Re: that NY Times article

Hello,

Would it be possible to have the URL for that Article in the NY Times. I
missed it somewhere along the line. Everbody has an opinion about it.
I'd like to read it for myself. Thanks.

Regards,
Bogdan

Katharine Thayer wrote:
>
> On Apr 30, 2006, at 10:07 PM, Judy Seigel wrote:
>
>>
>> The article Pam mentions is the article I recommended, probably so
>> far into something else nobody saw it. I PROMISE it answers many of
>> the questions brought up today and yesterday -- in terms, not just of
>> naivete, or people being evil, but of -- excuse the expression, human
>> nature.
>>
>> I think reading it would take this discussion to another level...
>
>
> Okay, that does it.
>
> This article is a logical mess, and doesn't explain anything. A more
> useful thing to read IMO for understanding what happened in Nazi
> Germany and what's going on today might be Erich Fromm, "Escape from
> Freedom," which actually makes sense.
>
> This NYT article is supposedly about fundamentalism, but doesn't even
> bother to define the term. It implies in the second paragraph that
> the Nazi movement was one of many "forms of tyrannical fundamentalism"
> then goes on explain Freud's theory about why people might follow a
> tyrannical leader (a theory that seems pure BS to me, but that's not my
> point here). Now we have to ask ourselves, what does blindly following
> a leader have to do with fundamentalism? Is he saying that the
> "fundamentalist urge" is the urge to blindly follow a tyrannical
> leader? No definition of fundamentalism I know of requires adherence to
> a tyrannical leader. What's more, I don't think that what's happening
> today in the US can be adequately explained by blind adherence to a
> tyrannical leader.
>
> What characterizes fundamentalism is a strong convinction that you
> are in possession of Truth, an inability to see things from someone
> else's perspective, an utter intolerance for other points of view. This
> is true of Bush and his gang, and it is also true of the tone of many
> of the posts in this thread. The one useful paragraph in this NYT
> article, IMO, is the last paragraph, where he cautions that those who
> fight against tyranny can become tyrannical themselves. "When that
> happens, a war of fundamentalisms has begun, and of that war there can
> be no victor." THIS is the real danger.
>
>> in fact remove much of the animus, which it does seem is already
>> lower. That's good. We've bottled up these feelings for "peace on
>> the list" for years. If they come out now, for a while anyway,
>> without hysterics and rage (or KILL THE MESSENGER as did happen
>> briefly) it's better, not worse for "the list," which is after all a
>> "community."
>
>
> But what you seem to have failed to grasp is that the community
> includes Dave Rose and Tom Ferguson and other people who don't agree
> with you about politics, and room and respect must be offered and
> restraint must be exercised so that people of all political stances can
> feel comfortable belonging here and discussing photography. I am
> probably to the left of almost any US citizen here, but I don't want
> Tom Ferguson called a nazi any more than I want people who agree with
> me politically to be called names. The point is that our political
> opinions should not be of interest here, one way or the other, because
> this is not a political list. The only thing of interest here is
> alternative photography. Those who choose to continue making this a
> political list, will kill this list.
>
> Katharine Thayer
>
>

-- 
________________________________________________________________
   Bogdan Karasek
   Montréal, Québec            e-mail: bkarasek@videotron.ca
   Canada
                   "I photograph my reality"
__________________________________________________________________