12 August 2014

Is This Appropriate?

Update #2: Kevin offers up an update that confirms his fondness of straw men:
"I have never compared Confederate soldiers with Nazis"
And I never said he did. My relevant quote was: "comparing the Confederate Battle Flag to the Nazi flag." And he acknowledged that this particular comparison "connected to this [Levin's] blog's theme." His words, not mine.

Update: Kevin responds wanting to know what's so "odd" about the post referenced below. Actually, I was being measured in my criticism. So let me elaborate, as Kevin requested. Frankly, Kevin's original post struck me as opportunistic - using a tragic and sad event to highlight what many of us with Confederate soldier ancestors would deem offensive: comparing the Confederate Battle Flag to the Nazi flag. That's a comparison that's been made on Kevin's blog before and, one which I believe he (among others) thinks has merit. So, again, the timing and controversial nature of the quote came off to me as opportunistic, self-serving and inappropriate; given the circumstances. That's my opinion. Readers of this blog as well as Kevin's are entitled to express theirs as well. My opinion is no more, nor any less, valid. It is, after all, just an opinion. I don't know Kevin's heart, but I do know what his opinion about the CBF is from reading his blog. So my opinion was influenced by Kevin's rather voluminous history on that topic. I think that is reasonable.

Furthermore, Kevin seems to indicate that his congratulating me on my recent book should have insulated him from my criticism. I can be critical of someone and remain cordial, as I responded to Kevin's congratulations by thanking him and saying that I "Hope your school year is a productive one." 

End of update.

Is it appropriate to use the occasion of someone's suicide to highlight a perspective on the Civil War? 


4 comments:

E.J. DAgrosa said...

That's just odd.

Richard G. Williams, Jr. said...

It's a little beyond odd in my opinion, but I'll leave it at that. Thanks for the comment.

Anonymous said...

There are different systems of justice - "inquisitorial system," "adversarial system," and "trial by combat."

According to wiki on the "Adversarial System," Some writers trace the process to the medieval mode of "trial by combat" in which some litigants, notably women, were allowed a champion to represent them. The use of the jury in the common law system seems to have fostered the adversarial system and provides the opportunity of both sides to argue their point of view.

According to wiki on: "Trial By Combat," a code of c. 1300, prohibits judicial duels altogether, stating that the Roman emperor had come to this decision on seeing that too many innocent men were convicted by the practice just for being physically weak. Nevertheless, judicial duels continued to be popular throughout the 14th and 15the centuries.

I think Kevin should apply for the role of a prosecuting attorney in a black and white movie. His "adversarial system" techniques are flawless.

As for "trial by combat," isn't that what the civil war was? The south lost, just for being physically weak, as predicted by Rhett Butler in Gone With The Wind.

And the "2nd Place Trophies" in the "Trial by Combat" can be seen on Monument Ave.

Nice system of jurisprudence.

Richard G. Williams, Jr. said...

"His "adversarial system" techniques are flawless."

Apparently not, since they are consistently made up of fallacies. His arguments are rather easy to counter with logic and truth; to which he responds with distractions and silliness. Outside of his academic bubble, his reputation is quite different.

"The south lost, just for being physically weak, as predicted by Rhett Butler in Gone With The Wind."

Rhett Butler, being a fictional character of 1939, had the advantage of hindsight. It's rather easy to predict the past.

Thanks for the comment.