Censorship of Reasonable Debate on Babble

31 posts / 0 new

Sun, 2010-08-01 17:12

shrug

Below refers to a discussion on the 'Harper govt. attacks employment equity and affirmative action' thread. I was advised that it should be discussed here, rather than derailing the thread from its original topic. At issue is the over-zealous moderation of this thread, which in my opinion was limiting reasonable debate and over-stepping the terms of Babble's policy. Please see the thread for the back-story...

Catchfire wrote:

shrug wrote:
unless I missed something

It appears you have missed something, shrug. To wit, the babble policy statement (linked to at the top of every page and which both you and Sentinel agreed to when registering for this site). It reads as follows:

Quote:
babble is NOT intended as a place where the basic and essential values of human rights, feminism, anti-racism, and labour rights are to be debated or refought. Members that join babble who indicate intentions to challenge these rights and principles may be seen as disruptive to the nature of the forum.

Let me get this straight - are you accusing me of going against any of the above? Have I questioned human rights, feminism, anti-racism or labour rights, or challenged these rights in any way? If you are saying that I have done, it is quite an accusation to make, and cannot be substantiated. As you do not know anything about me or my profession, I suggest that you should choose your words more carefully. I agree whole-heartedly with Babble's policy; what I do not agree with is the over-zealous execution of this policy, which seems to me bullying and knee-jerk in its condemnation of people with differing views. I shudder to think of all the left-leaning contributors (but not left-leaning enough for Babble's definition) who have been kicked off of this forum, and were left feeling that leftist ideology is exclusive and afraid of dissenting views. It should be anything but.

Catchfire - "We're not here to discuss everything. We're here to discuss leftist topics from a leftist point of view, in the hopes of extending and enriching leftist thought. For those keeping score, that does not include protecting the privilege of white, able-bodied, heterosexual men (of which I am one)."

Well, I am NOT a white, able-bodied heterosexual man, and I have NOT been defending the rights of white, able-bodied heterosexual men. It seems strange that you, as a white, able-bodied heterosexual man, seem to feel that you should be the spokesperson for all oppressed groups. You do not represent me, and Babble does not represent all leftist thought - you represent a very rigid version of leftist thought, which silences minority voices (and I'm not talking about Sentinel's more mainstream, hegemonic views - I'm talking about my own, which is most certainly leftist, but is feeling oddly threatened and bullied in this forum).

Catchfire - "It's also not up for debate. If you want to debate such elementary first principles, feel free to head to CBC, the Globe and Mail, or the National Post, all of which, sadly, still like the look of the wrong side of history."

This is incredibly elitist, condescending and patronizing. I joined Babble in the hope of being able to interact with people who might approach online debate in a more progressive and informed way than the above news sources. Perhaps I should stick to The Guardian. It's a shame that such an open forum is not available in Canada. The Guardian also has a strict policy to ensure that commentators do not spout hate (this is right and just), but otherwise it does not confine people to a ridiculously small ideological framework that disallows any real debate.

I am truly disappointed by Babble's fear of differing points of view - all in the name of diversity and acceptance, you say? What a joke.

Sun, 2010-08-01 18:37

abnormal

shrug,

Thanks for this. I've always found it "amusing" that a supposedly progressive website is so closed to people that disagree with them. If nothing else it suggests that the "board" isn't capable of defending their positions.

Sun, 2010-08-01 18:49

E.Tamaran

Catchfire has no problem, as a white, abled-bodied hetreo male, moderating the Aboriginal Forum. How crazy is that?

Sun, 2010-08-01 19:11

Slumberjack

I don't believe anyone else applied to the position, and for good reason no doubt. Which begs your question of what on earth could have possibly drove him to it.

Sun, 2010-08-01 19:12

abnormal

I don't post often but that thread is one I avoid. I grew up outside of the largest reservation in North America and I never saw a sober Indian until I was in my early twenties (he got fired for turning up drunk).

Then I moved to UBC - I had two students from Kelowna that I figured were the most bigotted individuals I ever met. After all, they used to talk about having to step over the drunk Indians in the park on a Saturday morning. Couldn't be true - until I took a university teaching position there.

Just how long do you think I'd last if I posted what really happened?

Sun, 2010-08-01 19:27

Ripple

and flagged as offensive.

