Sunday, March 22, 2009

Toxic Hate

As I suspected, my challenge of the hate monger will go unanswered. Generally, people filled with hate are unable to back up their words with action until the hate causes them to lose their mind altogether. At that point they will usually explode in a violent act toward those they hate.

What makes Hart Williams such a hateful person? He obviously hates Republicans, or anyone who sees things differently. He obviously hates people with developmental disabilities, as demonstrated by yesterday’s post. What have these groups of people done to him personally, that would cause him to spew such ugliness. Does he believe they are somehow responsible for his failed political career? Or his failed writing career? In the way he describes both of these groups, you’d think they were also responsible for the obvious pain he’s experiencing.

I guess when you are as full of yourself as he is, and you feel the sting of your own impotence in the world, lashing out at a group of people can be expected. I do think he’d better leave people with developmental disabilities out of his hateful sights from now on. Otherwise, I might have to take a trip to Eugene.

7 comments:

Hart said...

Maybe because of 30 years of unrelenting Republican hate, smear and an inability of civility to get through to you jerks.

Or, it could be something I ate.

-- Hart Williams

(Or could it be the ubiquitous censorship of my answers to inane questions on blogs like this?)

David McDonald said...

Glad to see you came out of hiding. How about we get together to figure out what you need to stop being a shit bird?

Hart said...

Right. Like you have anything to teach anybody about couth.

Find yourself another patient, Dr. Freud. (And get rid of the couch of nails while you're at it.)

David McDonald said...

So you're saying you're AFRAID to meet with me to discuss your disparaging remarks about people with developmental disabilities?

Hart said...

No, I'm saying that first, you didn't actually read the blog posting that you thought you did, and second, that your opinions on the questions you raise are a matter of complete indifference to me.

Period.

I made a promise to myself never to engage in battles of wits with the clearly unarmed, and I've broken that promise here today.

So, I'll just stop.

Period.

David McDonald said...

I had a choice to make yesterday which delayed my response. Either continue arguing with a bouncer who scattered teeth in Mexico, or hang out with my autistic nephew, who came over for Sunday dinner, so I chose the latter.

I know he probably doesn't deserve to eat in your mind/world, but it's hard to watch people starve.

In the way you describe me as a Republican, and claim you've read my blog, it's clear that you are, in fact a very wise man. May God bless you.

ethnicguy said...

It's kind of hard to think that someone can be liberal or progressive or just a positive force in the world and still make the kind of offensive remarks about anyone, including people with disabilities, that I read in the first posting which started all of this. And it does indeed boggle my mind that an allegedly lefty blog website will carry these remarks but still refuse to link to or carry blogs that are more genuinely identified with the left.

Something here transcends labels and goes to the core of human decency: you either believe that everyone has equal rights and standing in society from an objective point of view or not. More plainly, you either believe in society or you don't. If you accept the premise that people should live in society with equal rights you don't step on others.

The original posting was indeed offensive and even reactionary. I'm not calling names here--I'm giving an analysis. The follow-up posts have been emotionally charged. Wrong or right, if you offend someone in an oppressed group we're most likely to respond with some emotion first. After that clears perhaps something more along the lines of civil logic can hold sway. But it's primarily up to the offender, the oppressor or the careless thinker and talker to accept accountability before anything else can be done in positive ways.

I heard Randall Robinson speaking about Haiti on Amy Goodman's show last week. Listen to him if you want to hear dignified and firm left wing discourse against injustice. That's what we should be aiming for on the blogs and in the rest of social life.

On the other hand, if we ask ourselves "What would Jesus do?" in these situations--or whatever the leftwing equivalent question is--then we have to admit that kicking over a table and freaking out is not entirely out of the question.

Either form of discourse works, but what is the most effective and which is the most challenging? Which form leads to people having more rights and respecting rights?

Still and all, if you're going to use the kind of language I read in the original post on the "left" blogs website, you can reasonably expect some heavy blowback.