Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW

Categories: Capital Read, Inkless Wells

Hey look: Peace in our time

by Paul Wells on Tuesday, March 23, 2010 5:43pm - 23 Comments

In which Coyne and Wells recover from our fray over the nature of Canadian conservatism to toast, via Skype, the latest triumph of American liberalism. That’s right: Coyne v Wells on Obamacare.

Tags: Coyne v. Wells, Insurance is mandatory, self-promotion

More by Paul Wells

jarrid

Off topic – but important breaking news. The Liberals, who are trying to make abortion a wedge issue, introduced a motion in the House to embarass the government on the G8 maternal and child health iniative. It failed to carry the day because some Liberal MP's voted against it and several others didn't show up.

Lefty Bob Rae introduced the motion but this Liberal political red herring fell apart on the Commons floor.

Maybe someone should tell Bob Rae that he's no longer with the NDP.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Fred_Moro Fred_Moro

You are right, off topic.

kcm

Not for the first time either.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Stewart_Smith Stewart_Smith

Well right off topic… but not right important. Jarrid please send your resume to Macleans, National Post, one of the Suns etcd… then you could be a journalist too!

http://intensedebate.com/profiles/tigerinexile Ben (The Tiger)

Sorry you're taking off, and that you've been smacked around a bit, but… yes, it's a f**king blog comment board!! (Using annoying software, which makes me log off my WordPress account and log in with my Intense Debate account (tigerinexile), which I'm no longer doing. B*stards. I'll abandon my close to 100p on the other account to avoid that annoyance.)

Internet fora always degenerate — have you not heard of Godwin's Law?!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law

Anyway, the comparison of contemporary concerns about Muslims and 19th century anti-Semitism will make sense to this reader once someone points out the historical existence of irregular networks of Jews who went around attacking civilians and chopping off heads. (Granted, the anarchist movement of the late 19th century bears some resemblance to al-Qaeda — but that was not a _Jewish_ movement per se.) Till then, it seems more than a bit off. (And if you're accusing other people of being like 19th century anti-Semites, you may well expect a tough reaction.)

Amateurs are often more qualified than the professionals — see the various legal and academic weblogs, which often have more knowledgeable and interesting writers than the professional journalists covering the same beat — but it's an informal sphere, for heaven's sake! That's its strength and weakness. (I see from your site that you're a Stanford PhD. I'm a Princeton AB and a Harvard AM. Does that get us any street cred here? Not a bit. And it shouldn't.)

But back to Godwin's Law — if someone jumps to accusing you of being like the Nazis, you win the debate by default. (Well, unless you're over at Stormfront or something. In which case, it's probably meant as a compliment.) Internet rules. Live 'em. Love 'em.

ADB

I'm sorry that Jack is taking off too. I wish him well in his new job, marriage and blogging. I am sure he is not an anti-Semite, but then I am also worried that Muslims are becoming the bogeymen (bogey-people) of Western Society and that prejudice against them as a group, is widely tolerated.

I don't believe Ben really thinks that had there been Jewish terrorist networks in C19, that anti-Semitism would have been warranted.

But I don't think we should take comment boards and forums to be more than they are.

http://intensedebate.com/people/YYZ YYZ

Too bad – I've always appreciated both your arguments and your ability to make them. Good luck!
http://intensedebate.com/people/DerekPearce DerekPearce

I will most definitely miss you around here Jack. I've been much more absent myself from the comments here lately and all I can is it really does help one's mental health, if even just a touch, to take a general break from the interwebs. And yes, it's just a F*cking blog comment board but for what it's worth I think you (and myself if I may so pat my back) at least have the balls to use our real names– I made a decision a long time ago to use my real name as it forces me to be less douchebagish with other commenters– unlike other, go-for-the-vitriol-if-you-don't-have-a-real-argument posters. Congrats on your engagement and your new job. I'll be sure to check in at your site once in a while. Adieu!
JamesHalifax

Halifax, eh?

cool….maybe I'll see you at "The Economy Shoe Shop"

After all, you do know the Halifax in my name is there for a reason right? You may pass me in the street and never know.

Lastly, Jack, I don't think you are a bona-fide anti-semite. I think you simply like to be on the side of what is considered fashionable in the arts and University communities……and that "go-with-what's popular" crowd has never appealed to my libertarian instincts.

Congrats on the marriage by the way……..

And it was fun arguing with you.

As for Paul Wells…….I think he's got a very thick skin and doesn't consider that not everyone does.
http://intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

"Interestingly, I believe these three (s_c_f, jolyon, and JamesHalifax) are all atheist Gentiles of Catholic background." Jack M

"At that moment, a horrible gurgling laugh fills the sky, coming from the North: the trolls have arrived. Description of their mythological charateristics. Gaunilon, TedTylerEzro, john_g ("the lesser trolls") followed by wilson, hollinm, avr, and jarrid ("the greater trolls") and by s_c_f, jolyon, and JamesHalifax ("the foul trolls"). Behind them all, the legendary Troll of Trolls, he of two names, biff / kody. They are all intent on eating reason alive" Jack M

Macleans Moderators

Can you please explain to me why it's ok for Jack M to write blood libel insinuations about Jews/Catholics and refer to all conservative commentators here as trolls while my comments pointing out what a cretin Jack M is are being deleted. Why can't Jack M defend himself in public, why are you letting him hide behind your skirt?

