Anti-protesters resort to obscurantism
More evidence that shows that the protesters have achieved overwhelming victory is that anti-protesters are resorting to obscurantism, and are demonstrating their tendency toward pseudointellectualism.
"Obscurantism" is the pseudointellectual trick of creating the false appearance of engaging in intelligent debate, when actually nothing intelligent is being said.
For example, no one really doubts that Irving Jordan maneuvered behind the scenes to arrange to be scheduled as a keynote speaker on April 12, 2007. Dr. Davila dropped a clear hint in his February 9 vlog when he said: "Scheduled to attend the conference are two important individuals," in reference to James M. McPherson and Paddy Ladd (who are two of the three keynote speakers) but did not mention Irving Jordan's name. Reasonable people would be correct to interpret that as being a deliberate snub.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that if the conference was organized last year, under John van Cleve's supervision, during the time when Irving Jordan was still the president of Gallaudet, then Jordan's selection as a keynote speaker constitutes Jordan inviting himself, no matter who said what to whom.
As it was, John van Cleve acted as a major force of oppression against Unity for Gallaudet protesters last year.
Only a pseudointellectual would attempt to argue that Jordan didn't invite himself if he didn't do something obvious, such as write a memo or give an open order to John van Cleve to put his name on the schedule. Only a pseudointellectual would attempt to defend Jordan on the grounds that no one has yet "verified" whether Jordan maneuvered to get himself invited.
No such verification is necessary or required. It's ridiculous to imply or assert that people should not make obvious conclusions, based on common sense reasoning, in cases where clandestine maneuvering would be expected.
Jordan's recent actions during the protest show that he is a political power player who uses every manipulative trick up his sleeve. He was accused by an independent reporter on a respected national television news program of usurping the Board's authority in choosing Fernandes to be his successor.
Having the ability to choose his own successor is not a power that Jordan stumbled onto accidentally. He would have had to maneuver behind the scenes for years and he would have had to manipulate many people to be able to pull such a trick.
The same pseudointellectual who attempts to defend Jordan with obscurantist arguments is showing his hypocrisy by participating as a blogger on a blogsite that removes controversial posts from its blog.
CLICK HERE to read previous posts of the Gallaudet Protest Legal Issues blog.
More evidence that shows that the protesters have achieved overwhelming victory is that anti-protesters are resorting to obscurantism, and are demonstrating their tendency toward pseudointellectualism.
"Obscurantism" is the pseudointellectual trick of creating the false appearance of engaging in intelligent debate, when actually nothing intelligent is being said.
For example, no one really doubts that Irving Jordan maneuvered behind the scenes to arrange to be scheduled as a keynote speaker on April 12, 2007. Dr. Davila dropped a clear hint in his February 9 vlog when he said: "Scheduled to attend the conference are two important individuals," in reference to James M. McPherson and Paddy Ladd (who are two of the three keynote speakers) but did not mention Irving Jordan's name. Reasonable people would be correct to interpret that as being a deliberate snub.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that if the conference was organized last year, under John van Cleve's supervision, during the time when Irving Jordan was still the president of Gallaudet, then Jordan's selection as a keynote speaker constitutes Jordan inviting himself, no matter who said what to whom.
As it was, John van Cleve acted as a major force of oppression against Unity for Gallaudet protesters last year.
Only a pseudointellectual would attempt to argue that Jordan didn't invite himself if he didn't do something obvious, such as write a memo or give an open order to John van Cleve to put his name on the schedule. Only a pseudointellectual would attempt to defend Jordan on the grounds that no one has yet "verified" whether Jordan maneuvered to get himself invited.
No such verification is necessary or required. It's ridiculous to imply or assert that people should not make obvious conclusions, based on common sense reasoning, in cases where clandestine maneuvering would be expected.
Jordan's recent actions during the protest show that he is a political power player who uses every manipulative trick up his sleeve. He was accused by an independent reporter on a respected national television news program of usurping the Board's authority in choosing Fernandes to be his successor.
Having the ability to choose his own successor is not a power that Jordan stumbled onto accidentally. He would have had to maneuver behind the scenes for years and he would have had to manipulate many people to be able to pull such a trick.
The same pseudointellectual who attempts to defend Jordan with obscurantist arguments is showing his hypocrisy by participating as a blogger on a blogsite that removes controversial posts from its blog.
CLICK HERE to read previous posts of the Gallaudet Protest Legal Issues blog.
posted by Gallaudet Protest Legal Issues | Wednesday, April 04, 2007
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home