[FoRK] Blah blah blah; also, Bolcerism strikes Ken, or, I'm a corporate apologist?
jbone at place.org
Wed Apr 14 17:14:07 PDT 2010
> Yes. That's where it came from. In arguing that dimension you have used arguments that have sounded very like you were supportive of, and even defending, corporate interests.
To be clear: the above --- "corporate interests" as a generalization --- is meaningless. Any given, specific issue, well, I'll weigh the issue itself. No black-and-white judgments here. I.e., I might defend some particular corporate interest in some context vs. something else --- but that doesn't generalize well.
So that, too, may have been easily mistaken by you in regards to specific previous comments of mine --- particularly when some issue is framed as some false dichotomy between corporate interests in general or even specifically vs some other vague, airy-fairy, probably mythical collective interest such as "the interests of society" <cough/>. (While "corporations" are a dangerous legal fiction, the idea of "society" as a first-class entity is an increasingly dangerous fiction, right up there with the idea of a "soul" in its potential to damage actual human lives.)
> Probably your usual gusto overpowering accurate articulation of your intended position on the matrix.
More likely lack of historical context and conversational lookback. I doubt anyone with tenure (and any long-term memory) on the list would have mistaken me for a corporatist, though it's perhaps not hard to see how somebody with somewhat more limited exposure could take certain things out of context and draw the wrong conclusion.
> Do I need to apologize?
Not at all.
More information about the FoRK