File spoon-archives/lyotard.archive/lyotard_2001/lyotard.0108, message 1


Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 21:53:34 -0700
Subject: Re: A few questions


and how do you think of intimidation?


Matthew Asher Levy wrote:

> Yeah.  I think so.  I think of hate is a feeling caused by experiences, not
> a theory caused by reasons.  Don't get me wrong.  People have theories
> backing up their racism that end up being used as rationalizations for hate.
> But there are plenty of racist people who feel no hatred whatsoever.  They
> have bought the ideas of racism and enjoy the thought that they are above
> other people, but they don't particularly hate those people.  They might
> pity them.  Often they are kind to them in a patronizing way.
>
> Take the relationship between prosperous Jews and not so prosperous
> African-Americans in the south.  Most southern Jews in the civil rights
> years were still so busy trying to assimilate, busy trying to "be white,"
> that they bought into the racism in U.S. culture.  At the same time, they
> had no hard feelings or hatred towards blacks.  So patronizing relationships
> formed.  Jewish families "took care of" their black servants' familes during
> race riots, mob lynching periods, or times of police brutality.  Yet, many
> Jews still thought they were superior to their black servants:  southern
> chivalry, noblesse oblige, etc.  They bought into a racist theory, but felt
> no hate.  You could argue that a more insidious psychological violence was
> still being waged by Jews against African Americans, but it had nothing to
> do with bad intentions or hate.
>
> Hatred is an energy that can be channeled by rationality, but I think hate
> comes from something that happens to the person who hates, not from a set of
> ideas.  This is why no amount of reasoning can get through to someone who is
> angry or hateful.  I think they need to be soothed or fought, not reasoned
> with.
>
> Consider the occassional scapegoating of Jews in 19th Century Europe.
> Theories of Jewish meglomania, inferiority or filth stuck around for years
> and years with nothing happening.  Then there is a crises--unrelated to the
> Jews--from which anger and hate is generated and a pogram is directed at the
> Jews.  Hate gets taken out on the Jews because of antisemetic theories, but
> it "comes from" something else, for instance, economic upheaval.
>
> Reasoning with an angry person is like trying to pursuade a hungry hog not
> to eat.  Isn't there a cliche that goes something like that?  It's pointless
> for the person and frustrating to the pig?
>
> Matthew
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Sissy <sissy-AT-ix.netcom.com>
> To: <lyotard-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 9:09 AM
> Subject: Re: A few questions
>
> >
> >
> > Matthew Asher Levy wrote:
> >
> > > when you say "the limits of paralogy" it reveals that you are thinking
> of
> > > paralogy as a program.. in psychology it might make sense to talk about
> the
> > > limits of paralogy because it refers to a certain set of approaches.  i
> > > don't think of it as certain set of approaches.  it is just the will to
> take
> > > different sorts of approaches.
> > >
> > > > > what are the bases on which we can rule some kinds of reasoning or
> > > > > outcomes of reasoning out? on the basis of their flagrant abuse of
> > > others,
> > > > > of the hate they reproduce, of the terrorization of others they
> imply,
> > > of
> > > > > the intimidation their reproduction supports? these or other bases
> for
> > > > > ruling some kinds of reasoning out.. or understanding that perhaps
> these
> > > > > are circumstances in which paralogy is not beneficial?
> > >
> > > Abuse, hate, terror and intimidation are not reasoning.  If you see
> them,
> > > stop them, if you can.  But don't use these horrors as an excuse to tell
> > > other people how to think.
> >
> > Guess this can be a problem then at least if some folks think the way to
> > stop them is to inquire respectfully have people elaborate and further
> > explain, how you come to hate, while agonistical challenging the idea of
> hate
> > with other reasoning as the only way to stop hate.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Matthew
> >
> > --
> > -----------------------------------------------------
> > Click here for Free Video!!
> > http://www.gohip.com/free_video/
> >
> >

--
-----------------------------------------------------
Click here for Free Video!!
http://www.gohip.com/free_video/



   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005