Sun, 2010-08-01 19:31

Slumberjack

Commentary regarding white ethnicity rarely finds its way into a sentence describing our own state of intoxication. Having recently taken up residence on a Reserve, the only non-sober person I've seen is in the mirror.

Sun, 2010-08-01 20:06

abnormal

Ripple wrote:

and flagged as offensive.

So I'm not allowed to tell what happened? Nice to know.

Sun, 2010-08-01 21:01

Catchfire

abnormal, I think you've forgotten the mandate of this forum, and the fact that propagating racist stereotypes is not allowed, nor attractive in any possible way. I'm suspending you for three days.

Sun, 2010-08-01 21:05

#10

Catchfire

And shrug, of course I accused you of nothing. You asked why Sentinel (i.e. not you) was asked not to post in the EE thread, prefacing it with the caveat "unless I missed something." You missed that Sentinel was re-arguing babble's first principles, which are not up for debate. That's what you "missed." It had nothing to do with you or your politics.

ETA. Also, you're new. So it's okay if you don't have a handle on the culture of the community you joined. You also probably aren't aware that we get a "babble censors such-and-such" thread about once a month or so. I might humbly advise that you wait a month before offering to save us from our closèd minds.

Sun, 2010-08-01 21:59

#11

hsfreethinkers hsfreethinkers's picture

I think shrug raises a good issue about how babble policy is applied or misapplied. I had a similar experience recently, so I tend to agree with the comments in the initial post.

Sun, 2010-08-01 23:04

#12

Lachine Scot

It doesn't bother me. I found that some of the people in that thread were just speaking from utter ignorance. (Not you, Shrug..) I don't see why this "subtle" form of white supremacy should be taken any less seriously than open racism. Those posters were arguing that white dominance should continue, weren't they?

Sun, 2010-08-01 23:40

#13

Frustrated Mess Frustrated Mess's picture

Catchfire wrote:

You also probably aren't aware that we get a "babble censors such-and-such" thread about once a month or so.

More like once a week.

Mon, 2010-08-02 08:17

#14

hsfreethinkers hsfreethinkers's picture

Frustrated Mess wrote:

Catchfire wrote:

You also probably aren't aware that we get a "babble censors such-and-such" thread about once a month or so.

More like once a week.

That may be so, but it doesn't adequately address the issues raised in the OP.

Mon, 2010-08-02 09:27

#15

Tommy_Paine

and flagged as offensive.

Better to examine what's really going on there. It's what sceptics call "remembering the hits and forgetting the misses". This is the incidious part of stereotypes-- when we see them, they reinforce the view. But when we see counter examples, they tend to be quickly dissmissed-- if seen at all.

Pay attention. I've grown up around three reserves, gone to school with natives, and natives have a significant representation in London's population. When you pay attention, you find that the stereotype doesn't hold up to a quantitative analysis.

Mon, 2010-08-02 21:26

#16

shrug

Unfortunately, Catchfire, I did not have to be in the forum as long as a month to encounter what I consider to be a severe limitation of free speech that goes beyond Babble's reasonable policy. The fact that over-zealous censorship is a common complaint does not invalidate my point - in fact, it strengthens it. Rather than assuming that the problem is always that of the complainant, perhaps you could consider whether Babble's policy is being applied fairly and consistently, or whether there is any basis to re-examine the policy's application. I have looked back at quite a lot of old threads, to get myself up to speed on Babble, and I can appreciate how hard your job as a moderator must be. I just think that it's quite easy to err on the side of banning anything that's even slightly controversial, which makes for scared and inhibited commentators, and for unintentional stifling of legitimate intellectual debate.

Tommy_Paine - I agree with you in principle and in many, many cases, but unfortunately, this particular stereotype does hold up to quantitative analysis, in that available statistics back it up. Saying/writing this is not racist, but merely acknowledges the realities that come of years of discrimination following colonization. It should go without saying that this does not mean that all, or the majority of First Nation/Aboriginal people have alcohol issues, or that people from other ethnic groups don't also have alcohol issues. It has been acknowledged by multiple First Nations/Aboriginal organizations that residential schools have left many turning to alcohol/drugs as a method of coping. It should not be surprising that if a people have been traumatised (by residential schools etc.), they may sometimes act in a traumatised way, and may attempt to cope in dysfunctional ways.

