From: "Nate Holdren" <nateholdren-AT-hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: AUT: Re: racism
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 22:21:35 -0500


Hi Harald,
My apologies if my post was an over-reaction. I had to fight pretty hard not 
to post a stronger response, like Geoff's. It helped that I think I know you 
fairly well from your posts here, so I figured your probably weren't meaning 
what I thought you meant, but I couldn't figure out what you did mean. To be 
totally honest, I read your post and thought 'this is stupid and/or 
chauvinistic', but knowing you from on-list I guessed I had misunderstood.

Actually, why your latest post has made some thigns clearer, I'm still not 
totally clear.
I think part of it is that I don't find the concept of 'culture' a 
particularly useful category for understanding the world or for 
informing/taking action. It fairly easily expands to a vanishing point in 
conversations like these, partially because of our different ... err, 
cultural starting points and because of the many different and not 
necessarily compatible uses of the term 'culture' that people employ.

That the prison situation in the US will impact other parts of our lives 
here in the US (I guess I'd call it 'our culture'), just like TV commercials 
does, but I guess I don't find that particularly interesting on its own as 
it's quite abstract, so much that I think it's only trivially true. (The 
same way that my childhood impacted who I am now, or that weather impacts 
traffic patterns, these are fairly uninteresting unless in a larger argument 
and more specific context.)

I've just accused you of abstraction as I proceed to ramble here and there, 
work wears out my brain, my apologies.

Aside from the whole culture discussion, what is the point you want to make 
about the US prison/policing system? I'd be very intersted to talk a little 
more about criminal justice systems (and the media/spectacle which here at 
least is often in lockstep with the drive to incarcerate) here in the US and 
elsewhere, I'd be very interested as I know a little bit about that here.

all the best,
Nate



No more weekdays, they hanged Monday, shot Thursday, sliced up Friday! Every 
day is Sunday.

-Franca Rame and Dario Fo, "Waking Up"





>From: Harald Beyer-Arnesen <haraldba-AT-online.no>
>Reply-To: aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
>To: aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
>Subject: Re: AUT: Re: racism
>Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 01:46:15 +0100
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Nate Holdren" <nateholdren-AT-hotmail.com>
>To: <aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu>
>Sent: 4. mars 2003 16.58
>Subject: Re: AUT: Re: racism
>
>
>Nate I have in part replied to Geoff. about the same
>topic.  But let me try to it apprach it differnetly.
>
>There is a differnece between wtching television
>with and without commercials. For along time
>T.V. commercials were not allowed at all in Norway,
>so I have experienced both.  And there is also far
>more of that kind of shit -- almost every way you
>turn - that it used to be.
>         However much you oppose it, such facts forms
>your culture to a greater or lesser extent. I all cirmunstances
>a wholly new situation has to been introduced, whether
>you react postively or negatively you are forced to
>relate to it.
>
>Liitle phrases can be telling. You mentioned in your
>other post the student who said he "didn't like arabs
>after the gulf war because they were 'our enemies'"
>
>To me the most revelaing about this story was the
>phrase "our enimies". I have never, ever heard supports
>of this or that war, including the last Gulf war and the
>looming one, use that phrase, however reactionary
>they may otherwise be. That is a cultural thing, produced
>by concrete realities. it sort of sound strange in my
>ears. This of course could change in  the future, but
>it will not do so without bringing about changes in
>peoples minds as well. That implies a cultural
>cahnge, in particular if these kind of things goes on
>for years and decades.
>
>You ask, "Are you trying to say that the US has more
>crime or something?" No; I am first and foremost
>trying to say that U.S has more prisons, and has
>has had so for a long, long time.  To not think this will
>reflect on what is conceived as "natural" and not
>in the liong run, as well as have an affect on their
>thinking in whole range of other things, would be naive.
>Btw, according to The OECD statistic I referred to.
>the the proportonal measured numbers of convicted
>prisoners in Turkey was only slightly higher than
>in Norway. Something I find, intersting, even if it
>should be revealed later that real figure is somewhat
>higher.
>
>You write, "but how is this in any way an interesting
>or politically useful observation?"
>
>I think that is obvious.
>
>Here are some of the figures of convicted prisoners
>per 100.000 inhabitants (written In Norwegian, but I
>think you should be able to understand the name of
>the states)
>
>USA: 468,5
>      Tsjekkia: 150,1
>      New Zealand: 132,3
>      Spania: 110,7
>      Ungarn: 109,0
>      Australia: 93,4
>      Mexico: 92,9
>      Slovakia: 91,6
>      England og Wales: 90,2
>      Portugal: 85,4
>      Korea: 78,6
>      Tyskland: 65,0
>      Italia: 50,8
>      Finland: 49,6
>      Sveits: 48,4
>      Danmark: 42,9
>      Japan: 39,3
>      Nederland: 34,8
>      Tyrkia: 33,8
>      Norge: 29,8
>      Island: 22,1
>
>Now, why if you where to ask someone: "Why is
>it that in "the land of the free," there are (proportinally)
>14 times as many (convicted) prisoners as in
>Turkey? "
>             Should not that give reason for thought?
>Would it not from there, be possible to start also
>questioning other things.
>
>
>Harald
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>      --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---


_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail



     --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---