This is the kind of comment that often leaves me wanting to eliminate the ability to leave comments here.
It came in response to yesterday’s “guest post” concerning Thomas Square and Kamehameha III.
The commenter wrote:
How interesting for Mr. Lind to present Mr. Kenneth R. Conklin (Ph.D.) ‘s opinions as objective! Way to go Ian!
Did the writer read the post and my brief introduction? There’s nothing to be found there about objectivity.
What I did say was straightforward.
Conklin, who earned a Ph.D. from the University of Illinois, Urbana, has lived in Hawaii since 1992. He describes himself as speaking Hawaiian “with moderate fluency,” and has written at length about aspects of the Hawaiian sovereignty movement from a critical perspective.
While I don’t agree with all of his editorial views, I find his interpretation of Hawaii history most interesting and informative. He does his homework.
I welcome comments that take issue with Conklin’s historical “facts” or provide reasoned arguments against his particular interpretations.
But this snide comment does neither.
I was inclined to just consign it to the big trash bin in the cloud. Instead, I decided to make it a teachable moment.
If readers would like to be argumentative, that’s generally okay. But do some work, or some thinking. Make an argument. Provide some substance. Don’t just be dismissive.
Fair warning. I don’t have any trouble deleting comments that fail to contribute anything.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Thank you for continuing to accept comments. The benefits outweigh the costs, and a prime example is the loss of commenting capability on Civil Beat.
Yes, Civil Beats eliminating comments was a great loss.
I don’t agree with much of Conklin’s tone or agenda, but that doesn’t mean his facts or interpretations are always wrong, and I’m glad he makes an effort since even questioning some outlandish assertions or outright propaganda seems to get nice people booted out of the “progressive” treehouse of presumed virtue and professed tolerance, as well as branded an undesirable in certain Hawaiian academic and activist circles that might really benefit from a little more rationality and introspection.
One of my hat’s is as a professional economic historian. And I too have problems with the current historiography of the Hawaiian Sovereignty movement. For instance the coup was not like a CIA overthrow but was about tariffs. My main problem is that it is too much like “official” history that you see in authoritarian states. (I am not saying anything more than that). So welcoming critical thought is always a good thing.
The elimination of comments in Civil Beat is WONDERFUL and long overdue.
Moderating comments takes time and resources and it sounded like Civil Beat didn’t want to make this investment so good riddance.
As Ian indicates, some people are all too willing to provide comments that provide no value.
Ian thank you for keeping the comments section open, even though there are spoilers out there from time to time. Reading the Washington Post I often find comments of great interest from people who appear to be very knowledgeable and close to the action. I appreciate the effort it takes to keep that door open.
On the other hand, the Star Advertiser comments section is usually filled by comments from the same people all day long arguing with each other or hurling mud at each other. Quite boring and they bring very little to the table.
“Reading the Washington Post I often find comments of great interest from people who appear to be very knowledgeable and close to the action.”
I agree wholeheartedly, and I treasure that feature in the Post.
I agree with your StarAdvertiser comment as well. Those are (for the most part) ugly and uninformative. I’ve stopped reading tyej, but I’m glad the Advertiser keeps them.
I hope you continue to allow comments here because more often than not they contribute to the discussion.
I realize all my comments won’t get posted here. So I have to craft them in a way that gets my point across without offending the sensibilities of the owner of the blog. I have no problem with that.