Salman Rushdie and Civility

If anyone would be expected to understand the idea of sensitivity and hypersensitivity, it would be Salman Rushdie (image of Rushdie at a film festival in 2011).

According to a recent article in the NYTimes (which carried the image shown above), Rushdie has a strong sense of civility as noted,

"...he seems to expect a certain civility. Mr. Rushdie blocked a Twitter follower last month [that would be Feb 2012] after the follower made a cutting remark about having read one of Mr. Rushdie’s books in high school. “Discourtesy not tolerated here,” Mr. Rushdie wrote in a tweet. “Your parents need to teach you your manners.”"

On the other hand,  here is a tweet made by Rushdie only yesterday,

Confused by news of Dick Cheney's heart "transplant." That implies he had one before.

9:09 AM - 25 Mar 12 via web

I think what Rushdie means is not "Discourtesy not tolerated by anyone" but "Discourtesy of me is not tolerated by me." Thus it would not be hypocritical to slam the 'follower' but then turn around and make a vicious comment about former VP Cheney. Of course, this doesn't mean that Rushdie is a nice guy, because, it shows he can be vicious (and the discourtesy to himself may irritate him because of an over sense of ego). 




NYTimes article here
Tweet here.

Two Cheers for double standards

Stanley Fish writing in a NYTimes blog (the same title as this post) essentially says that it is OK to be critical of Rush Limbaugh (right image) but not Bill Maher. This is so even though what he said wasn't as nasty as what Bill Maher (left) said and even though Maher never apologized.

He specifically says the the Tim Noah theory (in the post below) "won't wash".

Instead he says that the larger issue of having your ideas triumph (since you must view your ideas as the right ideas) justifies not being fair, specifically,

"... Rather than relaxing or soft-pedaling your convictions about what is right and wrong, stay with them, and treat people you see as morally different differently. Condemn Limbaugh and say that Schultz and Maher may have gone a bit too far but that they’re basically O.K. If you do that you will not be displaying a double standard; you will be affirming a single standard, and moreover it will be a moral one because you will be going with what you think is good rather than what you think is fair. “Fair” is a weak virtue; it is not even a virtue at all because it insists on a withdrawal from moral judgment.
I know the objections to what I have said here. It amounts to an apology for identity politics. It elevates tribal obligations over the universal obligations we owe to each other as citizens. It licenses differential and discriminatory treatment on the basis of contested points of view. It substitutes for the rule “don’t do it to them if you don’t want it done to you” the rule “be sure to do it to them first and more effectively.” It implies finally that might makes right. I can live with that."

So I take this as a statement that some things (politics) are too important to avoid hypocrisy.



Mr. Fish's blog post on this is here.

Tim Noah Defends Carbonite

Actually, I'm not sure Tim Noah (a journalist and senior editor of The New Republic) means to defend Carbonite (a company which sells software to back up files in cyberspace). In fact, I have no evidence to support my guess that Noah may know that the Carbonite company exists.

However, Carbonite recently ended their sponsorship of the Rush Limbaugh radio program. This was because, apparently of Mr. Limbaugh's reference to Sandra Flute as a sl.te (Ms Flute is an unmarried student at Georgetown law school who advocated requiring employers to pay for contraception). Limbaugh subsequently apologized for that. Carbonite, however, retained sponsorship of the Mr. Ed show despite Ed Schultz calling Laura Ingraham the same thing (Ed Schultz did apologize for this but not for other insults of this kind).

If I didn't cite the Carbonite issue, the whole thing wouldn't be hypocrisy because people who criticized Rush Limbaugh would claim they didn't know and shouldn't have to look up information about the Mr. Ed show (this wouldn't apply to Carbonite).

Mr. Noah cites a few cases of liberals calling conservative women obscenity laden names and says that this isn't the same for two reasons.

1. Sandra Flute, although a public activist, is not a public figure.As Mr. Noah puts it, "...First, all of the people who were subjected to verbal abuse by the liberal- or left-leaning blowhards and smart-asses mentioned above are public figures. If you follow politics you know who they are. Fluke, on the other hand, though a political activist, was not really a public figure.."

2. Something to do with President Obama not being afraid of rappers (I didn't follow the logic since, among other things, I thought it was about calling women names). Mr. Noah considers this more important than #1 above.

3. Rush Limbaugh has a bigger audience than the liberals who called conservatives obscenity laden names.As Mr. Noah puts it, "...When Taibbi, Olbermann, Mahar, and Schultz tell liberals what to think few of us even hear what it is they're saying and no politician pays them any mind. (Sorry, fellas, but it's true.) It matters more to society what a person with a big following says than what a person with a small following says."

Mr. Noah did not address the fact that Limbaugh apologized and the liberals generally didn't. He also asserts, without citing facts, the influence of Limbaugh. He also doesn't weigh the fact that Ms Flute is seeking to be a public figure.

Notwithstanding those things, he probably believes them. However, what about the totality. Even if each individual liberal insult (unacceptably vile, in Noah's words) is less important than Limbaugh's doesn't the fact that there are many of them count for something. Also, why isn't Mr. Limbaugh's apology important.

Even given Mr. Noah's beliefs, I can't excuse him from the charge of hypocrisy.

Tim Noah's piece in TNR is here.
Kisten Powers (writing for the Daily Beast) gives a more complete list (than Mr. Noah did) of liberal misogyny here.
Michelle Malkin (who used to live in our neighborhood) gives a list here.  Ms Malkin is the subject of many such misogynistic insults (she got enough for one chapter of a book). She has stated that she left our neighborhood because of threats.

Story on Carbonite's actions regarding the Rush Limbaugh program and the Mr. Ed program is here. This story also has embedded video so it covers quite a bit.

Death threats, approximately contemporaneous with the Noah article, reported against Limbaugh here.
next day, Keith Obermann issues an apology (sort of) for misogynistic insults to SE Culp and Michelle Malkin here.