Censorship and bigotry on this board and society in general

[inthebrain]

I'm not certain if this is something that should go to the moderators or if it's permitted on the general forum. It's difficult to tell whether the rules here are made democratically or a consensus of the moderators. Maybe a combination of the two?

I know this board has strict rules against posting from racist/bigoted sources. It even has strict rules against bigotry and racism in general. I understand the reasoning for that and think it's well intentioned. On the other hand I wonder if we are creating an environment where people just disguise their bigotry and racism behind other issues. Wouldn't it be more productive to allow this stuff out in the open; "speak friend so we may better know thee"?

I've read a lot on this issue and I think we have a hell of a fight ahead of us. I've read resources such as the SPLC, Public Eye and the ADL with much valued info on the subject. Many of them cite that Neo Nazi groups have grown 2/3 in the last seven years. The media certainly has no shortage of white supremacist sources that it cites from as evidenced from the research of the ADL, Public Eye and the SPLC.

How do we as a community or progressives and liberals deal with phenomena? I am conflicted as to whether or not outright shunning these people is the correct course of action. Maybe we can use this place to further the dialogue and perhaps get to down to the underlying causes that lead people to this outlook. There are many characteristics that are economical and social that lead people to engage in scapegoating which is what much of this stuff is. It take the responsibility of those who are powerful and places it on the backs of the folks who are powerless.

I know this is the Internet and not much social change can be achieved here. This does serve as a wonderful educational tool to redirect people towards resources that may not otherwise utilize. Perhaps if that's the best we can achieve maybe there is better avenue we can take to combat this problem other than traditional means?

[blondeatlast]

1. Are you questioning the rule regarding citing RW sources?

Or allowing those not supportive of Democratic politics to post?

Either way--or some other one--this is the Administrator's board and they are free to make the rules as they see fit, imho.

[salin]

2. I think it is more about letting

bigotted posts stay up - the old "know who folks really are" rather than letting them hide (by having posts deleted). Though I am not really sure that is what the post is about.

[blondeatlast]

5. I believe you are right, I think I saw the offending thread.

It is interesting, to say the least.

Thanks.

[bananas]

18. What did I miss?

Is the thread gone?
Did someone want to ban tie-dye t-shirts again?

[inthebrain]

21. To a degree, yes

I think they should stay up. There is more to these arguments that are insidious which happen to be a bi product of the censorship.

A lot of it comes in the form of anecdotal evidence and others in the form of what is "accepted" media sources. I'd rather open dialogue so perhaps maybe some the turtles pop their heads out. They seem to be the ones fanning the flames. My favorites happen to be the ones where one claims they see a bunch of illegals and I ask them to verify how they know they are illegals. It seems being a Latino is enough to draw suspicion. Granted this seems to set them off but I'd like to see some of these folks out their sources as well.

I'm not really pointing out any specific threads. I'm just talking as a general way to deal with it. I think many of us have made some progress here in fetching these sources out.

[The Magistrate]

3. Citing Of Racist Sources, Sir

Is not permitted, and is not going to be permitted.

Nor is "dialog" with Neo-Nazis and the like to explore why they adopt the views they do going to occur on Democratic Underground.

[inthebrain]

6. They are already here

In many instances it seems to be occurring anyways. Have you ever followed the links some people use to their own web sites and the issues they promote there?

I've even seen people voice support here for folks like Pat Buchannan. The censorship angle doesn't seem to be working as they are able to hide these views into other issues. Much of this stuff is sneaking in via the main stream media and finding it's way onto this board. By and large it seems to be tolerated.

I'm not saying that this board is solely responsible for encouraging the recruitment of these folks. I think given the frustrating nature of out political system that avenue seems offer the myth of instant gratification. Now a days it seems to come in the form of scapegoating and it's;lead to us plea bargaining away many of our values and institution IE Welfare Reform. Now we are contemplating building a wall on the Mexican border, many seem tolerant of white supremacist groups patrolling the border and the war on drugs has lead to the incarceration of more minorities than South Africa at the height of apartheid.

