Verbal Salvos and Temperance
Via Mahablog:
A stink is rising about Michele Malkin, who posted private information - in the form of phone numbers - about several UC Santa Cruz students who succeeded in ousting military recruiters from their job fair. As it happened, some of the people who read her blog have issued death threats against these students for the audacity of speaking their mind about their belief that recruitment doesn’t belong in academia. It’s their opinion. Such is the heated nature of political discourse these days that their opinion accompanied by “resoloot” action seemed extreme to certain people who tend to read Michelle’s ravings.
To post contact information gleaned from the header of a press release and pretend that its “published” is just wrong. But that shouldn’t surprise us, considering the source. That less savory individuals would take this information and hound the students with repeated death threats, is sinful. Even as the Right rightly complains about a Purdue University student who was arrested and charged with threatening to kill the president, so like-minded others reverse the rolls, and Michelle thinks that is acceptable behavior. But she whines about her hate mail. She hand picks her favorites, but not one of those threatened her life.
The responses I’ve seen are venomous and foul. But the Left has assembled an arsenal of tempered writers who respond strongly against Michelle’s brand of hatemongering. Some from both sides, however, need to stay rational. In context is Michelle’s admittance of being an alarmist. She has said many times that she wants to be a top blogger. To that end, she will do and say anything. Ask Tom DeLay, Jack Abramoff, or Newt Gingrich just how far a Republican will go to achieve their goals. Ethics is for fools, and anything goes; so too with “conservative” bloggers. (I put that word in quotes, because I really can’t tell just what they think they’re conserving…)
Fact: both political camps have an overabundance of hot-headed, self-propelled pundits. Thanks to the Internet, anyone can say anything. Likewise anyone else can take someone’s ravings and do real harm. As a rule, generalizations about “us and them” are seen as fruit of the ignorance that spawned them.
Fact: Angry words soothe no wounds. To respond out of anger detracts from the message, however just and well thought it might be. Once your reader feels you’re fuming, you’ve lost credibility. Read the careful summary from Maha; feel out who is rational and who is not. Then ask yourself who you’re most likely to believe. Read also the comment section. See for yourself the hatred overflowing in both directions.
This is the wrong path, folks. Wake up!