| |
|
I am bumping this thread because I have just had one of those two black faces talking/a white candle-holder moments. Cusm, in the discussion of the banning of Darkmatter, said:
He was eventually cut when he went over the line on the conspiracy theories and the anti-semite knee-jerk became too much for the collective to bear, as it often will.
I first read this as meaning that The Fetch's anti-semitism was knee-jerk, and had become too much for the collective to bear. However, upon re-reading, I am not sure that I read this aright. I believe he might have meant that the knee-jerk accusations of anti-Semitism towards the Fetch became too much for the collective to bear.
Now, if this reading is the correct one, this was basically what cusm said at the start of this thread - that people who weren't even Jews complaining about anti-Semitism interrupted the pure pursuit of truth, but that since people did get upset about this sort of thing we should all calm down a bit before going back to examining the International Jewish Conspiracy:
But can we even talk about it? It is even possible to point out the existence of the PR machine itself without activating it into another flame war? Its that touchy of a thing. And that's why the thread was locked. I don't personally support censoring, but for something like this I will admidt that it is wise to stop and give it a moment to cool off before continuing further with it.
After that, Tom quoted some of the Fetch's spicier views about the IJC, here. cusm argued that the fact that he had not posted those here deserved consideration, and went on:
With respect to gold hidden in shit, Jewish conspiracy theories are a fine example of people trying to poke at something that may contain a real conspiritorial element but who are classicly unable to do so in a coherent manner without saying foolish and sweepingly incorrect things or frothing racial hatred. Its a real shame, really, as I think there could be a lot of useful discussion on it if people could do so without foaming at the mouth. But historically, they just can't. Fetch is certainly guilty of blindly ignorant conclusions, but I think he was at least keeping the foam to a minimum here, though that may not be true elsewhere in the past.
This is textbook amazing, arguing as it does that it's a shame that all theories about the IJC are advanced by foaming racists, since it really distracts from all the interesting things that one could say about the IJC were it not for the problem that so many people one would be lining up to chat with would be foaming racists. The possible link between the quality of the theories and the fact that the only people who advance them are foaming racists appears not to have been made.
So, what's my point? My point is that it seems possible that cusm's position remains that identifying the desire to propose discussion of "Jewish conspiracy theories" - the Banking Conspiracy? The Protocols? The Holocaust? - as anti-Semitic is "knee-jerk". In fact, it is a sign that Gods help us all, the counterculture is growing conservative.
So, what's my point again? My point, specifically, is that cusm may well be right to say be aware of the choice we are making by this action, and hold future actions to principles of board vision rather than knee-jerk reactions to content. My vision for Barbelith does not include moderators of Barbelith, who now have the power to ban or veto baning in their own fora and may have it across the board in the near future, being apologists for people who represent the Protocols as factual evidence of the IJC, or describing negative reactions to same as "knee-jerk" (twice, in fact). Speaking purely for myself, it doesn't include those people being made to feel very welcome here.
I also do not believe that we should give the Temple special rights to host racist,sexist anti-Semitic or homophobic material in the pursuit of t3h majickal truths - that is, I do not believe that his ravings are arguably content in the context of chaos magick study is a valid piece of special pleading. If Temple moderators are going to have the run of all banning threads this becomes a larger issue again.
So, this being the case, I would like to understand whether cusm feels that he is going against his committed free-speech principles by voting to ban Darkmatter - because, really, moderation should not be such an onerous obligation as to force one to betray deeply-held beliefs. I assume that life critic and charrelz have taken the opportunity to rethink their views in the intervening years, but would hope not to seem presumptuous in doing so. _ _ _, apparently, has burned his suit. |
|
|
