The most recent 20 comments posted to Electrolite by David Neiwert:

Well, in sifting through the various accounts -- which differed in detials -- I spotted the obvious holes in the News-Herald version, several of which are detailed by the school district's denial.

But the district's denial doesn't in fact negate the core facts of the story, most of which I tried to sift out in the post. It was clear, for instance, that the "shut your face" remark was spoken by the person reading the counter-poem, not by the principal. That doesn't excuse Principal Tripp's behavior in clearly condoning both the sentiment and the purpose of the ceremony.

Note also that the district's denial does not refute other core facts: the poetry club was shut down, other students faced retaliation, the fact that all these actions came after the military liaison officer complained, and the clear fact that Bill Nevin's attempts to move to another district were held up by school officials (though whether it was incompetence or maliciousness is something that will probably be determined in court).

Neither, it must be noted, does the student poet's letter refute any of these facts. She is simply upset (understandably so) at the invasion of her privacy by people interested in the case, and the hijacking of her poem.

Some of the facts do remain unclear, and I expect they'll sift out. In the meantime, I simply thought that regardless of the district's defense, the core facts of the Nevin case were difficult to refute. It was an example of the suppressive behavior that I think is actually fairly widespread, particularly in the context of the current war, engaged in by people in all kinds of official capacities in small ways, that often go completely uncovered. It's the real-life extension of the "stab in the back" and "liberal treason" memes, played out on the local level.

By the way, thanks for the link, Patrick.

Well, conservatism and liberalism have always had their extremists. What's always mattered is the nature of their respective relationships.

That is, how close are the two sectors? To what extent do extremist values and ideas permeate the mainstream and affect the public debate?

I would argue that in the 1960s and even into the '70s, mainstream liberals had a far closer relationship to their extremists than they do now. Radical leftist memes and values were much more common and even acceptable then. Nowadays they're being drawn rightward, becoming much more centrist, in large part because of the gravitational pull being exerted from the right.

And on the right, the growing closeness of extremist elements with mainstream conservatism is eminently visible. This is particularly true when it comes to memes from the far right migrating to the mainstream, thanks to such folk as Ann Coulter and Pat Buchanan.

On the other hand, Mr. de Genova's views do not appear anywhere among mainstream American liberals, even in a mutated form. The only memes I can think of that resemble his clearly radical anti-Americanism are those that float about on the anarcho- and vegan left.

Moreover, there are very few de Genovas out there. OTOH, there is a nearly endless supply of right-wing extremists generating all kinds of memes that somehow appear in places like Fox News.

Indeed, that was the underpinning of the Trent Lott controversy. Lott's associations with neo-Confederates was problematic precisely because they are in fact right-wing extremists. The line that got him into hot water was a favorite among these extremists, and Lott was just trotting it out for public consumption, like so many other similar memes.

His supposed punishment merely was a whitewash of the GOP's dirty little secret: It cannot win a national election without the support of its extremists.

Comment statistics for David Neiwert on the Electrolite blog

Total: 2 comments. View all these comments on a single page.