Many of these people are not Neo Nazis but regular joes duped into believing this malarkey. Some may be but infuse their arguments in more isidious ways. Many do so unknowingly.

[cosmik debris]

8. And your solution is...?

Please be specific about rules you would impose and who has the responsibility to enforce those rules.

[inthebrain]

11. Can we assess the problem first?

Do you agree with what I have said? If not, then what is your assesment of the problem and how does your implementation meet your goals.

This is a very complex problem. I haven't begun to think about "enforcement" of any rules as I am just throwing putty at the wall to see what sticks. It appears right now that alot of racist/bigoted ideas have worked their way in and are now accepted as "common sense".

My take is that we first need to find out and discuss how we got here.

[cosmik debris]

13. I don't see a problem

I just wanted to understand what you were trying to fix by understanding how you would try to fix it.

Why don't you be more specific about: "alot of racist/bigoted ideas have worked their way in and are now accepted as "common sense"." I haven't seen any of that.

[blondeatlast]

14. Isn't that what we do? If you are referring to the thread I think you are,

it seems that one particular poster has been taken very much to task and has only his inflated ego to support him at this point.

The pundit that has been discussed at length regarding the issue in that thread has been pretty much decimated as well, as has been many of the talking points cited.

DUers seem to me to be a very educated and insightful lot and can take on outright lies, fakery, and RW talking points with very little trouble.

I may be wrong about the problem and/or the thread, but nonetheless, I think we do a pretty good job of separating the from the you-know-what.

[The Magistrate]

9. If, Mr. Brain

You see something that leads you to believe a poster is a Neo-Nazi or some such, then please use the alert function, and we will look into it.

[blondeatlast]

10. Mr. The Magistrate, sir, sometimes you slay me...

:rofl: :thumbsup:

[snowbear]

16. The Magistrate does rock, huh?

I think so too!

Magistrate, you rock!

[inthebrain]

20. I don't see how referring the problem to the mod does anything to solve it

I think many of us would rather the turtles pop their heads out. We can't do that if they are intimidated.

So far, we have made great gains on these issues with many posters on this board. I know personally that I've had my best successes when the mods don't pop their heads in. I'd rather posters get full view as to who they are alligning themselves with.

As I see it, we as a party have a completely revamped left wing. I think it would be interesting to see that baby taken out for a spin. You've noted above that we do a pretty good job. Yet, there is much more to do and I think we can do more if we are able to attack the whole beast rather than hack at it's limbs. I think that's what Martin Luther King would have endorsed as surely that's what his civil rights movement was about.

[The Magistrate]

23. From Our Point Of View, Sir

When such turtles pop up their heads, we want to lop them off, because they are not permitted here. There are plenty of places people can go if they want to get into slanging matches with assorted rightists and bigots, but the proprietors of this site have a different vision for it than that. Since we moderators obviously cannot be everywhere and see everything, we must depend in large part on alerts from the membership to point us to problems, including bigots posting here, so I will generally take any opportunity offered by the flow of conversation here to solicit such assistance from our members. We need their help.

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

[inthebrain]

25. The problem with that

is they are able to dissemenate their propaganda in more insidious ways. They have become so effective at this that those who are not racist/bigoted buy into the arguments.

I think what you are doing is well intended but it's become counterproductive. In such a way, that these pricks have become so sneaky, moat are confused as to what a working definition of racism is. I often wonder if we can moce this discussion from a case of "race" to a more producive discussion of "class". In a sense the two are inseparable.

Many of the folks that are of the opinion that there are forces out to "destroy the white race" don't seem to get that. Their biggest whipping boy tends to be affirmative action. That seems the ultimate vehicle to whip up the masses. One can see paralells between that issue and the way Welfare Reform and Immigration reform has been argued.

[The Magistrate]

27. It Is Only Possible, Sir

For me to re-iterate and support the policies of the proprietors in this regard, and to urge compliance with them, and to enforce them as a moderator.

I can only suggest contacting the Administrators with your views on their policy, but between you and me, doubt very strongly they will be moved to alter them.