I live in the north (Yukon), where the Aboriginal population is around 25% (compared with about 4% in the rest of Canada, according to the 2006 census). Alcohol use within First Nation Communities is a serious problem here - many First Nations governments try to deal with this by legislating for 'dry communities' free from alcohol sales, but unfortunately this has not solved the problem. Domestic violence rates in Yukon are 3 times higher than in the south; Yukon government figures also show that in Yukon, Aboriginal women are 3 times more likely to experience domestic violence than non-Aboriginal women. Alcohol is usually a factor in these instances of violence.

Refusing to acknowledge alcohol problems within Aboriginal communities because doing so would 'reinforce stereotypes' does nothing to help the situation. Before you ban me, here's some more data on the subject... Though fewer Aboriginal people drink alcohol than in the Canadian population at large, those who do drink are more likely to drink to excess and to have issues of chronic inebriation (StatsCan). The situation has damaging and far-reaching effects - apart from the domestic violence rates already mentioned. According to First Nations, Inuit and Aboriginal Health Canada, "The rates of FAS/FAE in some First Nations and Inuit communities are much higher than the national average." (http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fniah-spnia/pubs/famil/_preg-gros/stop-arret-synd...) [Incidentally, it is hard to find hard data on FAS/FAE rates in Aborginal populations vs. non-Aboriginal populations in Canada, since in 1992 it was decided in the House of Commons that the results of such a study would be 'stigmatizing' of First Nations people. We are burying our heads in the sand on this, with the kind of 'ignorance is bliss' mentality the Harper government champions - for example, through its decision to stop making the long-form census mandatory. Unofficial numbers do back up the general assumption made by Health Canada - in Yukon, for example, hospital records show that 75% of FASD cases are Aboriginal (this figure was in the Yukon News newspaper just today). If such figures were more readily available nationally, perhaps more funding could be targeted toward eradicating this, and to solving what is a major problem in First Nations communities. This is also backed up by opinion polls in First Nation communities/reserves, where alcohol issues are repeatedly acknowledged as a major problem.]

It is not controversial to suggest that substance misuse can be compounded by issues of marginalization and poverty. It is also not controversial among progressive, well-informed people to acknowledge that First Nations people are disproportionately marginalized in Canada, and disproportionate victims of poverty. Why then is it controversial to see a linkage between these two points? Abnormal's comment was that he/she did not want to admit or acknowledge any substance to anything stereotypical, even when it was evidenced clearly; he/she was afraid of writing this on Babble's discussion boards for fear of being banned. Well, you proved him/her right.

Sorry this is so long. I'll shut up now.

Mon, 2010-08-02 21:50

#17

Ripple

and not flagged as offensive.

abnormal's post did not make any linkage between substance misuse and marginalization and poverty amongst First Nations people. abnormal said s/he never saw a sober Indian.

Mon, 2010-08-02 21:55

#18

Catchfire

shrug, I have no wish to ban or suspend anyone. In fact, I hate it. It is the worst part of my job.

Quoting a statistic is one thing. Deciding that this thread would be a good time to announce that one has "never seen a sober Indian in my life" is quite another thing. abnormal was not doing so for our own edification. He was not titilating us with trivia. He was holding up a stereotype (and using outdated terminology to boot), validating it with limited individual experience, and using such a claim to invalidate babble policy which is built on decades of anti-oppression study, practice and collective knowledge.

Of course, another thing we like to think of here in babble is collectivity and social welfare. So even "simply" quoting a statistic is impossible. What does substance abuse in First Nation communities have to do with Employment Equity? How does the colonialist stereotype of the "drunken Indian" operate in Canadian society and how is it mobilizing this discussion? What does AIDS have to do with discussions of the gay "lifestyle"? Did you get the impression that abnormal was bringing up his anecdotal (yet universalizing, apparently) experience in order to critique Canada's legacy of colonialism and disregard for marginalized people? I didn't.

The hegemonic narrative of the Western white het male perpetually under attack is monochromatic and homogenizing, and in now way contributes to diversity. Allowing its particular, toxic, and utterly tired tropes to flourish in no way contributes to diversity--it is in fact an enemy of diversity, attempting to stamp out agency, sovereignty and identity in anything outside the social norm. This is what years of progressive though has taught us, and it is what informs babble policy. I'd be the first to say that such a policy is in no way easy to implement or enact, but we do our best. And it is in my humble opinion that we rarely, rarely err on the side of overly vigilant, overly militant. Your mileage may vary, but I have about six years of babbling experience on you.

