Tuesday, August 30, 2011

Exit Is Not a Productive Mode of Articulating Criticism

What I Said at Sunstone - Kristine (By Common Consent)
Posted by at

5 comments:

Chino Blanco said...

The author is quite brilliant, but she's got this one thoroughly, completely, absolutely wrong and doesn't lay a finger on Hirschman's argument.

August 30, 2011 at 10:00 PM
Papa D said...

Chino, I post links regularly to posts that I believe are thought-provoking, no matter how much I agree with them. I probably should have added a line for this one that stated explicitly that I linked to it more for the commentary following the post than because I agree with everything in the post. I don't agree with everything in it, especially as it applies to ALL people who leave.

There are some situations for some groups that are so difficult, egregious or flat-out wrong that asking them to stay and criticize from the inside is not right. I get that and will never argue otherwise. However, for the vast majority of LDS members, I believe their "criticism" does not fit that description.

In that regard, I do agree with Kristine that leaving is not a "productive" model.

I don't know if you agree with this comment or not, especially given your own situation, but I really should have made that clear when I posted the link.

August 30, 2011 at 11:48 PM
Papa D said...

Also, Chino, if you read this comment, please read the link I am posting on Thursday. I scheduled it for Thursday largely as a companion post to this one - to show a post that talks about not rejecting people who leave the LDS Church.

August 30, 2011 at 11:55 PM
Chino Blanco said...

Hey, thanks for the fair response. I was glad to see you bringing attention to that post. I think it's an important discussion. And I'd be willing to admit that there are productive modes of articulating criticism from the inside. My specific beef with Haglund's position is that she doesn't take into account how conditions on the ground have changed in recent years. For example, she asserts a lack of leverage "unless you belong to a large, identifiable cohort of exiters"... To which I'd reply: The Washington Post links to our exmo projects just like they link to the bloggernacle. At some point, I expect she's gonna have to admit that we qualify for "cohort" status. In the meantime, BCC can keep pretending we don't exist by banning us, but the only thing that accomplishes is warping their own view of the situation, and we'll just keep adding to our numbers and raising our visibility and developing exactly the kind of leverage that Haglund wants to suggest will always be beyond our reach.

Otherwise, if you've got a new link coming up on Thursday, you're certainly invited to post your link to reddit.com/r/mormon ... that's where I put the links I plan to read.

August 31, 2011 at 12:58 AM
Kristine said...

Chino, fwiw, I kind of hope you're right. I wasn't just covering my argumentative behind when I said the Savage model is unsatisfying. I think there are important criticisms that can only be made from the outside, and the church has responded in the past to pressure from non-Mormons making public critiques. In some ways, ex- and post-Mormons can make more insightful and necessary critiques, and I think it would be salutary for the church to be able to take them into account. I just don't think we're there yet (or even as close as you suggest).

And BCC is warped in all kinds of ways--no argument there :)

September 6, 2011 at 10:01 AM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)