The UFT is getting ready to hold elections. The big mystery, supposedly, is who will win? Will it be Unity/ New Action, or upstart MORE? Well, it's not such a big mystery that no one has ever defeated Unity except Mike Shulman, or that Unity now co-sponsors him and New Action for a few seats on the UFT Executive Board. Nor is it a mystery that the overwhelming majority of chapter leaders are committed to support Unity/ New Action.
What I'd like to see is a discussion of issues rather than personalities and stereotypes. Will that be possible? Lately, when this blog takes a position against UFT leadership, I get responses calling me an egomaniac and comparing my viewpoint with Fox News. I generally delete them, as I do all personal insults to commenters.
On the other hand, if someone has an argument that contradicts mine, feel free to offer it. If it merits a response, if I have one, if the original post has not already addressed it, I'll be happy to answer.
I certainly don't deny this blog represents my point of view. I am not running a news outlet here, and if I were I'd certainly hope to be compensated better than I am for writing the blog.
I'm friendly with a lot of people of differing viewpoints, and I will not attack people for their viewpoints. I will, however, point out viewpoints I deem without merit and support those that make sense to me. For example, I'm not willing to endorse a "growth model" theory untested, with no evidence whatsoever to suggest it's remotely effective.
Ideas are what this election ought to be about. I'm not naive enough to assume it will, having seen many of them. It would be nice, though, to see ideas rather than stereotypes and juvenile insults. I'm not going to label people childish and contrary simply for disagreeing with me.
What do you suppose we'll find in UFT mailboxes this season? Point-counterpoint, or Daffy and Bugs?
Stories herein containing unnamed or invented characters are works of fiction. Names, characters, businesses, places, events and incidents are either the products of the author’s imagination or used in a fictitious manner. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events is purely coincidental.