Jeff Goldstein gets all concern trollish regarding the Jesus’ General-Brittney Gilbert-Ghost of Adolph Rupp-Scott Kaufman dustup (go here for as good a take as any on that regrettable situation):
I find it at once touching and sad that Kaufman is maintaining that this attempt at getting him canned merely for challenging the officially-sanctioned narrative is something of an unrepresentative gambit — that it is an individual vs individual scenario that doesnâ€™t speak to larger problems within the progressive movement — even as heâ€™s witnessed firsthand how pernicious is a world view that privileges the incorrect decoding of a particular interpretive community over the (since established) intent of the utterer, and then gives that interpretive community permission to ascribe to the original utterer the product of the communityâ€™s own (often cynically self-interested) interpretive intent.
Ooh … it’s high-falutin’ Pasty. Gettin’ down with the deconstructionalamism. “A world view that privileges the incorrect decoding of a particular interpretive community …” Man, that kind of patter plus a corduroy coat with elbow patches would get you laid at any one of the Seven Sister schools circa 1973.
But here’s the real point, jackass. You and your cohorts are for torture. We occasionally act like assholes. To be precise, an indvidual — Ghost of Adolph Rupp — is acting like an asshole. Without “official sanction” from the progressive movement, whatever that’s supposed to mean.
A Star Chamber of Katrina vanden Heuvel, Kos, Michael Moore, Tinky Winky and Rosie O’Donnell did not compose the “narrative” and then order the attack on Scott Kaufman. An individual did that, and it’s not part of a “larger problem” … it’s one guy being a dick.
The “larger problems” in our “movement” are that we sometimes get all het up about stupid shit. The larger problems in yours are that you are a bunch of psychopathic, emotional cyphers whose black hearts lust for ever increasing gouts of blood to fill the petulant, quivering emptiness that resides in your persons where a soul should be.
But as Clarkeâ€™s essay spells out (however tentatively), the problem is far more widespread than Kaufman would like to admit — and indeed, for my part, Iâ€™ve come it see it as systemic, following naturally from an interpretive paradigm that of necessity culminates in competing narratives vying for established â€œtruthâ€? based entirely on the power and tenacity of an advocacy groupâ€™s insistence.
What does this even mean? Skreak English, retard.
I could be wrong, of course. But I long for the days when someone would argue how this is so, rather than labeling my thinking â€œhate speechâ€? and hoping that the mere accusation does enough to scare me off.
Scare you off? You want to pre-emptively attack Iran. You’re fucking nuts. We want to marginalize you to the point that the dustbin of history wrinkles its mixed-metaphorical nose at the thought of being asked to house the remaining artifactual motes of your brief but extinction-level usurpation of basic morality.