Eric

 

This seems a wonderful example of abduction gone awry.    This seems inevitable 
since we seem to have so few rules distinguishing good and bad abduction.  

 

n

 

Nick Thompson

 <mailto:thompnicks...@gmail.com> thompnicks...@gmail.com

 <https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/> 
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/

 

From: Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> On Behalf Of Eric Charles
Sent: Thursday, September 2, 2021 10:04 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Liberal dilemmas

 

"The fact that you agree with the policies and actions does not mitigate the 
harm caused."

 

This seems to be a recurring theme in conversations I am having recently, in 
several venues. I make a factual claim about damages caused by a 
policy/action/decision. Someone objects to the factual claim because they agree 
with policy/action/decision. I'm never quite sure where to go in the 
conversation after that. 

 

Like, I saw someone post, non-sarcastically, a meme claiming that Biden's 
withdrawal from Afghanistan was more peaceful that Trump's final days in 
office. When I pointed out how obviously wrong that was, the 
otherwise-sensible-seeming person couldn't do anything but insist that 
withdrawing was the right thing to do. Like... come on man... I get that... but 
what does that have to do with pretending things went well, or were 
"peaceful"?!? 

 

So, like... yeah... you might agree with restrictions on the uses of public 
lands... but that doesn't mean you need to pretend it has no negative 
consequences for individuals. Just own that those harms will happen, as part of 
your supporting the policy. 

 

 

On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 8:09 PM Prof David West <profw...@fastmail.fm 
<mailto:profw...@fastmail.fm> > wrote:

Marcus, you seem to miss my point; perhaps just baiting me.

 

Honors at Highlands: this was part of a policy, stated publicly at a Board of 
Regents meeting, "Highlands exists to provide degrees to Hispanic students that 
could never obtain one at any other university. Honors degrees, curricula, and 
courses are racist reasons that students from northern New Mexico cannot 
succeed at other universities and, as such, cannot be tolerated at Highlands."

 

Posters: woman in question was a 30+ year old grad student (we shared the same 
advisor). The posters were in my office for my enjoyment, purchased at the 
university bookstore. Meeting was held in my office at her request. They were 
prints of Dali work considered "great art." The human figures are totally 
androgynous as well as being distorted in typical Dali style. Her motive for 
filing the complaint was, she stated in an email a year later, to discredit me 
with our advisor who she thought showed a preference for my work over hers. The 
HR office, because of their "enlightened liberal policies" accepted her 
complaint on its face, no investigation; as the same policy stated one was not 
needed because, as a male and academic staff, I had no defensible position to 
consider.

 

Ranchers: this particular family took 'stewardship' seriously and made hundreds 
of thousands of dollars worth of improvements to public land. but my point is 
simply that bureaucrats, kowtowing to liberal environmental lobbyists set 
policy without regard to any 'facts on the ground' or any science, simply on 
liberal philosophy of how things "should be."

 

Access: I too am a taxpayer. There are some very nice hot springs on BLM land 
near by. They are maintained and upgraded by a volunteer public group (pretty 
informal, word of mouth kind of stuff). Being old and feeble, my access is 
increasing dependent on the use of an ATV. BLM policy dictates constant 
reduction of motorized transport on that land, so it will not be long before my 
access is de facto denied. This is a personal example of a "woke" policy on 
increasing wilderness designations thereby denying access to elderly, 
handicapped, and otherwise marginally abled.

 

You asked for examples of liberal actions/policies that caused harm, to me 
specifically, but by implication in general. These are tangible examples. The 
fact that you agree with the policies and actions does not mitigate the harm 
caused.

 

davew

 

 

 

 

On Wed, Sep 1, 2021, at 4:33 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:

Welfare ranchers, indeed.   The rest of us have to constantly modernize our 
skills..  But freeloading off the public land and environment that’s 
“multigenerational” and must be preserved?  Why?

 

Marcus 

 

From: Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com <mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com> > On 
Behalf Of Frank Wimberly

Sent: Wednesday, September 1, 2021 3:17 PM

To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com 
<mailto:friam@redfish.com> >

Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Liberal dilemmas

 

I owned 40 acres in Torrance County, NM which was adjacent to a national 
forest.  Ranchers were charged $1.21 per acre per year to use the NF land for 
grazing.  I could have made $48 per year by charging a little less than the 
feds.  My property taxes were $40 per year.

---

Frank C. Wimberly

140 Calle Ojo Feliz, 

Santa Fe, NM 87505

 

505 670-9918

Santa Fe, NM

 

On Wed, Sep 1, 2021, 1:50 PM Marcus Daniels <mar...@snoutfarm.com 
<mailto:mar...@snoutfarm.com> > wrote:

Dave wrote:

 

< More significant: I have had my curricular materials censured and have had my 
job threatened on a number of occasions because it was deemed inconsistent with 
liberal values. Ironically, many of these events occurred when I was teaching 
at a Catholic university where I could, with impunity, challenge religious 
orthodoxy, but not liberal woke snowflake orthodoxy. I was once censured by the 
University of Wisconsin HR department because a female student filed a sexual 
harassment complaint because I had a meeting with her in my office where I had 
three Salvador Dali prints on my wall and "she was forced to look at breasts 
the entire meeting." Her complaint was upheld because neither the content of 
the Dali prints nor my intent or rational for having them in my office mattered 
— only her subjective feelings. At Highlands I was forbidden to offer Honors 
courses or any opportunities to earn extra credit in a class by tackling extra 
hard problems (these were software courses) because doing so was racist and 
unfair — simply because more non-Hispanic students obtained the extra credit or 
the honors designation. >

 

So the university had the expectation that before advanced classes could be 
offered, there needed to an unbiasing of the candidate pool for those classes 
by adequately training everyone (every demographic) that was potentially 
feeding in to them?  Ok.  If the university wants to do this, or incentivized 
to do this, it is really just a matter of private/public strategy.   If you 
don't want to work for a university that has this "fair" strategy, then don't.  
  As for subjecting young students to strange imagery, I can see why one would 
not want to do that.  Just as it would strange for a female professor to dress 
like a hooker.   Organizations can have dress codes.   Don't be a fool, 
universities are just another kind of business.  You mess with the business, 
you will have a problem.  It would be better if your department heads were 
"upstanders" and just said, "Hey Dave, how is this art helping your students?"

 

< Not personal, but a relative: multi-generational ranch with Federal grazing 
right. Hundreds of thousands of dollars over the years were spent enhancing the 
Federal land, containment ponds for water that reduced erosion and flash 
flooding without diminishing runoff contribution to watershed; planting of 
native grasses, elimination of  deadwood, etc. etc. End result was the ability 
to safely and sustainably graze X number of cattle. About five years ago, BLM 
issued a new policy dictating the maximum carrying capacity of Federal lands. 
The math was based on lowest common denominator. The policy was, at the behest 
of preservation groups, written with the specific intent to minimize and 
eventually eliminate the use of public lands for grazing. (Also mining and 
motorized recreational vehicle use.) Bottom line, allotment was taken away 
because it violated the numbers — not because there was any evidence of actual 
harm. >

 

I'm a taxpayer.  Why should I want off road vehicles or cows on federal land?  
I don't care about either of those things.   This is a weird entitlement that 
these folks have in mind.  As far as I was concerned the Bundy principals in 
Oregon deserved to be met by A-10s.

 

Marcs

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam 
<http://bit.ly/virtualfriam> 

un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam 
<http://bit.ly/virtualfriam> 

un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com

FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/

archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

 

 

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam 
<http://bit.ly/virtualfriam> 
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/

Reply via email to