[FRIAM] Revising the American Revolution

[uǝlƃ ☤>$]

Excellent! Thanks.

My complete ignorance forced me to duckduckgo it. The results were mostly useless. But Urban Dict seems to work:

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Neener-neener

One of the definitions also raises the brinkmanship aspect Nick seemed to include (with "I'm more pomo than you"). It's still not clear to me if Nick thinks *I* was brinking him or if he simply had no serious response to my criticism and just defaulted to his own brinking. Whatever, my criticism still stands: that Rawls' was a neoliberal justificationist, not any kind of deep egalitarian. But I'm working off very old and faulty memory. So, I wait with baited breath for a counter.

As always, treating posts to a permanent, public forum like this as if they were chatty conversations seems ill-advised. I'm guilty of it, too. But ... tu quoque, I guess. 


On 10/27/21 8:11 AM, Steve Smith wrote:
> 
> On 10/27/21 7:53 AM, Frank Wimberly wrote:
>> Most people would spell that, "nanner, nanner, nanner", I think.  It's heard on playgrounds all over, or it was in the 40s and 50s.  In Mexico they sing, "lero, lero, lero",  using the same notes.
> 
> It would seem there are many regional and quasi-generational dialects of Silly Taunts...  I believe my playground training involved something more like "Nyah, Nyah, Nyah!" with a sprinkling of allusions to one's grandma wearing army boots.  We also were issued lariats along with dodge-balls and were allowed (up to injury that drew blood) to chase one another around and try to "head" or "heel" one another.   I never understood what the teachers were thinking, though I did enjoy the "game", both as roper and ropee... go figure.
> 
> I think this thread backs into a metaphor of mail-list-as-playground/sandlot and some of the kind of bullying the Jon tried to reference.  
> 
> 
>>
>> ---
>> Frank C. Wimberly
>> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
>> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>>
>> 505 670-9918
>> Santa Fe, NM
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 27, 2021, 7:35 AM uǝlƃ ☤>$ <gepropella at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>     I have no idea how to respond to this post. I don't know what "neener, neener, neener" means, unfortunately. But the grand narrative I'm talking about is the (I suppose Rawlsian?) social contract, including the wall of ignorance. That's distinct, I think, from the altruism of joining a collective effort to take responsibility for the future. The social contract argument seems fundamentally self-serving, especially the wall of ignorance fulcrum. It's a neo-liberal rhetorical device used to bridge the chasm between self-serving and pro-social perspectives.
>>
>>     It's that bridge that is the grand narrative of the social contract. If you don't buy into that story, then the whole thing comes crumbling down. Most of my generation (X) and the Y's and Z's are calling the emperor naked at this point. So when you tell the story of the pre- and post- civil war understanding of the constitution to anyone under, say, 50 years old, you *might* want to consider that.
>>
>>     For some reason, I feel like King Arthur at the base of the French castle in The Holy Grail: https://youtu.be/QSo0duY7-9s
>>
>>
>>     On 10/26/21 1:03 PM, thompnickson2 at gmail.com wrote:
>>     > Grand narratives. Oh, neener, neener, neener.  I assume that we are all endowed with a very fuzzy ruleset from which patterns of association arise.  What's grand about it.  I admit to a desire to join with others in taking responsibility for our future.  I think that such a joining is a "good", even while conceding that, given complexity, that the future we plan for is unlikely to be the future we get.
>>     >
>>     > How DARE you pin me with a categorical pin.  Besides, I am much more pomo than you are. 
>>     >
>>     > As I said: Neener, neener, neener.  And so's your old man.

-- 
"Better to be slapped with the truth than kissed with a lie."
☤>$ uǝlƃ