Dear Bill:
We’ve been staging various sorts of e-mail conversations for almost five years at Slate, but this may be the first one that goes on for a week without getting beyond the salutation! (It might make a good premise for a Nicholson Baker novel. …)
You’re correct to nail me on my crack about Bob Novak. Yes, that was just Crossfire talk. All things being equal, I’d just as soon he be happy, too. (And I grieve with him this week over the death of his writing partner, Rowlie Evans.)
Meanwhile, though, I have succumbed to your choice of topics, but you refuse to engage on the issues I raise. Let’s reduce them to two:
1) You prefer to be addressed as Mr. Buckley, at least until familiarity has some basis in fact. But is this symmetrical? In the world of universal first names where I live, everybody is equal in this small symbolic respect, which is nice. Is there equality of salutation in your world, or do you first-name people who last-name you? And are you comfortable with that?
2) You say that addressing strangers as Mr. is “conventional … customary and polite,” and by implication needs no more defense than that. A classic conservative argument. But even you must allow that conventions and customs change, no? Believe me, in Seattle and in cyberspace, first names are the near-universal convention and custom. Addressing someone as “Mr.” is positively impolite, verging on insult. So if you prefer Mr., it seems to me you must defend it on its merits and not rest on custom.
I have to be a bit brief today because I’m about to spend all afternoon in “Diversity Training.” It’s mandatory for all “managers” at Microsoft, which is what, however unlikely, I am. No doubt there is no such requirement at National Review, and you may say that, since I’m a liberal, it serves me right. I do generally support affirmative action, although (one more attempt to wrench the conversation forward) I was glad to see the Supreme Court yesterday taking up (once again) the issue of special treatment for minority businesses in awarding federal construction contracts. Favoritism for minority-owned businesses is one form of affirmative action that is truly indefensible and poisons the well for the rest. Anyone in a position to bid for a multimillion-dollar highway contract is either already well-to-do or fronting for a white male who is, or both. Undoubtedly black millionaires suffer discrimination in comparison with white millionaires. But affirmative action is powerful medicine with some toxic side effects and should be reserved for injustices that are more pressing.
Whaddya think?
Best,
Mike
