In the interests of a certain neutrality of presentation, I am omitting mention of the specific episode seemingly prompting this correspondence, and while the following citations are listed out of chronological order, I’ve done nothing to edit them or diminish their impact. In a nutshell, here is the case against me.
"(Roger is fostering) a culture of negativity and community dissent bred through loaded discourse ... (this is) negative and tearing down others’ committed and well intentioned acts.And so, the prosecution rests.
"Facts are distorted, reputations are sullied, and some of the authors are projecting their beliefs on other people's actions, like the conspiracies imagined and connected to every good work/project.
"When folks attempt to try and do something toward community betterment (they) are raked over the coals for doing so.
"(What is missing) is an effort on (Roger’s) part to be a part of the solution, to offer input on problem-solving on some of these issues. Why not take the time to call and have some dialogue and understand … instead, public criticism through the blog becomes your bully pulpit.
"(These words will) be distorted and predictably used as further fodder for your destructive antics.
"Many folks have told me that they refuse to patronize your business because of your condescending tactics and negativity.
"See how toxic your approach can be."
Is there even hope of a defense?
Discuss.
You don't present any attribution; this appears to be a Fox Editorial for such dearth.
ReplyDeleteComments culled from three separate transmissions; identity withheld to protect self-fulfilling prophecies.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, I'm reading Zizek. Work's been a bear.
Ad Hominem attacks are New Albany's favorite form of political discourse.
ReplyDeleteRoger, while I strongly disagree with individual posts, if I were to word associate "New Albany" and "Culture of Negativity," NAC and your other writings are not the first to come to mind. Taken as a package, your message is one of optimism; you believe the city and its citizens can do better.
As for those who "refuse to patronize your business," I feel sorry for them. First, that attitude reflects insecurity and pettiness. Second, they’re missing out on the best food in town.
If the author(s) of the above can point to any other New Albany publication, group, etc., that in the past few years has publicly provided more ideas, examples, case studies, and reviews of best practices as they relate to revitalization strategy (i.e., locally adoptable, positive ways forward) than the community who participates at NAC, please do so. Having looked nearly every day and apparently missed them, I'd sincerely like to see their output. No joke. No sarcasm. Where is it?
ReplyDeleteAs Dan has correctly communicated and at times personified, constant agreement is neither expected nor required and open disagreement is likewise not considered a threat to be quashed. What appears here is, in my view, offered under the assumption that readers and residents possess the intelligence necessary to discern for themselves what is valuable and applicable.
It's unfortunate that others have a more negative view, thinking the local populace so incapable of sensible decision making that they must appoint themselves solitary arbiters of what's to be done for the common good.
If facilitating community dialogue concerning desired outcomes and the proper processes for achieving them is dangerous to personal agendas, then it may be time to consider that those agendas are themselves dangerous to the community.
Revitalization and community are ongoing, participatory processes, not some finite, bricks and mortar result.
There are at least two approaches to "revitalizing" an area. The first is to determine what's important to the people who populate the place and then help them devise and implement strategies to make it more viable moving forward. The second is to go into a place not bothering to develop such understanding, impose your own paternalistic will on it, and then act offended whenever someone objects to your "good" work.
I've admittedly had to learn that the hard way at times but at least I've learned it. To consider it as not worth learning is a matter of arrogance, not expertise.
Jeff you have expressed exactly what is wrong with and needed for our community. Thanks for your insight.
ReplyDeleteRoger I disagree with your approach at times but I understand both your passion,frustration and hope for what most of us hope for New Albany to be. Keep it up--ruffle those feathers.
Let us all benefit from thought provoking ideas whether we agree or not.