[inthebrain]

26. This is another problem that is of growing concern; Right Woos Left

Populist Party, LaRouchite, and Other Neo-fascist Overtures To Progressives, And Why They Must Be Rejected

By Chip Berlet

Political Research Associates
Corrections, 1999 - revision 3
Revised Draft: February 22, 1994
First Draft: December 20, 1990


Preface & Acknowledgements

Fascism and Reaction inevitably attack. They have won against disunion. They will fail if we unite.
George Seldes
You Can't Do That, 1938
This report was first issued on December 20, 1990 as a three page memo for antiwar activists titled "Right Woos Left Over Gulf War Issue: Confronting Rightist Ideologies & Anti-Jewish Bigotry is Crucial to Full Debate Over Principled Tactics." The memo briefly described attempts by members of the LaRouche movement to involve themselves in antiwar organizing, and discussed the growing network of persons willing to appear at functions of the quasi-Nazi Liberty Lobby, including Fletcher Prouty, "Bo" Gritz, Mark Lane, and to a lesser extent, Dick Gregory.

The original memo was issued after Political Research Associates received numerous phone inquiries regarding the background of the LaRouchian and Liberty Lobby networks, and was preceded by a discussion paper circulated to a handful of researchers who, for over a year, had been informally discussing the dilemmas posed by the transfusion of right-wing theories and research into progressive circles. I would like to thank these persons (whom I dubbed in my correspondence the "Thorns of the White Rose" as a historical salute to the German anti-Fascist movement), including Russ Bellant, Johan Carlisle, Sara Diamond, Brian Glick, Jean Hardisty, Jane Hunter, Sheila O'Donnell, Margaret Quigley, Diana Reynolds, Whitney Rugosa, and Holly Sklar. They will be the first to tell you that their contributions to the debate do not necessarily imply agreement with my thesis.

Several journalists and activists were forthcoming in sharing their information or making suggestions and deserve special mention. They are Dan Junas, Howard Goldenthal, Alice Senturia, Dennis King, Barry Mehler, and Richard Hatch. The research by Sara Diamond and Richard Hatch into radio personality Craig Hulet was particularly thorough and useful. The Center for Democratic Renewal, especially Leonard Zeskind, provided documents and other pertinent information. Fairness and Accuracy in Media also provided assistance and encouragement, especially Marty Lee.

Matthew Nemiroff Lyons wrote a thoughtful critique of an earlier version of this paper titled Right Woos Left Revisited: Tracing the Roots of Conspiracy Thinking. His suggestions have influenced subsequent revisions and we are now working together to write a lengthy study of the roots and current variants of fascism in the U.S.

The United Front Against Fascism and its allies in the Seattle and Portland areas gave me encouragement and assistance, and sponsored a public forum in Seattle where I shared the podium with anti-fascist organizer Spencer Hamm of Spokane's Citizens for Nonviolent Action Against Racism. Jonathan Mozzochi and the Coalition for Human Dignity in Portland shared their work and publicized the issue, and were denounced by neo-Nazis for their efforts.

[Amonester]

4. To the question: "How do we as a community or progressives

... and liberals deal with phenomena?"

My opinion is public showing of bigotry and racism should be made illegal, and punished accordingly by law (if it isn't already). IMHO, freedom of speech and childish spreading of pure paranoid hate are two very different things.

[inthebrain]

7. I read this piece from Public Eye

Racism and Bigotry are often forms of misdirected class anger. I think the indivudual reasons for people engaging in it are all unique. I'm a nurse and am thinking of this from a nursing process perspective so maybe that's a little confusing for people. I don't think jailing peope is going to solve the problem.

There is more to this article that can be read by clicking on the link.


The Dying American Dream

And the Snake Oil of Scapegoating
By Holly Sklar

The American Dream--always an impossible dream for many--is dying a slow death. As the systemic causes go untreated, a host of local and national leaders are peddling the snake oil of scapegoating. Many people are swallowing it, in anger and desperation.

