How ILE Won The War

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
OK this is just armchair sociology, NOT an attack on anybody in particular OR ILE as a whole...please don't take it the wrong way.

it seems to me that after Sept 11, there was a brief period when people tried to delve into serious discussions. Maybe that type of discussion was just too earnest for this forum or most of us were too ill-informed to sustain it, but all those geo-political threads evaporated right around the time the bombing began. Since that point, ILE's all been pretty flirty, silly and self-involved (NOT THAT THERE's ANYTHING WRONG WITH THAT. FUN IS GOOD.)Why do you think discussions of the war dried up? Do you think ILE has gotten more light and frothy (maybe even verging on irrelevance at times?)in the past month? If this is so, do you think ILE is reflecting a broader change in social discourse?

fritz, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

are we seeing an evolution of ILE from generally being questions of public (pop culture criticism, aesthetics) to the personal(ethics and sexuality)?

(I may be way way off on all of this, I haven't really been here that long)

fritz, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I R wondering, what couild be more globally important than matters of fatnick?

I R grate!, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Because I bulldozed all threads about it, calling out a few people and going completely apeshit freaked out, basically. It's pretty much at least partially my fault for losing my shit over it, though I will say at least two of my rages were wholly justified.

Ally, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

exactly.

fritz, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

that "exactly" WERE aimed at fatnick, not ally.

fritz, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

For me it's a matter of information overload. it seems like that's the only thing I've heard on the news for the past 6 weeks and I have no desire to talk about it anymore. I'm numb to it.

Samantha, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Coulda been aimed at me too, I admit my rages.

ALly, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Sidestepping old laughing boy there -- threads do pop up now again about the situation, but as with any other thread it's all up to the sustained interest of participants to keep it going, an interest which is of course not required of any of us. Those who will want to talk and discuss, will.

Ned Raggett, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I just don't remember them that well, ally... you just went off a couple of times and your rage seemed pretty specific, I don't think you bulldozed the whole thing.

fritz, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

'Laughing boy' being Fatnick -- it is all about him!

Ned Raggett, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

yes, ned, I agree that no-one's required to discuss anything... what I was trying to get at was *why* the sustained interest in discussion of current events had diminished and if anyone sees a pattern in discussion, both on-line and off, tending towards the more playful in recent weeks.

fritz, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

The problem, seriously, with a discussion like the one we were having, is that there are too many armchair sociologists, as you put it, who were a bit, um, well...not tactful about how they dealt with an issue that was directly affecting several people on the board. Which bothered me a couple of times. The only time I truly got pissed though was at someone who tried to turn it into an episode of self- pity for the poor darling, so maybe the sociologists aren't the problem at all but rather the people I actually know in real life. That's another discussion.

Though maybe it's not - a lot of us have met each other and have certain opinions of one another. DOES that damage the ability to have discussion like this? There are certain posters that I can read their posts and imagine, for better or for worse, just how they are saying it and how it is meant, because I know them well enough. Which sometimes results in "unwarranted" behavior towards the people in question, because I just look at it as behavior is behavior online or offline and I don't stop to think that other people DON'T know the way the person is in real life, so the in-jokes and, conversely, the in-nastiness is not understandible to most readers.

Does anyone else find this a problem or am I nuts?

ALly, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I R not sure wether to be insulted by that!

I R fatnick, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I think the things you're saying are true Ally but I think the discussions have waned more b/c of the reason I gave. We're all flooded with this stuff everywhere we look. It's nice to come here and *not* talk about it. Does that answer your question Fritz?

There was just a news conference with AG Ashcroft saying there was a credible threat of more attacks within the next week and law enforcement was being put on alert. All I want to do is work on an altar for El Dia de Los Muertos. Can't the world leave me alone?

Samantha, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

so what about the discussion since the geopolitical stuff died off, do you think it's had a different tone than that which preceded it?

fritz, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Ally's wrong about her bulldozing - I honestly don't think it had that much of an effect other than the good effect of making some people stop and think. I think basically that if you look at the threads posted immediately before the 11th you'll see the same mix of frivolity and the occasional serious thread, but with a tentativeness that isn't so much there now.

