A movement that can't bear criticism is a weak and unsustainable movement.
Charlie's comments are hardly a tedious drumbeat; he talks about many other things too.
Minimizing abuse -- and exaggerated criticism of the people who point out the abuse -- are two time-honored, even clichéd, ways of excusing and enabling abuse.
A movement that can't bear criticism is a weak and unsustainable movement.
Charlie's comments are hardly a tedious drumbeat; he talks about many other things too.
Minimizing abuse -- and exaggerated criticism of the people who point out the abuse -- are two time-honored, even clichéd, ways of excusing and enabling abuse.
We need to clean our own house first.
(Although I have to say that I'm feeling increasingly uncomfortable saying "our house" -- the ceaseless "no problem here, move on" drumbeat is making me feel more and more like this is not my house to worry about. I wonder how many other people are being pushed away and perhaps pushed farther?)
I think we need a better understanding of whether we're talking about some dust and light clutter or if we're talking about sewage starting to well out of the toilets.
And Charlie may talk about many other things, but he does spend quite a bit of time on this general topic. Not as much as JVL spends on Baseball, but probably a bit more than he spends on watches. Of course, only one of those two topics is existential for JVL, so that might explain the difference.
No one is saying they can’t bear criticism. They’re saying the criticism is wrong.
Correct criticism: “This small minority of left-wing students who have abhorrent beliefs is bad.”
Wrong criticism: “I will use this small minority of left-wing students who have abhorrent beliefs to critique the left as a whole, as if they all believe this stuff or at least as if a huge portion of them do.”
By all means critique the problem. But don’t exaggerate it.
A movement that can't bear criticism is a weak and unsustainable movement.
Charlie's comments are hardly a tedious drumbeat; he talks about many other things too.
Minimizing abuse -- and exaggerated criticism of the people who point out the abuse -- are two time-honored, even clichéd, ways of excusing and enabling abuse.
We need to clean our own house first.
(Although I have to say that I'm feeling increasingly uncomfortable saying "our house" -- the ceaseless "no problem here, move on" drumbeat is making me feel more and more like this is not my house to worry about. I wonder how many other people are being pushed away and perhaps pushed farther?)
"We need to clean our own house first."
I think we need a better understanding of whether we're talking about some dust and light clutter or if we're talking about sewage starting to well out of the toilets.
And Charlie may talk about many other things, but he does spend quite a bit of time on this general topic. Not as much as JVL spends on Baseball, but probably a bit more than he spends on watches. Of course, only one of those two topics is existential for JVL, so that might explain the difference.
No one is saying they can’t bear criticism. They’re saying the criticism is wrong.
Correct criticism: “This small minority of left-wing students who have abhorrent beliefs is bad.”
Wrong criticism: “I will use this small minority of left-wing students who have abhorrent beliefs to critique the left as a whole, as if they all believe this stuff or at least as if a huge portion of them do.”
By all means critique the problem. But don’t exaggerate it.
It is extrmely tedious especially from the guy who helped bring us the Iraq war,among other things. People should broaden their interests.