Criticism of Amherst Life

We have been criticized on all angles after voicing our opinion that there is racism in Amherst, MA. The following appeared as a comment last night:

Amherst Life likes to make broad proclamations about the way things are in Amherst. The tone of the advocacy is idealogical rather than compelling on the merits. To me, the arguments are unconvincing because they make claims of fact without providing information, observations or experiences that inform the opinion and give it credence. Unsupported claims about unethical or immoral Amherst is an inherently self-righteous point of view, and frankly, it's easily dismessed. Here are some ideas. Write from the first person singular, from you to me. It's a more powerful voice. Write like your name is attached to the post. Speak to others like you care about them. Show them what you want them to see.

First, we are glad to see that people are reading and reacting to the blog -- that is the whiole point. Some of these discussions, when looked at beyind the context of an attack on Amherst -- are educational. Readers/commenters are brining their views to the table and there is dialogue. That is step 1.

Second, we'd like to address a few points in the commenter's critique. We may make broad proclamations and do our best to provide facts. Unfortunately, racism and acts of racism are not always documented. We must then look at issues from a broad perspective and then focus on things like: http://halogen.note.amherst.edu/~astudent/2001-2002/issue05/news/03.html

Developing a sensitivity and awareness regarding the multiple forms of racism in places like Amherst, MA is central to our mission. People who have that sensitivity, see the above link in a diferent context than folks who don't. Sometimes we need a broad understanding of race relations and racism to be able to see the effects of the above story (see the amherst.edu link in the previous paragraph).

And yes, we are dealing with ideologies and ideological constructions. Many of the topics we address are ideological and we try to explore them.

The commenter writes, "Unsupported claims about unethical or immoral Amherst is an inherently self-righteous point of view, and frankly, it's easily dismessed." In response, we'd like to say that, yes, there are elements in Amherst that are "unethical" and "immoral." Why is adressing those claims "self-righteous"? That remains a mystery to us. Perhaps the claims are easily dismissed to one party, but to another (as we see in the emails that constantly flow into our account), they are opening up a space for dialogue. Far too often people will say: there's no racism here, show me the evidence. When people feel it, it is there.

The commenter adds, "Here are some ideas. Write from the first person singular, from you to me. It's a more powerful voice. Write like your name is attached to the post. Speak to others like you care about them. Show them what you want them to see."

We appreciate your stylistic tips. However, We represent a collectivity and, as there are several of us, we prefer to express our views as a group. We write about topics that are very sensitive. Topics that have led to threats, intimidation, and "black-listing" (another word we should write about). As a group, we are willingy to confront what as individuals might be detrimental. And that directly reflects the state of things in this town.

And regarding the final point, "Speak to others like you care about them. Show them what you want them to see," we think you have a point. Some readers' comments have been quite agressive and we have responded agressively, often in ways that might make it seem like we don't care about people who have different opinions. In that sense, the commenter has every reason to remind us of our duty to do exactly what we want others to do; to show some respect and to listen to the "other" sides. We thank you for letting us see that, by responding to fire with fire, we may be contradicting ourselves and diluting our main purpose: to have dialogue. "To show them what you want them to see" means to have a space where multiple opinions can be expressed and respected. We thank you for those words.