xmca@weber.ucsd.edu writes:
>Phillip,
>
>I'm confused, too. What did you mean?
>
>Charles
>
good morning, Charles - i'm less confused today - Rachel's recent set
of postings helped me clarify my own position - which is that i don't
want to use standard rhetoric to problematize foreign policy of the usa
and/or to de-problematize the behavior of the hijackers and their
cultural-historical roots, which includes pain inflicted on them, perhaps,
from the usa.
sixteen years ago a 58 year old woman was walking home in the dusk with a
bag of groceries - only to be beaten to death by a gang of four black
crips members with golf clubs -
i know the racial oppression ever constant in this country, as well as
other methods of oppression woven into daily social practice - the world
is not a kind place - historically it has always been cruel - monstrous
-
and i can not at the same time condone acts of violence in the name of
liberation, etc. and those who do commit violence should be held
accountable.
i do agree that we should find out the participants in this crime and if
we are able to - just as we did with milosovic - attempt to bring them to
a place of consequence.
phillip
* * * * * * * *
* *
The English noun "identity" comes, ultimately, from the
Latin adverb "identidem", which means "repeatedly."
The Latin has exactly the same rhythm as the English,
buh-BUM-buh-BUM - a simple iamb, repeated; and
"identidem" is, in fact, nothing more than a
reduplication of the word "idem", "the same":
"idem(et)idem". "Same(and) same". The same,
repeated. It is a word that does exactly what
it means.
from "The Elusive Embrace" by Daniel
Mendelsohn.
phillip white
doctoral student http://ceo.cudenver.edu/~hacms_lab/index.html
scrambling a dissertation
denver, colorado
phillip_white@ceo.cudenver.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Oct 10 2001 - 15:49:18 PDT