you could have Emailled me and explained how wrong I was, "yelling" if necessary. I think that the past history of interaction that we have makes that a worthwhile attempt. But instead you wanted to play it out publicly. OK, you apparently have the result that you wanted, which I do not see as doing any good. Do you? The last time I asked you that question, you said no.

[TRex]

You nailed it, Rich. This is bound to set off much outraged squawking among the Lefty Frag Hags.

Pass the popcorn.

[Rachel]

Hold on one fucking minute. TRex can leave a comment, but he can't answer a fucking email? Remember this?

I have contacted the General and the writers of FDL requesting IP addresses but have yet to hear back. Please email me (scotterickaufman [at] gmail [dot] com) if you have any information about the identity of "John Casper" or "The Ghost of Adolph Rupp."

Couldn't be bothered to answer that. Watch progressives tear each other apart, however, and the man needs some popcorn. That's class.

[anon]

I know Scott Lemieux's got to be around here somewhere. Whenever faux-feminist speech and thought police get together for a gang bang, Lemieux is never far behind.

Speaking of behinds, we have Chris Clarke, few more pretentious jackasses have blogged while claiming to be progressives.

[Karl Steel]

Thanks for your substantive critiques, anon. With suave words and an apt metaphor, you've certainly captured my benevolence.