The Silliness of Amitai Etzioni
I must confess at the start of this that I've been writing critical comments on Amitai Etzioni's posts since he started here. Some of them were probably immature and stupid. But I think most of them fairly criticized his view of foreign policy and morality because he, unlike many of us here, believes that "security" is the paramount goal of foreign and even domestic policy, even if it infringes on the rights of individuals. He would not fit in well with the ACLU. His ideas are not, and I think he'd admit this, "liberal" in the sense that we value both individual freedom and collective justice without accepting that the two are mutually exclusive.
Once upon a time, and I can't find it because not all of the old TPM archives are Google-able, but I got into it with Etzioni about his unwillingness to answer the many and vociferous objections and debunkings that his posts inspired from TPM readers. I accused him of lecturing us because what would usually happen was that he'd post and we'd criticize and he'd ignore all criticisms and move on to a new topic that we'd mostly find problematic. So I made a habit of pointing out in the comments that he was avoiding us.
Etzioni responded with the curious statement that he would not answer criticisms from those who use Internet pseudonymns. He would only answer people who put their names to their posts, he said. I, as one of his critics with a funny Internet name, objected. A debate started.
My objections were that: 1) People really have been fired from their job from posting their opinions online, so it's fair. Etzioni is a professor and public intellectual, so posting his thoughts, under his name, on the Internet, is a good thing for his livelihood. Not so much for some one who works for a boss with a "McCain/Palin" bumper sticker. 2) Who cares? We can all be anyone on line anyway. Amitai doesn't want to talk to destor23. Fine. But My handle could easily be Fred Moreno. Would he answer Fred Moreno? Because I can use that name. It wouldn't be my real name either. So who is he to know? Also, what if I use my real name and it sounds weird to him? What if my real name and handle is something like Horatio Chong? What is his criteria for a real name and how does he know? Or does he just think that any two words (like Amitai Etzioni) is good enough? Okay, Amitai... I'm Destor 23. So man up and answer some questions!
At the time, and this is where I wish I could find the darned conversation on Google... Etzioni actually agreed that people have good practical reasons for using Internet handles. And yet he's never taken the next step and engaged the readers who would like to debate him.
Now in his most recent post, which I also found objectionable, he said he would respond only to comments from people who would use their real names. I'd like him to explain how he can know if somebody uses a handle that sounds like a real name is really using a real name, if he's given up his previous position where he agreed here that Internet handle usage is appropriate and, finally... why is he so willing to espouse his ideas here but so afraid to defend them?
Once upon a time, and I can't find it because not all of the old TPM archives are Google-able, but I got into it with Etzioni about his unwillingness to answer the many and vociferous objections and debunkings that his posts inspired from TPM readers. I accused him of lecturing us because what would usually happen was that he'd post and we'd criticize and he'd ignore all criticisms and move on to a new topic that we'd mostly find problematic. So I made a habit of pointing out in the comments that he was avoiding us.
Etzioni responded with the curious statement that he would not answer criticisms from those who use Internet pseudonymns. He would only answer people who put their names to their posts, he said. I, as one of his critics with a funny Internet name, objected. A debate started.
My objections were that: 1) People really have been fired from their job from posting their opinions online, so it's fair. Etzioni is a professor and public intellectual, so posting his thoughts, under his name, on the Internet, is a good thing for his livelihood. Not so much for some one who works for a boss with a "McCain/Palin" bumper sticker. 2) Who cares? We can all be anyone on line anyway. Amitai doesn't want to talk to destor23. Fine. But My handle could easily be Fred Moreno. Would he answer Fred Moreno? Because I can use that name. It wouldn't be my real name either. So who is he to know? Also, what if I use my real name and it sounds weird to him? What if my real name and handle is something like Horatio Chong? What is his criteria for a real name and how does he know? Or does he just think that any two words (like Amitai Etzioni) is good enough? Okay, Amitai... I'm Destor 23. So man up and answer some questions!
At the time, and this is where I wish I could find the darned conversation on Google... Etzioni actually agreed that people have good practical reasons for using Internet handles. And yet he's never taken the next step and engaged the readers who would like to debate him.
Now in his most recent post, which I also found objectionable, he said he would respond only to comments from people who would use their real names. I'd like him to explain how he can know if somebody uses a handle that sounds like a real name is really using a real name, if he's given up his previous position where he agreed here that Internet handle usage is appropriate and, finally... why is he so willing to espouse his ideas here but so afraid to defend them?
