It seems my concerns about discussion of emotional charged issues
that go beyond the professional competence of xmca members were/are well
founded. Peggy Syverson at Texas has written about the discussion of
the Gulf war and perhaps Eva or someone else interested in the discussion
archives has done the same for other examples, like the Daley example,
where their is general failure to establish common ground, and the
discussion spins out of control.
If I contributed to further problems by my comment on criminal
codes and de-tenuring, I apologize. I was not in any way trying to
equate the Daley case with McCarthyism. I do not know enough about the
case to make such an equation. I was trying to say that de-tenuring
based on the criminal code alone is problematic and noted a case where
I personally experience the problem.
I am sorry to hear that there are people who believe that there
is a politically correct response on xmca to the Daley case and that
someone who supports de-tenuring in this case would fear for their
reputations, or careers, or whatever they fear for if they feel moved
to comment and are afraid to. I know of know case where anyone has
come to harm because they expressed what they perceived to be minority
opinions on any issue, but then, of course, that may be the way the
discourse is structured.
As someone (Nate?) observed, there appears to be range of
opinions on the case on this list. Since the vast bulk of those who
read xmca rarely or never post on it, I really have no idea what
the range of opinion is. I suspect that a sizeable group agree that
Daley was wrong, and perhaps that de-tenuring is appropriate. But I
could easily be wrong.
My own preference, as you have noted, is to enter discussions
either of matters pertaining to the explicit purpose of the list--
to study the relationships between mind, culture, and activity as
an academic undertaking (my own personal focus is on developent, so
that is what I am most likely to discuss) or on the conduct of the
discourse itself (since I value the learning it affords).
This does not mean that I have no opinions concerning important
social issues of the day. But it does mean that I distrust this medium
as way to gain enlightment on them.
I repeat the general sense of my first note pertaining to this
thread. It is not helpful to engage in ad hominum comments or to try
to win arguments by overpowering people. It is helpful to assume that
you are dealing with decent people with very different experiences and
backgrounds and partial knowledge, and to explore issues in that light.
Or so I believe.
mike