Members banned from this thread: allegoricalfact


Page 1 of 30 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 293
Thanks Tree228Thanks

Thread: Is There Value In Debating Hate?

  1. #1
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    55,991
    Thanks
    32093

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio

    Is There Value In Debating Hate?

    Based on a true story:



    Denial, the new film starring Rachel Weisz, Tom Wilkinson and Timothy Spall, tells the true story of the gripping High Court case between American academic Deborah Lipstadt and the controversial British historian David Irving.

    When Deborah Lipstadt wrote her book Denying The Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory in 1993, she took aim at the US media of the time for their rewriting of the Second World War, and Holocaust deniers such as Irving.

    But what was it about Irving’s career that led him to be such a target for Lipstadt?

    His work in the 30 years before Lipstadt’s book appeared reveals the chequered past of a historian who spent his life trying to get his own version of history to stick.

    The film Denial, starring Rachel Weisz, Timothy Spall and Tom Wilkinson, tells the story of Deborah Lipstadt's courtroom battle with David Irving to prove the Holocaust took place. It opens in cinemas on 27 January.
    David Irving and why the Holocaust went on trial

    Prof. Deborah Lipstadt had no choice; she was sued by the Holocaust denier. Unless she avoided the jurisdiction of the UK courts, or conceded she had libeled David Irving, she had to enter an appearance and make an argument, and of course, she did win.

    But as we all know, hatred is popular, especially online, and especially in the US. We could any of us spend all day refuting lies told about Jews and Israel, or about black Americans and BLM, or about virtually any other ethnicity that is marginalized or oppressed in the West.

    Some of these debates might be healthy. Well-meaning people might learn new facts and change their minds. But not all of them.

    Well-meaning people do not despise Jews and refer to Judaism as a "cult", etc. They do not lie about the history of Israel, or pretend that Israel has forced Arab Israelis into ghettos, then "holocausted" them.




    How much is best? Is there a sunshine disinfecting mold tactic at work, or are we just offering to pay attention to people whose views are so hateful and so irrational, they should be shunned?

    Does it matter how frequently we encounter such false beliefs? I must have read 1,001 times on PH alone the "BLM is a terrorist organization".




    Completely untrue.

    I find myself growing deeply angry, disturbed, even frightened by the rising tide of hate in this country. Combating it seems to me to be the obligation of every decent person in this country.

    The question is......how?

    Thanks from Ian Jeffrey, The Man and Isalexi

  2. #2
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    55,991
    Thanks
    32093

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    The Southern Poverty Law Center recommends a 10 step plan to be used by a community suddenly gripped with hate.



    1. Act
    2. Join Forces
    3. Support the Victims
    4. Speak Up
    5. Educate Yourself
    6. Create An Alternative
    7. Pressure Leaders
    8. Stay Engaged
    9. Teach Acceptance
    10. Dig Deeper




    https://www.splcenter.org/20170814/t...response-guide
    Thanks from The Man

  3. #3
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    55,991
    Thanks
    32093

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    So.....what's the internet version? What's the most effective action plan for combating hate online?



    *Snip*
    Providers should take reports about cyberhate seriously, mindful of the fundamental principles of free expression, human dignity, personal safety and respect for the rule of law.

    Providers that feature user-generated content should offer users a clear explanation of their approach to evaluating and resolving reports of hateful content, highlighting their relevant terms of service.

    Providers should offer user-friendly mechanisms and procedures for reporting hateful content.

    Providers should respond to user reports in a timely manner.

    Providers should enforce whatever sanctions their terms of service contemplate in a consistent and fair manner.

    The Internet Community should work together to address the harmful consequences of online hatred.

    The Internet Community should identify, implement and/or encourage effective strategies of counter-speech — including direct response; comedy and satire when appropriate; or simply setting the record straight.

    The Internet Community should share knowledge and help develop educational materials and programs that encourage critical thinking in both proactive and reactive online activity.

    The Internet Community should encourage other interested parties to help raise awareness of the problem of cyberhate and the urgent need to address it.

    The Internet Community should welcome new thinking and new initiatives to promote a civil online environment.

    *Snip*
    https://www.adl.org/best-practices-f...g-to-cyberhate

  4. #4
    Vexatious Correspondent Leo2's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,672
    Thanks
    3477

    From
    UK/Australia
    There is value in examining hatred, which is often based upon nothing factual. A people who are oppressed, or have suffered actual injury, have reason to dislike their oppressors, but often 'old hatreds' are based upon nothing but handed down prejudice and rumour - religious and national hatreds being foremost amongst these.
    Thanks from Madeline, Trish, The Man and 1 others

  5. #5
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    55,991
    Thanks
    32093

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by Leo2 View Post
    There is value in examining hatred, which is often based upon nothing factual. A people who are oppressed, or have suffered actual injury, have reason to dislike their oppressors, but often 'old hatreds' are based upon nothing but handed down prejudice and rumour - religious and national hatreds being foremost amongst these.
    How true. My Scottish grandparents tried hard to pass along a deep hatred and distrust of the British, based on claims of injustice they never really articulated. I never even considered adopting their views, but they were hardly unique.

    In the 1950's and 1960's, everyone seemed anxious to locate his own tribe so as to join with them to hate someone else, or everyone else. At least they did in New York. This was the era in which an Irish Catholic girl dating an Italian Catholic boy caused massive backlash. Even violence, at times. Dating someone of another religion or ethnicity was usually grounds for expulsion. Permanent expulsion.