The noticeable trend since the 11th for me has been people posting "I have this problem. What should I do?" threads, asking for the advice of the community, and a general rise in the level of intimacy and informality. I think that is attributable to the 11th-threads, because we all used the boards in our different ways during that time and we got through it without biting each others heads off and if you look anywhere else on the web that is quite surprising.

So why aren't we talking about the war now (actually there were a couple of big - 60 or 70 message - threads when the bombing started, and a handful of small ones since)? I think partly because we're all a bit talked out. I think partly because a lot of us were on ILE before and wanted to do our bit to put ILE 'back to normal', or back to an exaggerated normality. I think also partly because we're all a bit surprised by what ILE did become during the week or so after and we're not sure we want to push things to see if it could be that again or if whatever community formed then can withstand continued high-level debate.

Or of course it might just be Fatnick.

Tom, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

And yeah, knowing people in real life completely changes how I read their posts. It's why I feel most comfortable on ILE when all the people I know are posting, since I've not really fallen out with any of them (yet).

Tom, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Can't the world leave me alone?

Without trying to sound awful, but it must be said -- I would guess most Afghanis are thinking the same thing right now. I understand the impulse towards wanting to hide away, but there we are -- the situation exists. I too would rather like to be left alone, though...

Ned Raggett, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

well, not knowing anyone on ILE personally, I'm probably less interested in the "who do you like best?" type of threads than those of you who hang out together. And there's been a whack more of those since sept 11, which is kinda sweet in its own way.

fritz, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I also think that people notice a lot of threads they're not interested in more than lots of threads they are. There have been times when I've thought "Dammit the board is being overrun by TV threads" when in reality there were maybe 4 on the new answers.

Tom, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Perhaps this is of note: discussion of the attacks and 'war' has dried up among my friends and my department members, too.

Josh, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I honestly think people are tired of it due to insane press overkill, ie the BBC always seem to have "not very much at all happened in Afghanistan today" headlines.

DG, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Of all things to be tired of, though. *sigh* What a world...

Ned Raggett, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Rumsfeld was commenting on the "lack of news" issue this morning. Basically, turning the bloodlust question back on the media, saying that the military won't be goaded into a harder attack simply because not enough of the current war is being televised.

The spookiest point of the press conference, was the talk about helping arm the Northern Alliance. If that doesn't sound off warning bells about history repeating itself, I don't know what can.

bnw, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I'm often reluctant to say things on ILE regarding the war because I just don't want to bother defending my opinions and create more animosity to add. It's not like it's going to make a difference in Afghanistan, after all. That's lazy and cowardly, I know, but I don't plan on changing.

Maria, Monday, 29 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I arrived at this forum and assumed we were not going to right the worlds wrongs on-line, nor indulge in detailed, exhaustive and inevitably biased rants on the world trade centre, osama bin ladin etc etc. The board is called I Love Everything which seems fairly frivilous to me, so serious posts on stuff I can get annoyed about on the news are not the ones I would naturally gravitate towards

Menelaus Darcy, Tuesday, 30 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

dont mention the war.

Geoff, Tuesday, 30 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

To your point Ned, the only news stories I still find intresting to hear/read are about the Afgahns. The actual "war" stuff or the political wranglings interest me less. I wish our government would launch a campaign to invite Afgahn refugees to come to America.

Samantha, Tuesday, 30 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Well, a few of the people who talk the most about this stuff, and (in my opinion) with the most clarity, like Kate, Nitsuh, Nick C and Mark Sinker, have been elsewhere/not posting much due to job stuff etc. I tennd to react or add to what they've said because it makes me think HARD. Frivolity doesn't bug me, I just don't post on those threads or mutate them.

suzy, Tuesday, 30 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Basically, I'm not happy with either possible scenario for ILE, which is why I've been reading it less and less. I don't particularly like most of the chatty stuff, but the least you can say for it is that it is democratizing: humor tends to have that effect. Whereas in the more serious discussions - I don't know, I start to see these hierarchies develop that I've seen in every online social group I've been part of, and I really don't feel comfortable in that sort of group. This is pretty much why I stopped participating in ILM. Groups like that tend to get impersonal and certain values get privileged - certain ways of expressing oneself or making an argument. A dominant culture develops. It's not the right of an individual to alter the social dynamic of a group, nor is it within their power, so if someone doesn't like it, about all they can really do...is look somewhere else.

