Comment Rescue: Stereotypes
In my opinion, some stereotypes are cheered here (including heroic contortions to portray them not as stereotypes) while others are roundly rejected. this is fine. the issue is the unequal application of the rudeness standard.
Sure, any sweeping generalization or stereotype against libertarian(ish) positions are dealt with swiftly and severely by people from across the spectrum.
I think this is always a fair potential charge to level against any group, if for no other reason it prevents groupthink from settling in, and the group has something of an obligation to respond to that charge.
Well, if the point is, “LoOGers will accept shorthand from members of their own that they might not accept from outsiders”, that’s… actually not a terribly surprising charge.
I mean, if you read one or two or three of my posts or Jaybird’s posts or Tom’s posts or Russell’s posts you’re probably going to construct a lot of context stitching those posts together to try and suss out who you’re talking to. Since you’re working on limited context you may wind up stitching a lot of extra stuff in there, particularly if you come here from a link given to you by a trusted party who refers to us as “that blog full of (something that has a lot of context) guys”. This is pretty common, particularly from the drive-by section of the commentariat, and it’s not always unfair or inaccurate stitching, to be clear.
On the other hand, if you read a thousand comments by any of the above, you get a clearer context of the person, which leads to a better understanding, and thus shorthand is read differently due to that subsumed context, which can lead to much more charitable reading.
Here’s an example not from the League. The basketball announcer Chick Hearn once said in reference to a black player who was hanging on the rim “whoa he’s hanging there like a monkey.”
Now, Chick had said something similar to that any bazillion numbers of times about white, hispanic, slavic (hm, okay, wait, Vlade probably never hung on a rim in his life, scratch that last) players… because that’s what you look like when you’re hanging on the rim.
The next few days all sorts of people were calling for Chicks head on a platter for his “racist” comment. He felt terrible about the backlash. Magic Johnson and numerous other black current and former Lakers immediately came to his defense.
One could say that’s because Chick was a member of the tribe, and they’re circling the wagons… or one could say that’s because they knew Chick better than the accusers knew him… because he was a member of the tribe.
There’s a difference between the two accusations.
In Chick Hearn’s case, I think it is a clear case of the second. Here around the League, though, I confess that there have been times when I personally have (either swiftly or severely) attempted to defend or explicate comments or posts by other members of the League, because there is an accusation from someone not a member of the League that I think is based upon some stitched together context that is inaccurate. It certainly may be the case that this comes across as being an apologist for libertarianism – it has to come across as something.
Usually this is a case of responding to someone who is likely possessing little context (a drive-by comment from someone I haven’t seen before), but I frankly admit that it may occur that bias can creep in insidiously for anybody, so if you catch me making explanations for something that is actually just making excuses, call me on it.