[van-discuss] Apology to the list

[Marjorie Brown]

Geordie,

Since I see my post listed there I take it I may have something to do with
our recent exchange.  Please do not unsubscribe on my account.  It was
extremely gracious of you to apologize and that is quite enough!
Disagreement is good - it helps us all refine our positions - and there is
certainly much to be angry about in these troubled times.  Sometimes it is
hard to focus that anger, but certainly any progressive community trying
to confront injustice should be a place for people to work through such
things.

Marjorie



> I would like to apologize to the list members for recent outbursts of
> hostility.  These days I am having trouble separating anger from simple
> disagreement.  I am going to unsubscribe from this list for a while
> since I actually do not wish to make this an unpleasant place for others.
>
> Geordie.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 06:47:51AM -0400, Geordie Birch wrote:
>> On Sun, Jun 01, 2003 at 06:36:15PM -0700, Marjorie Brown wrote:
>> > Sheesh Geordie, watch your communication style.  If we want to get all
>> > holier than thou about revolutionary credentials and revolutionary
>> lives
>> > let's talk about the way men flame debates on lists and why women
>> > therefore rarely take part in them.
>> >
>> > If you have something to say about my post, go nuts - but can the
>> cheap
>> > shots.  Do you think you will convince me of anything that way? And do
>> you
>> > think the left will convince anyone else if that's how we communicate?
>>
>> I don't really care about revolutionary credentials.  I'll certainly
>> refer to my own experiences and opinions however.   And I have trouble
>> relating to people with more than one of the following:  Relatively
>> new/expensive: cars/cloths/digs/computers/bicycles/educations.  And
>> Union
>> jobs, as many of these are relatively stable and high paying, and
>> although I am asked on a regular basis to back up some unions with very
>> large cash flows, these same unions seem largely uninterested in
>> supporting for example my welfare issues.  This is my problem but it is
>> not holier than thouness.  I tend to assume that people disagreeing with
>> me on this list fall into those categories.  (And yes, I have trouble
>> relating to those who have relatively crappier stuff/situations.  What's
>> there to talk about with someone who lives in a alley when you're on
>> your way home for dinner.)
>>
>> (Short diversion rant - where the hell were all these anti Liberal types
>> during the NDP's reign of welfare dismantling during the 1990s.  And if
>> they get the cutbacks reversed will they disappear again?  My money says
>> yes they will.  Any takers?)
>>
>> We're big kids. If you choose to base your opinions of Cuban social
>> issues on my communication style that's your problem.
>>
>> As far as cheap shots go, I broke them out after you did.  And check
>> the archives, you'll find that I make an honest effort to be an equal
>> opportunity cheap shot artist.   (Once before on this very topic no
>> less.  (I'm assuming I took some cheap shots there, though I can't
>> actually remember)).
>>
>> Sure, let's talk about the way men flame debates on lists.  I'd be into
>> attending a face to face meeting with people who had opinions on the
>> subject.  That would make a good miniconference.  I guess I'd rather it
>> be on *people* flaming, obviously with a large section devoted to gender
>> issues.  I hope you're not of the opinion that women don't produce a
>> healthy amount of flames.  Actually if you are then I'm not interested
>> in talking to you about it.
>>
>> I dispute that I started this flame session.  I don't think I flamed
>> Barb when I asked what her methodology was.  I found her statement
>> regarding Cuban homelessness offensive.  You responded sarcastically to
>> that post.  And your response seemed to me to consist entirely of a
>> cheap shot.  Perhaps to you though it was not a flame?
>>
>> > Regarding your post, no, I do not think there is no homelessness in
>> Cuba -
>> > and I certainly don't suggest that I do.
>>
>> You did suggest such implicitly, by choosing to express only your
>> disagreement with the sources I cited and avoiding comment on my thesis.
>>
>> > But I do have an issue with
>> > using the Miami Cuban exile community's propaganda.  Yes, I did read
>> all 3
>> > articles.  The first 2 are exile propaganda and the 3rd is, as you so
>> > aptly describe, the observations of a tourist.
>>
>> I take what I can get when I am doing research.  I certainly don't base
>> my conclusions soley on the writings of evangelistic moneyed types (on
>> the left or the right).  I like to think that I and the people I am
>> talking to are capable of thinking for ourselves.
>>
>> If the left would give me *anything* on this subject then I would cite
>> that first but alas....
>>
>> Even if those articles were cut from whole cloth would that mean there
>> was no homelessness in Cuba?  They were the first hits I came across in
>> a very cursory search on google.ca.  I had previously on this mailing
>> list argued with someone who straight up said there were zero homeless
>> people in Cuba (which was Barb's position in the parent post of this
>> thread) and wanted to provide some, any evidence to the contrary.
>> Plenty of time to debunk it later.  Unfortunately most of the links I
>> found last time seem to have vanished and I was stuck with the more
>> unsavoury ones.  I wasn't about to spend a lot of time on it right then
>> and there either.
>>
>> If you don't like my sources then by all means tell me so.  But take
>> your own advice and can the cheap shots.
>>
>> > My reference to "methodology" has nothing to do with your post - but
>> with
>> > a post that came after holding up your links as some sort of
>> scientific
>> > proof of homelessness in Cuba.  Yes, you have provided some anecdotal
>> > sources of homelessness (kind of like the Fraser Institute's research
>> on