Kerry, Tuesday, 30 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Kerry - I know what you mean about ILM, but I think it's getting better now. You might want to check it out again.

fritz, Tuesday, 30 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

A dominant culture develops.

Is this not pretty much inevitable, though? Not to deny the truth of it, but it seems the corollary here is that you must feel pretty uneasy with just about any group you find yourself in.

Ned Raggett, Tuesday, 30 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I feel pretty uneasy in every group I find myself part of.

fritz, Tuesday, 30 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

don't you? haven't you ever watched the history channel?

fritz, Tuesday, 30 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Ned, yes that is the case, although not with small groups (I'm not anti-social). I guess I'm a perpetual underdog.

Kerry, Tuesday, 30 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Well, Fritz, I get along fine with this group. :-)

Ned Raggett, Tuesday, 30 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Does anyone think it strange that the white house is announcing Dick Cheney is being kept at a seceret and secure location while bush is throwing at the first pitch in yankee stadium tonight? Could Cheney really be dead?

Samantha, Tuesday, 30 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I was just kidding, but group dynamics are generally ugly. For the most part I see very little of that here. I mean some people get their asses kissed a little more than others, but being mean & nasty and bullying seems pretty clearly frowned upon. People have been very generous with their ideas and support for each other here. Those depression advice threads a few weeks back were really really nice.

fritz, Tuesday, 30 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Could Cheney really be dead?

*There's* a movie plot for ya. Cheney needs blood and it's discovered that the only person in the world with the same exact type due to a rare condition is...OSAMA BIN LADEN! Now secret agent Hank Rockjaw must battle both the Taleban and the US Armed Forces in a desperate race to both save and capture America's greatest enemy! Coming Soon to a Theatre Near You -- _HARD BLOOD_.

Ned Raggett, Tuesday, 30 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I've had similar thoughts about ILM, but I think the individual does have the right and certainly has the power to effect certain changes in groups they have at least a tacit membership in - especially "open" groups such as this one.

Probably the main reason these hierarchies and pet norms develop (and kill much of the interesting debate) is because one by one, the dissenters and the supposed quare pegs allow *themselves* to feel unwelcome and fall silent and/or drop away.

Often it seems as if people are working under the assumption that most others are only interested in the opinions of some inner circle that probably only half exists and is certainly not exclusive, and the very idea that it is runs contrary to the fact that this discussion is here and not in someone's living room, and also the other fact that anyone is free to join.

That is, unless it's all just some perverse trick to make interlopers look foolish of course. (nyeah nyeah) Anyhow - I'm off topic.

The war stuff - yeah, I think this escapist attitude is taking hold everywhere and not just here. It's at the point where we all know what's going on, we're all watching the news for and waiting something else big and bad to happen, some of us are deep down scared but are sporting the good ol' stiff upper lip, we're all upset and disturbed on different such levels that talking about it just feels as if it takes too much energy and does more harm than good.

Kim, Tuesday, 30 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

God Bless the USSA!

Kerry, Tuesday, 30 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

ow..excuse those garbled bits - really don't know what happened there

quare = square

Kim, Tuesday, 30 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

where is momus, btw?

Geoff, Tuesday, 30 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Nick is on tour and appears to be having a whale of a time roadtripping with Stereo Total. I would imagine he is having the same conversations with the people he is meeting as would do here re: current situation so it's all to the good.

Sixty-second Op-Ed piece: Bush and Dick are TWATs. Who is surprised, less than a year after Indecision 2000, at the state of our world? I do feel like I am watching The Omen IV sometimes. Like Bush, OBL is a spoilt rich kid who is far removed from the chess game currently under way, and Western imperialism/the Palestine situation, sinister as these things are, does not excuse his actions or incitements. A lot of this is a one form of macho bullshit fighting another form of macho bullshit, and we need less of that. The West did not give a ripe shit about the Arab nations either way until black gold was found in them thar hills. There is a shitload of oil under Afghanistan's rough terrain - and there are a few failed oilmen in government who see the acquisition of this as a long-range goal - and all this talk about justice for the 9/11 victims is just obfuscation. The only fitting memorial to all these lost lives is to use our freedoms wisely and ensure they can be shared by others, without the good cop/bad cop approach taken by our public servants.