One out of four children is born into poverty in this, the world's wealthiest nation. That's according to the government's own undercounting measure. Wealth is not trickling down. It is flooding upward. The richest one percent of American families have nearly as much wealth as the entire bottom 95 percent. Such obscene inequality befits an oligarchy, not a democracy. Manhattan's income gap is worse than Guatemala's.

We have the highest economic inequality since 1929. For more and more Americans, the future is an endless Depression--minus the New Deal.

The politically weakest New Deal "entitlement," Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), is the first to go. The assault was camouflaged with Big Lies about "welfare queens" and "illegitimate" children. Social Security and Medicare are being undone, beginning with the more vulnerable SSI (Supplemental Security Income) and Medicaid.

The United States grows increasingly disunited. Once-thriving communities are in decline. Instead of full employment, the United States has full prisons. The military budget continues consuming resources at Cold War levels, while programs to invest in people, infrastructure, and the environment are sacrificed on the altar of deficit reduction. People who should be working together to transform the economic policies that are hurting them are instead turning hatefully on each other.

http://www.publiceye.org/eyes/hs_econo.html

[Democrats_win]

12. Well written. The movie "History X" talks about the better angels of our nature.

The characters in that movie are the young people who are living the lives that you describe and they end up in jail for taking action against their "enemies." In the end, they realize that they are wrong: they should have counted their blessings. It's too late. Their hatred ends up killing those they love. The movie ends with the quote from Lincoln about how Americans need to return to the "better angels of our natrue."

Not only is racism a problem but also the greed that Uncle Ronnie Reagan cemented in our society. They try so hard to make us pay for everything except the air we breath that half the country is on medication to help them deal with this insanity.

[salin]

15. maybe getting people to confront the real sources of their fears

as I think that often bigotry is directly related to fear - not necessarily fear of the unknown or other - but often a deeper, not-specified even to self fear. Economic stability of the family, for example - or of the community, I think quick periods of economic revolutions (eg industrial revolution, tech revolution, etc.) fuel folks sense of stability - and are more prone to point to 'others' (those who become the focus of the bigotry) rather than the real causes. In a period where one worries for ones' job - or for the ability for ones' children to get decent jobs when they are old enough to work... for many it is easier to get angry at immigrants for taking jobs - than to recognize that a) employers want to pay lower wages (and hence use illegal workers) and b) that we, as a society, do not want to pay higher prices that legitimating work forces (eg raising wages and enforcing 'legal residents/citizens' regulations per workers) would cause. Thus the fear of economic insecurity is easily warped into bigotry - especially if there is a demagogue spokes person channeling the fears into anger.

All that said - your reference to misdirected class anger rings very true to me.

[blondeatlast]

17. "misdirected class anger...: Yep. Now that the middle class is feeling

the oppression, it seems to be getting worse, too.

The bastards won't stop, either, as it diverts attention from the real criminals who foster the hatred for their greedy self-interests.

[inthebrain]

29. A little more attention paid to those on the bottom

would have prevented that. That's the problem when you view yourself as a class unto yourself. It's also why conflict theorists refer to the middle class as the "buffer class". We are all the underpriveledged because those on top eventually see you as disposable.

The constant scapegoating of welfare mothers and drug addicts contributed to this as well. Recently much energy has been spent trying to get the middle class to go after immigrants. Those that perpetuate this strategy know that this will solve nothing. See the Welfare Mothers and the Drug Addicts I mentioned above.

[lumberjack_jeff]

32. "Racism and Bigotry are often forms of misdirected class anger."

Absolutely.

This is exactly the concern I have with this topic.

There's a compelling argument to be made that healthy economic populism could replace some of this unhealthy misdirected xenophobia if one were to try. Sadly, the rules preclude making this attempt.

A related concern of mine is; economic populism and class advocacy are frequently conflated here with racism. One has only to look at threads on the economic effects on labor of unregulated immigration for good examples of this phenomenon.

Since expressing racist or sexist views earns the panic button, every challenging topic is rationalized by some to be from that basis.

If the rules are a hammer, it's human nature to see all disagreeable posts as nails.

[TygrBright]

19. Indeed? And just WHOSE definitions...

...of the terms "childish spreading of pure paranoid hate" do we use?