Mon, 2010-08-02 22:28

#19

laine lowe laine lowe's picture

Great news to hear that you are a mod, Catchfire. I have no doubt that it is not an easy task.

I agree with Lachine Scott. I participated in the Employment Equity thread and I was shcoked at some of the reactions I read there.

As for wanting to dicuss the issue of alcohol abuse among First Nations, I have to question why? Serioiusly, venting on how many Aboriginal people you have encountered drunk is the kind of comment I see on the feedback pages of every one-line new media. Nothing new in giving anectdotal stories of such experiences. But how does that even help anyone.

I can give anectdotal evidence of all sorts of non-Aboriginal people who have also abused alcohol 24-7. Does that mean I should make some sweeping correlation based on their ethnic background or income class? I don't think so.

The fact that alcohol consumption among Aboriginal should even have anything to do with employment equity is totally disturbing. The fact that this Board and its moderators should indicate that that is a pretty freaking racist assumption and call on it when they see it is heartening.

Tue, 2010-08-03 00:14

#20

Unionist

I loved shrug's last post: Statistics prove Aboriginals not only drink more, but can't hold their liquor - and by recognizing this "truth", "We" (that's a capital "W" for White) can direct funds to solve this "problem"!

I'm looking for double blind studies proving that rich folks, on average, smell nicer than homeless folks. Maybe the census long form will help us out here. By acknowledging this statistical reality, we can justify federal funding for the homeless - mouthwash, deodorant, etc. There's no problem that science, hand in hand with privilege and power, can't fix!

We can't ignore such inconvenient truths, just because we fear the fascist babble gendarmerie! Stand up and fight for your rights! Shrug off tyranny!!!

Tue, 2010-08-03 20:25

#21

shrug

I'm going to try to make this brief because I'm tired and I fear I'm already wearing out my welcome here. I see your point, Catchfire; I just think that abnormal's point may have been missed because of knee-jerk assumptions of 'ooh, using the words Aboriginal and alcohol in one sentence = bad and racist." It's a sensitive issue for me because of where I live and the work I do. But I bow to your greater Babble experience (though please remember that Babble is by no means the only left-wing organization in the world; do not assume a lack of social activism experience on my part just because I am new to Babble).

Which brings me to Unionist's sarcastic comments. While trying to catch me in the 'White Man's Burden' accusation, you're assuming that I am white, or a man, or both - I don't know where you got that from. I'm sure you are not honestly saying that there IS no "problem" with First Nations people's status in this country. I also assume that you are not arguing that no funds should be allocated from "White" government (largely accurate, unfortunately) in order to try to redress the power imbalance. So what is your point exactly?

Tue, 2010-08-03 20:45

#22

hsfreethinkers hsfreethinkers's picture

Do stick around shrug (I sense you are getting discouraged, and if so I don't blame you). The rest of you, ease off eh? shrug comes across pretty cool and reasonable to me. You should welcome new folks instead of treating them like %*#^.

Tue, 2010-08-03 21:15

#23

Catchfire

shrug, I have only supported and agreed with any posts you have made during your tenure on babble. I have done my utmost to explain--not make accusations rooted in--babble policy. I have family in the Yukon, actually, and have made several visits to Whitehorse and environs. It would be great to have a northern perspective, so I hope you'll stick around.

I humbly suggest that we all just leave this matter be--head to other, more productive threads. Meta threads can be fun (although usually not for moderators) but they're not really the point of babble, eh?

So welcome to babble, shrug. See you on the boards.

P.S. Hey, and thanks for the look, laine lowe. Good to see you around too!

Tue, 2010-08-03 21:39

#24

Unionist

shrug wrote:

Which brings me to Unionist's sarcastic comments. While trying to catch me in the 'White Man's Burden' accusation, you're assuming that I am white, or a man, or both - I don't know where you got that from.

You don't know me well. I don't actually give a shit what colour, race, creed, orientation, or whatever other deficiency you or I or anyone may suffer from. I judge people by their deeds, and (especially on an internet discussion board) by their words. Their instincts. Their partisanship (not in the ugly narrow sense). Whose side they are on.