——————————————————

"The Liberals can affect discipline on the matter more easily than the conservatives can because their anti-woman fringe is smaller."

"Anti-choice people are anti-woman."

"Conservatives just call people n***ers and f*ggots and throw bricks through their windows."

"So, an unfunny, desperate-for-attention (kind of like Cosh and Levant, frankly) performing clown, who spews lies and bigotry everywhere she goes, finds out that Canadians …. "

I am conservative and I object to all those comments, and many more, but I don't say anything because I believe in free speech. If Macleans is going to start censoring people, I would appreciate it if Macleans followed a standard policy and not some half-assed system where Jack M, the jew baiter, gets to be Grand Inquisitor/Richard Warman.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Lord_Bob Lord Bob

As you are one of the few commentators here whose comments I'd almost always read 'til the end even if they were long enough to require three posts to get through, I'd be sorry to see your Orwellian comments disappear.

(Referring to the avatar, of course, and shamelessly trying to make people pay attention to my sentences.)

Now, I'm not sorry to see you go because I agree with every word you wrote. On the contrary, in other circumstances I could launch into a spirited reply decrying some of your very premises for leaving. But because you'd actually make a point, defend it articulately, and if the arguments against you were persuasive you'd actually change your mind once in a while. Which would make a lot of public comment boards a lot more readable.
Holly Stick

And where was this implication?

http://intensedebate.com/people/CTM Claudia Lemire

Going to miss you jack, good luck with your wedding (I am getting hitch in july too, in Scotland) and your new job, we will keep in touch!

Best of luck!

http://intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

Macleans Moderators

Can I have your email, please, because I would like to have a word with you.

I am really curious to know why Jack M gets to post blood libel insinuations and others write equally offensive comments but only my comments pointing out what kind of person Jack M is are being deleted.

Chrs

"IT'S A F*CKING BLOG COMMENT BOARD," i.e. get a life.
Holly Stick

jolyon, you are misusing the phrase "blood libel":

"Blood libels are false and sensationalized allegations that a person or group engages in human sacrifice, often accompanied by the claim that the blood of the victims is used in various rituals and/or acts of cannibalism.."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_libel

http://intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

Badly phrased, I agree.

This is what I was talking about:

"Somewhat lost in the debate was the fact that an agency independent from the Jewish community had repeatedly investigated the blood libel accusations against the Jews between 1247 and 1759 and issued several reports denouncing the accusations as both stupid and false, including in the very cases studied by Toaff. That agency was the Vatican. The article summarizes the Catholic Church's position between the 13th and the 18th century, and also tries to explain why these documents were almost forgotten by the Church itself in the 19th century and rediscovered only in the 20th." Catholic Church and Blood Libel Myth, Massimo Introvigne

Catholics and Jews have a long and contentious history, to say the least, but I don't believe it's right to imply people are anti-jewish just because of their supposed Catholic background.

John D

I don't see any insinuation there

http://www.tsn.ca DJ Abraham Lincoln

Wait a minute? Paul Wells responds to emails? So I could email Paul Wells(" Dear Paul, I just wanted to say as a long time fan, I'm totally supporting you in the upcoming Macleans civil war. So, should I bring the sandwhiches?") , and there's a chance he'll reply back? Hmmm, I wonder how I can turn this to my advantage….

Also, good luck in life and stuff.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

I fear my reply can only sully this, but I must, for I don't know which is better — the poem itself, or the story unwritten that you've described. Bravissimo in either case.

For what it's worth, your words have changed some people around here for the better, myself among them. I think that's probably the best thing anybody could ever ask for, so kudos on that.

May each day forward be the best one of your life.
http://intensedebate.com/people/janicemaerose janicemaerose

Jack, your intelligent, sometimes quirky and humerous comments will be missed on this blog. Your input has made for more interesting reading here on the Macleans site.

Based on what you've written about your concerns being discounted about being labelled an anti-semite by a couple commenters on this blog, I am disappointed by how Macleans has dealt with it.

Hope you come back, but I appreciate your stance.
James C. Orr

This is specifically for Paul Wells:

I enjoyed your Haydn / Mozart talk this evening at the NAC. I spoke to you afterwards, and mentioned a quote about Mozart and a sow.
It appears in this book:
The piece as a whole: studies in holistic musical analysis By Hugh Aitken

Jim Orr
http://intensedebate.com/people/Be_rad Be_rad

I'm terribly disappointed to learn of this. I have been travelling abroad on business and was not aware of the flame war or this decision until my return today.

Nonetheless, as you have taken great pains to reinforce that this is your last post, I will respect that and not beg you to reconsider.

Your often erudite, sometimes overly passionate posts have been a pleasure to read and have wrung admiration from me many times. JM for Poet Laureate of Canadian Politics!