Yours?

Mine?

If I express vigorous and insulting disagreement with your definition, would that make my expression an instance of "childish spreading of pure paranoid hate?"

If you slang me off for my definition, can I have you hauled off to Gitmo for your childish spreading of pure paranoid hate?

On the Internet, you have the option to navigate away from anything that offends you. Or to not navigate there in the first place, if you suspect it might offend you. On television and radio, you have the option of turning it off or changing the channel. On the street, you have the option of walking away. In print, you can turn the page, toss the publication in the trash, or use it for loo paper. Your choice.

You also, always, have the option of expressing your disagreement in any terms you choose short of threats of bodily harm, etc. You need not even exercise the good manners you are annoyed by others not exercising.

Thanks, I prefer that to letting someone define "childish spreading of pure paranoid hate," and criminalizing it.

That way lies madness.

warily,
Bright

[Amonester]

31. The first answer is: no.

> If I express vigorous and insulting disagreement with your definition, would that make my expression an instance of "childish spreading of pure paranoid hate?" <

No. Because you would be expressing your personal opinion (like I did). On the other hand, if by "vigorous and insulting" you meant "violent and bigotted" you would still be expressing your opinion and be free to do so as long as you wouldn't "cross the line" of breaking the law (as far as I know, the act of being "vocally" violent isn't illegal, as long as specific threats to commit one or many crimes aren't issued). And the same goes for being bigotted. Although that would be childish, especially if you'd then seek (and succeed) to gather in other people with you in order to "follow" your "lead" in being violent and bigotted; I don't think you would do that, personally, but many "other" persons who are kind of "psychotic" would (and do/or did/or will do...).

> If you slang me off for my definition, can I have you hauled off to Gitmo for your childish spreading of pure paranoid hate? <

I am not slanging you off for your definition, I almost never slang anyone off for anything because nobody assaulted me (yet...), lest would I ever start any "movement" advocating such childish behaviors.

> On the Internet, you have the option to navigate away from anything that offends you. Or to not navigate there in the first place, if you suspect it might offend you. <

Texts and images that don't break any laws on the Internet don't hurt anyone (note: texts and images that don't break any existing laws, and International Law in particular). The moment laws are broken, whether they are on the Internet, or on radio, or on teevee, or in publications or whatever, then the potential victims have the human right to indicate where and when one or many specific crimes have been/are being committed against them to the proper law enforcement authority (using the correct collection of evidence...).

If no laws were broken, I have no problem turning the childish stuff off...
If laws were broken (threats are illegal), my only problem would be one of being able to collect the proper evidence, or to signal the location of the crimes that are being (or have been) committed to the proper law enforcement authorities.

http://www.interpol.int/

Peacefully,
Amonester

[Finder]

22. They are not different...

and if anything...letting certain groups spread what is obvious paranoia and childish hate is the best way to expose them for what they are.

I say, the more rope, the sooner they hang themselves.

[Esra Star]

28. Hear ! Hear ! and Bravo qed . n/t

[seabeyond]

24. i had two rw'ers tell me they have the right to be a bigot, a couple years

ago. the ugly head of racism is alive and well, as far as i can see. i believe it has received its validation from the christian right. allowing it to be ok to hate. and using hte bible to validate and justify this behaior. this is not an attack on my religion. this is an understanding of what i see around me, and in truth,... only can healing be. not shying away from, or pretending it isnt there, or feeling the need to defend..... i dont. but i do not think what is today could have happened without the bible. i think the repugs have taken advantae of this and used it to the fullest. so much so.... i think this is as far as it goes, before it starts being trampled down, again.....

[Trajan]

30. I am sorry you dont live in the kind of world ....

Where all bad threads can be torn down before you see them ...

You are complaining that; sometimes, bad people say bad things, and therefore, DU is bad ? ....

Is EVERYONE offending you ? .... 95 % ? .... 94 % ? .... 0.000004 % ? ....

Didnt we already know coming in here that we wont agree with everything we see here ? ...

One last question: Does perfection exist ?

[inthebrain]

33. I never said that