And let's do find the rednecks sending anthrax letters, although there is a perverse genius at work in sending white powder to newsrooms. I wonder if they put it in wraps, as that would lend Friday afternoon authenticity (seriously, I know of at least two tabloid reporters who used to be their papers' Medellin operatives, so there). I'm a little bit jumpy about all this because I live right in between the ITN building, the Mount Pleasant post/sorting office, the big Holborn CID office, and Cherie Blair's chambers are right across the street.

You may be interested to know that my friend Hugo, who is currently stationed in Batumi in Muslim-held Georgia, will soon be sent to Afghanistan by the satellite network for whom he is currently working. He's ace: a year ago he and three others successfully completed a challenge to the UK government in the EU Court to equalise the age of consent for gay men to 16, thus is everything the Taliban hate and also would make Dubya squiffy (memo to Theban Horde - he's also *yummy*). He will be joining the 1000 other journalists who are paying Northern Alliance interpreters $100 per day to guide them through the area ('this is so they can keep tabs' sez H). If he has time and access to his Hotmail, I will ask him to post here, from there.

Oh, and is anyone with me in this definition of 'recession': I define it as someone with a very good job telling those of us who don't have one that we can't have one.

suzy, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

The West is going down, because we're weak and decadent. Two headlines juxtaposed ('Observer'?) - 'Brits fight for Taliban', and 'Demand for legalisation of Ecstasy'. Rave unto the grave.

dave q, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I plan to.

Andrew L, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

The only fitting memorial to all these lost lives is to use our freedoms wisely and ensure they can be shared by others, without the good cop/bad cop approach taken by our public servants.
I'm not sure how these two approaches are that different.

bnw, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I agree with Ned. There's something about people being 'bored' or world events that is disturbing, and the fact that more people aren't disturbed is even more disturbing. I think that, even compared to pre 9/11, the board is verging on the hebephrenic.

dave q, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

'Bored BY...'

dave q, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I think only a couple of people have said they were *bored* by world events, as opposed to feeling frustrated, impotent etc. I think for a lot of posters the board offers an area of escapism, and there's not anything intrinsically wrong with that. If ILE was filled with powerful opinion-formers and we were saying, oh let's not talk about the war, then that would be a different situation.

The boards' quality, as Suzy notes, is very much dependent on who's around to post.

Tom, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

hebe whats see?

Geoff, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

. I think for a lot of posters the board offers an area of escapism, and there's not anything intrinsically wrong with that.

That is what it has sometimes been for me.

Thinking about current world events, I am filled with a deep sense of powerlessness and despair. For me, talking about it only seems to make things worse. I haven't posted much on the political threads not because it bores me or because I don't care, but because it just reopens fresh wounds.

Nicole, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

The West is going down, because we're weak and decadent.

An eternal complaint about just about every society. I don't buy it.

Ned Raggett, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Well Ned, I don't know about you but I've been feeling rather weak and decadent for awhile.

Samantha, Wednesday, 31 October 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

The individual level is something else again. ;-)

Ned Raggett, Thursday, 1 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I started some of the early 9-11 threads/discussions, and putting up interesting links and that, and Josh suggested starting a blog for this so I did. Which is linked straight back here, as well as to wherever. I think initially I also wanted a little space to think for myself about stuff, and not get so caught up in discussions, at least for a while. Dave q asks a lot of the questions I find most interesting, esp.about liberal assumptions and unquestioned standbys, but he tends also to word them to seem more abstract (and also mocking) than they actually are, whereas I tend to ground them so concretely to [whatever] that everyone talks about whatever and not the wider issue. Or not even [whatever], when they don't get what I'm on about.

mark s, Thursday, 1 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Oh, and is anyone with me in this definition of 'recession': I define it as someone with a very good job telling those of us who don't have one that we can't have one.

God, it certainly feels that way. Although I might be able to get back with the company I left in April... who are now doing much better. Yay!

Dan Perry, Thursday, 1 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

mark - i found the blog really useful. thanks

fritz, Thursday, 1 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.