    I thought it was a stupid idea then, and I think it's a stupid idea now.
    Last edited by Madeline; 2nd January 2018 at 01:41 AM.
    Thanks from Leo2 and MaryAnne

  6. #6
    Vexatious Correspondent Leo2's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    2,672
    Thanks
    3477

    From
    UK/Australia
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeline View Post
    How true. My Scottish grandparents tried hard to pass along a deep hatred and distrust of the British, based on claims of injustice they never really articulated. I never even considered adopting their views, but they were hardly unique.

    In the 1950's and 1960's, everyone seemed anxious to locate his own tribe so as to join with them to hate someone else, or everyone else. At least they did in New York. This was the era in which an Irish Catholic girl dating an Italian Catholic boy caused massive backlash. Even violence, at times. Dating someone of another religion or ethnicity was usually grounds for expulsion. Permanent expulsion.

    I thought it was a stupid idea then, and I think it's a stupid idea now.
    You are a very wise lady who was obviously wise even as a young girl.

    Sorry to appear unduly punctilious, but the Scots are British, as are the Welsh, Cornubians, the Northern Irish (though they are not part of Great Britain). I think perhaps you may have meant the English.

    I too have Scottish grandparents (in fact my mum was born in Edinburgh,) and I have encountered the illogical hatred of the English from certain Scotsmen - some are even so ill-mannered as to say so to my face. I simply remind them of which flag flies over Edinburgh Castle and Buckingham Palace - it is neither the flag of St.Andrew, nor the flag of St.George.

    But the most ludicrous aspect of English/Scottish rivalry is the fact that we are all the same people - with essentially the same language and culture. We are all descended from the Germanic tribes which peopled the British Isles (pushing the Celts to the tips of Great Britain) after the Romans left in the 4th century - even the invading Normans shared that common descent.
    Thanks from Madeline

  7. #7
    Veteran Member Madeline's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    55,991
    Thanks
    32093

    From
    Cleveland, Ohio
    I will master the nomenclature of your country, someday. I swear!

    Lol.

    But to return to the Op: it's hard to see value in posts that decry the Israelis as murderers, anymore than peace is promoted by allowing Irish Catholics to describe the English as murderers.

    This message board is someone's private property, and to reach it, we all use one or another private (rather than government) browsers.

    The question of what it would be best to permit has nothing whatever to do with the issue of censorship. Since this is true, why not ban incendiary, hateful, untruthful speech?

    What can possibly be gained by allowing any PHer to write that "BLM is a terrorist organization" or that "Israel murders Arab children"?

    These are not opinions. They are false statements of fact, and it seems to me, decency requires that we prohibit debate based on lies.
    Last edited by Madeline; 2nd January 2018 at 03:05 AM.

  8. #8
    Cat-tastic Babba's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    67,168
    Thanks
    48259

    From
    So. Md.
    Quote Originally Posted by Madeline View Post
    How true. My Scottish grandparents tried hard to pass along a deep hatred and distrust of the British, based on claims of injustice they never really articulated. I never even considered adopting their views, but they were hardly unique.

    In the 1950's and 1960's, everyone seemed anxious to locate his own tribe so as to join with them to hate someone else, or everyone else. At least they did in New York. This was the era in which an Irish Catholic girl dating an Italian Catholic boy caused massive backlash. Even violence, at times. Dating someone of another religion or ethnicity was usually grounds for expulsion. Permanent expulsion.

    I thought it was a stupid idea then, and I think it's a stupid idea now.
    My mother was born and raised in Canada and when she was a young adult she had a close friend of Anglo descent of some sort. She never specified. And her friend became engaged to a young man of Italian descent. There was and is a relatively large population of Italians in and around Niagara Falls where my mother grew up. Her friend insisted that the groom-to-be Anglicize his name and he wouldn't so they never got married. Seems awfully silly, but even the ever so polite Canadians have had their prejudices and hatred.
    Thanks from Madeline

  9. #9
    Veteran Member cpicturetaker12's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    26,804
    Thanks
    19192

    From
    Florida
    I think this is an appropriate place. A couple of years ago, I heard on NPR, and later read, there is NO genetic difference--the same DNA--between ISRAELIS and PALESTINIANS.

  10. #10
    Veteran Member bonehead's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    14,901
    Thanks
    5480

    From
    south
    Quote Originally Posted by Leo2 View Post
    There is value in examining hatred, which is often based upon nothing factual. A people who are oppressed, or have suffered actual injury, have reason to dislike their oppressors, but often 'old hatreds' are based upon nothing but handed down prejudice and rumour - religious and national hatreds being foremost amongst these.
    agreed. hate is, by definition, one of the strongest emotions known to humanity. being an emotion, it defies logic. any discussions based on logic are doomed to failure. and, since discussions are normally based on some sort of logic, any fruitful discussion is useless and a waste of time. understand hate - absolutely. understanding from whence it comes - absolutely. but, it must be taken for what is - an emotion which defies logic.
    Last edited by bonehead; 2nd January 2018 at 05:48 AM.
    Thanks from Madeline

Page 1 of 30 12311 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Senate debating immigration
    By News Poster in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 29th March 2006, 10:02 PM

Search tags for this page

Click on a term to search for related topics.

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed