Jump to navigation
First. I think it would greatly simplify matters if all [i]other[/i] questions about what is racsim simply be ruled out of order for the Anti Racism forum. Period.
NO discussion of 'reverse racism' whatsoever. Ditto for isn't what happened to the Irish the same? No discussion period.
Only a quick reference by a moderator to a brief mission statement that explains why and says where and how person can raise their concern. [Probably with a caveat that it is likely that there will be minimal patiece for discussions like 'reverse discrimination' anywhere on babble... valid points notwithstanding the history is the discussions always degenerate and quickly. Etc.]
Since such distractions can very quickly derail a discussion in a manner that turns out to be terminal- it should probably be any posters right and responsibility to referr to the protocol... with the expectation that this can be challenged to a moderator.
Then there are the anti-semitism and racism questions themselves.
Which do not deserve a dismissal at all- let alone such a summry one as oulined above.
BUT, the discussions are chronicaly fatal... and long lasting. Which would not be so bad, except for the futility of it all.
So how about an 'agree to disagree' message that is referred to.
Something to the effect that these are good questions which all take seriously. Then a statement of where the impasse has been found. And an agreemnt that the flame wars that have followed have always consumed everything around and satisfy no one. Such that we have agreed that we will not got go there anymore.
Then the practiacal consequences of that, the protocol we have adopted. I propose the following. But [b]A[/b] protocol is the point, not this protocol I am proposing.
First. In a discussion that is about racism as it bears on FN and POC, of which the faciliating and encouraging of is the purpose of having the forum in the first place.... any time that anti-semitism or the oppression of Jews comes up, there is a reference to the protocol which is to end that line of discussion. Period.
The exception being accusations of anti-semitism in the words of a poster. And even that is to be left to a moderator to resolve, and is NOT allowed to go off into general implications, etc.
[i]Closely and neccesarily associated to that reference to the protocol and termination of the line of discussion for practical reasons[/i]: that discussions of anti-semitism and the oppression of Jews are always welcomed in the AR forum. Particularly encouraged are discussions meant to resolve, or attack, the acknowledged deadlock, notwithstanding a practical warning that there is likely to be goodly skepticism that the discussions can be useful.
But all discussions of ant-semitism are to have their own thread- no matter how inclusive they are hoped to be in terms of particpants or substantive content.
[b]ETA: [/b] As an example of the kind of thread that is encouraged I would referr to the currently running content [and titling] of [url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=38&t=000682]What the UN says about racism[/url]- minus the flame war parts. But those outbursts are just not encouraged- the fact that happen not necessarily being reason not to try.
Although I've taken the lead in suggesting this, I ask that others run with it. Thats always good anyway- but this is time consuming and I really have to do some work. The details may be different, but I doubt if this is an original idea.
[ 28 May 2008: Message edited by: KenS ]
Gee. This is one of two threads open in the forum. And I'm still the only one to post in it.
No opportunities for outrage and venom spreading?
Makwa's last post in the most recently closed thread:
I am of the opinion that the so-called anti-racist forum should be shut down all together, because it is so seldom that I see anything resembling 'anti-racism news or initiatives'. I have no problem with people identifying anti-semitism as racism. For me, I make an analytical distinction for reasons I have explained. I don't see it as an issue worth the acrimony, and can't see why it is problematic to Jewish people, but by all means include issues of anti-semitism in discussions of racism.
I agree 100% with all the points.
With the exception that I do see why it is problematic. Don't see that I do makes any difference, but some one is sure to pick that to focus on and ignore the rest.
Lets close this thread too for good measure.
Originally posted by KenS:[b] With the exception that I do see why it is problematic. Don't see that I do makes any difference, but some one is sure to pick that to focus on and ignore the rest. Lets close this thread too for good measure.[/b]
I don't want to sound too forward with this, but how about you just shutting up about it, because it seems you have no idea what you are talking about. Protocols...Anti-semitism...nice imagery there.
Then why did you spend so much time insisting that anti semitism wasn't racism?
I agree 100% with all the points.
To clarify, I should indicate that my position has moved somewhat from before. In the past, I insisted on making the distinction because I saw the larger appropriation of the conceptual use of racism as a means by which people would minimize and define away racism. Now I have come to realize that this is unavoidable, so for the purposes of analysis, I will try to avoid the concept of racism altogether for the somewhat more precice concept of 'white supremacy.'
Slumberjack has the right idea.
I'll follow Makwa's lead and close this thread. I'm sure he's probably sick of dealing with this today. I sure would be in his shoes.