Quote:
I'm sure you are not honestly saying that there IS no "problem" with First Nations people's status in this country.

If by their "status" you mean "I've never met a sober Indian", then actually, be very careful, because I get nasty even with people I've just only met.

Quote:
I also assume that you are not arguing that no funds should be allocated from "White" government (largely accurate, unfortunately) in order to try to redress the power imbalance. So what is your point exactly?

My point exactly is that Aboriginal peoples don't need your help. What they need is recognition of their hereditary rights, respect, equality, compensation, and lots of redress for wrongs that have been done. And they are the ones who should be not only the masters of their own destiny, but telling us how, when, where, and how much to compensate and redress the wrongs we have done to them.

That's my point, exactly.

I grew up with the "drunken Indian" stereotype being universally accepted. When I hear it on this board - in 2010 - I am inclined to tell those who repeat such stereotypes, no matter how White and Christian and Condescending the motive, to f*** off and die asap. That's why I'm not a moderator. I don't have the infinite patience required.

Tue, 2010-08-03 21:51

#25

E.Tamaran

Was at an outdoor patio last week in the Exchange District having a beer. FN fellow came up and started badgering us for change/smokes/whatever. Called us "toadies" when we told him to fuck off. I've never been acosted for money by settlers. Had plenty of other shit done to me by settlers though. True story.

Tue, 2010-08-03 22:28

#26

Maysie

In my opinion "true stories" are not helpful to this kind of discussion and can serve to reiterate stereotypes. See Tommy P's post #14.

And E. Tamaran, if it's not ok for others to post stories like that, it's not okay for you either.

Tue, 2010-08-03 22:32

#27

laine lowe laine lowe's picture

Thank you, Maysie. It makes me cringe to read such sterotypes on this board. I get my fill with the Winnipeg Free Press.

Tue, 2010-08-03 22:51

#28

E.Tamaran

Maysie wrote:

In my opinion "true stories" are not helpful to this kind of discussion and can serve to reiterate stereotypes. See Tommy P's post #14.

And E. Tamaran, if it's not ok for others to post stories like that, it's not okay for you either.

LOL. I can't relate a story about being called a toadie by an FN guy for not giving him money? WTF is that all about?

Tue, 2010-08-03 23:06

#29

Unionist

E.Tamaran wrote:

LOL. I can't relate a story about being called a toadie by an FN guy for not giving him money? WTF is that all about?

It's about respecting the integrity of this board, my friend. Tell your offensive anecdotes somewhere else, please. And I really personally don't care if they're "true" or not.

Wed, 2010-08-04 03:02

#30

Ripple

I take the point about "true stories" but I'm going to tell this one anyway ...

I grew up down the road from an Anishnawbek community. I grew up thinking this was just another neighbourhood. I went to school with the kids, went to their birthday parties and they came to mine, played sports with them, was coached by their moms and dads, travelled to tournaments with them, spent summer weeks with their families. I never registered any difference, except that the houses in this neighbourhood seemed more like my family's camp (that's a cottage, for you southern ontarians, a cabin for those in BC) than my home.

When I first realized the people of the neighbourhood down the road were different was when I was about 12 and eavesdropped at the door to the living room. My mom was meeting with two police officers. She had been first on the scene of a hit and run accident where a woman from the Anishnawbek neighbourhood had been walking along the side of the road and killed. My mom was filing a complaint - the officers on the scene treated this woman "worse than a dog". They didn't call an ambulance, deciding she was dead. (My mom, a nurse, wasn't so sure.) They didn't cover her body. They smoked and dropped their cigarettes butts around her.

Incidentally, the driver was found and arrested. He was a drunk white teenage boy. He was given a slap on the wrist. (No jail time, as I recall.)

True story.

Wed, 2010-08-04 06:47

#31

Maysie

Thanks Ripple. I think.

The problem with "true stories" is that this can go back and forth forever, without any understanding or deeper analysis of systemic racist policies and practices, and ways to combat them.

When racism is understood, incorrectly, as something that is fluid, up for debate/interpretation, and affects white folks in the same way as folks of colour and Aboriginal folks, then these stories and the telling of them are endless. Putting a stop to bad faith discussions, that some may see as "reasonable debate" is just part of my job here. Did I mention I'm away for two weeks starting Friday?