>> > how unions interfere with the economy in BC), and for what that's
>> worth,
>> > fine.
>>
>> Wrong.  As a matter of fact, you referred to "methodology" in direct
>> response to my post.  And in the two weeks following my post, yours has
>> been the only one in response.  No one held up my links as some sort of
>> scientific proof of anything.  It seems you have made up and presented
>> as facts the statements to which I am responding to in this paragraph.
>> Again, check the archives.  If you believe me to be wrong, please
>> advise.
>>
>> Your Fraser Institute analogy is flawed.  Economic interference is
>> subjective, abstract and obvious bullshit.  Are you trying to prove that
>> all anecdotal evidence is invalid?
>>
>> > I think you are probably quite accurate in describing it as a problem
>> > (which it always is) that may be less than the problem in industrial
>> > countries, but a problem nonetheless.  Let's just lay-off the Batista
>> > emigre community mouthpieces when we look for comment on it though,
>> ok?
>>
>> No let's not lay off the defector "mouthpieces" - unfortunately in this
>> case
>> there's little else written on the subject.
>>
>> Geordie.
>>
>> > > (My apologies for any inconvenience caused by two replies to the
>> same
>> > > post.)
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, May 14, 2003 at 01:12:42PM -0700, Marjorie Brown wrote:
>> > >> Yes, and a few more clicks will demonstrate that the first story is
>> from
>> > >> the "Free Cuba Foundation" espousing "Free Markets, Permanent
>> Values,
>> > >> Limited Government".
>> > >
>> > > Telling, isn't it, that the left is largely silent on this issue.
>> And
>> > > what's your point about the "first link"?  This proves something
>> other
>> > > than your cleverness?  Did you actually read the articles?
>> > >
>> > > Here's one that shouldn't sully your mouse's cursor:
>> > > http://www.blacklightonline.com/cubanow.html
>> > >
>> > > An interesting site on Cuban neologisms of the periodo especial:
>> > > http://www.amigospais-guaracabuya.org/oagbv002.html
>> > > The relevant portion excerpted:
>> > > "In the province of Havana, people address a person from another
>> province
>> > > as palestino (palestine). This new gentile form was explained to me
>> as
>> > > the crowded way people from other areas have to live when they first
>> > > come to Havana."
>> > >
>> > > (Hmm.  I smell smoke.)
>> > >
>> > >> I'm sure they have a completely objective, scientifically based
>> > >> methodology for their comments on homelessness.
>> > >
>> > > It's called using your eyes and common sense.  None of the articles
>> > > bothered with your precious scientific methodology - they were all
>> > > anecdotal.  You would know this if you had read the articles before
>> > > commenting on them.  (Another research method that is not
>> scientific:
>> > > parroting government press releases.  Or is sauce for the goose no
>> > > longer sauce for the gander?)
>> > >
>> > > (I'm reminded here of the late-era USSR intelligentsia phrase "right
>> > > wing", referring of course to the Soviet government and its
>> apologists.
>> > > I feel that in this context and with that meaning, this phrase
>> applies
>> > > to anyone who says Cuba has no native homeless population.)
>> > >
>> > > A tourist making such claims about homelessness is demonstrating
>> > > naivete if not foolishness.  Any government making such claims is
>> > > being dishonest.  Shame on the Cuban government.  Why do they fear
>> > > widespread awareness of their beautiful country's social problems?
>> > >
>> > > My bullshit detector goes off real fucking loud when I hear
>> superlatives.
>> > > As one who has often found himself to be homeless I get angry when I
>> hear
>> > > supposed fellow travellers denying the existence of the homeless.
>> > > (Reminds me of trying to get a welfare cheque from the god damned
>> NDP.  At
>> > > least the god damned Liberals are up front with their war on the
>> poor.)
>> > >
>> > > I believe that Cuba's homeless problem is probably much less severe
>> > > than that found in much of the rest of the world.  However as they
>> say
>> > > over at the IWW (and the ILWU for that matter) "An injury to one is
>> an
>> > > injury to all."  The Cuban government's preposterous claims add
>> insult
>> > > to that injury.
>> > >
>> > > We're talking about peoples lives here.  Have you no respect?
>> > >
>> > > In solidarity with the "Palestinos" and other homeless Cubans,
>> > >
>> > > Geordie.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >> > On Tue, May 13, 2003 at 08:57:52PM -0700, waldern at sfu.ca wrote:
>> > >> >>
>> > >> >> Housing
>> > >> >> is affordable; there is no homelessness and most people own
>> > >> >> a home. When they do rent housing they pay 10% of their
>> > >> >> income.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Two weeks in Cuba and you state definitively that there is no
>> > >> > homelessness there?  What was the methodology of your research?
>> > >> >
>> > >> > A cursory search of the web indicates there is plenty of
>> > >> > homelessness in Cuba.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Unfortunately the Left is in denial of this.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > A few links:
>> > >> >
>> > >> >  "To be Homeless in Havana" Manuel David Orrio, Cooperativa
>> > >> >  de Periodistas Independientes
>> > >> >  http://198.62.75.1/www2/fcf/tobeho.html
>> > >> >
>> > >> >  "Why doesn't the government help the homeless?"
>> > >> >  http://64.21.33.164/CNews/y00/nov00/03e1.htm
>> > >> >
>> > >> >  "CUBA Now" by Walter Lippmann
>> > >> >  http://www.blacklightonline.com/cubanow.html
>> > >> >
>> > >> > The word "palestino" is a good search term for finding
>> > >> > info re. Cuban homelessness.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Geordie.
> _______________________________________________
> van-discuss mailing list
> van-discuss at lists.resist.ca
> https://lists.resist.ca/mailman/listinfo/van-discuss
>