TBC
Intellectual honesty, bias, and activism.
Sat, 2015-03-28 12:31
#1
Intellectual honesty, bias, and activism.
Sat, 2015-03-28 12:33
#2
http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2015/03/23/Trudeau-Calls-Out-Racist-Past/
At this point, the columnists who-know-what-is-best-for-us started to spin out because Trudeau mentioned many of our past sins with respect to minorities in this country. Somehow, we just should not talk about these when we talk about treatment of minorities today. This is utter rot. I reserve judgment on Mr. Trudeau generally and surprise myself for springing to his defence, but he's entitled to be defended by all decent citizens.
Surely, in dealing with issues today, we can't ignore our past; particularly since the events Trudeau mentions were not that long ago. Indeed, many of the serious examples of Canadian intolerance happened well within my admittedly long lifetime.
...
Now this is critically important given that even Thomas Mulcair, along with many writers, has Trudeau conflating the treatment of Muslims with the Holocaust.
He did nothing of the sort. He did not directly or inferentially mention the Holocaust and has not mentioned it since, despite the baiting of the Tories and now Mulcair and the NDP.
The policy he mentioned predated the Holocaust. The Jews in question were fleeing because of Kristallnacht, literally, "Night of Crystal," of violent anti-Jewish pogroms which took place on Nov. 9-10, 1938, throughout Germany.
If anyone in May 1939 had predicted that a civilized nation would murder some six million people, including I might say, the mentally ill and disabled, Roma people and homosexuals, he would have been considered mad.
Babble reacted pretty much like the MSM. Kneejerk condemnation of Trudeau and waving around accusations of inappropriate comparison to the Holocaust.
Trudeau was right to remind us of our history of racism but he was denigrated for it by babblers and the MSM.
Mon, 2015-03-30 14:30
#3
First, why is this thread in reactions rather than the election forum? What kind of site policy has to do with this? If this is in order to ask for some policy around being nicer to Trudeau that would be very inappropriate to say the least. If you are not asking for a policy on this or for there to be action taken on this site then exactly why is this thread here?
News flash: Rabble does not take marching orders from the MSM.. We can discuss what they write in the politics threads but bringing them into the reactions section to advise people how they should behave is not what Rabble was created for. This is a first -- opening a reactions thread over Babblers' opinions about a party and leader rather than other Babblers.
If the question is should the site consider some kind of directive to be kinder to any party or its leader, the reaction should be absolutely NEVER. If Trudeau wants to come here personally and engage then we can have a discussion about what is said to him as a member of the community. Likewise, Mulcair. And why not Harper, if Trudeau can be here and be protected.
I resent very much the thread title that seems to suggest that Babblers criticizing Trudeau are being dishonest. This has come at the end of a couple weeks of very provocative posts by the Liberal advocates here. They are no longer just disagreeing or countering the opinions of nonLiberals but demeaning their opinions and questioning the legitimacy of their choices. Quite a few posts were sweeping statements that clearly were not even argumentative—they were designed to get people angry not to get them to think about something.
This site is going to deteriorate quickly if we start having directives about what opinions about Trudeau are legitimate or honest or fair. If legitimately held they are fair.
This thread is more provocation.
So, argue, provide opinions but when Rabble becomes a campaign site for the Liberal party or has appeals in reactions threads based on partisan boosterism, it will have a hard time justifying its existence. Independence means that if the people here wish to criticize Trudeau – they can, no matter what the MSM, the Liberal party, or their boosters here say.
Mon, 2015-03-30 14:55
#4
Nowadays Kristallnacht is very much considered part of the Holocaust, and indeed the act that ratcheted the Nazi mistreatment of Jews (and other "racially inferior" groups) up from discrimination to the beginnings of genocide. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristallnacht
However, as Richard J. Evans cites several German scholarly sources in his 2005 The Third Reich in Power in his attempts to approximate an accurate death toll, the true number of Jews massacred in the attacks will probably never be known, but it was certainly many times greater than the "published 91+ dead", when the maltreatment of the Jewish men after they were arrested is taken into consideration, along with at least 300 suicides caused by the despair it engendered; Jewish deaths undoubtedly ran into the hundreds.
Additionally, 30,000 were arrested and incarcerated in Nazi concentration camps.[2] Jewish homes, hospitals, and schools were ransacked, as the attackers demolished buildings with sledgehammers.[3] Over 1,000 synagogues were burned (95 in Vienna alone) and over 7,000 Jewish businesses destroyed or damaged.[4][5] Martin Gilbert writes that no event in the history of German Jews between 1933 and 1945 was so widely reported as it was happening, and the accounts from the foreign journalists working in Germany sent shock waves around the world.[3] The Times wrote at the time: "No foreign propagandist bent upon blackening Germany before the world could outdo the tale of burnings and beatings, of blackguardly assaults on defenseless and innocent people, which disgraced that country yesterday."[6]
The pretext for the attacks was the assassination of the German diplomat Ernst vom Rath by Herschel Grynszpan, a German-born Polish Jew living in Paris. Kristallnacht was followed by additional economic and political persecution of Jews, and is viewed by historians as part of Nazi Germany's broader racial policy, and the beginning of the Final Solution and The Holocaust.[7]
I doubt very much that many if any babblers would deny the politics of institutionalized racism within the Canadian state, in particular with regard to the Indigenous peoples.
Mon, 2015-03-30 15:16
#5
I don't see how Kristallnacht can be view historically seperate from the Holocaust. The idea that the full scale of what was happening was not known at the time is not a reasonable test for a relationship between the events. If it were we would have a more fragmented view of history.
I agree Canada has a long history of racism -- as do many countries. I do not object to any conversation about this and I doubt anyone else here would.
I was suprised by the amateurish comments from Trudeau but would not have been so harsh on him over this or many other issues were it not for the rampant boosterism that is going on promoting Trudeau.
Fri, 2015-04-10 11:49
#6
First, why is this thread in reactions rather than the election forum? What kind of site policy has to do with this? If this is in order to ask for some policy around being nicer to Trudeau that would be very inappropriate to say the least. If you are not asking for a policy on this or for there to be action taken on this site then exactly why is this thread here?
Because it is a reaction to Rabble. It has nothing to do with being "nicer to Trudeau". It is about acknowledging Canada's racist past and recognizing that the mounting anti-Muslim sentiment being promoted by the Conservative government is dangerous and undermines Canadian unity and our future. In my opinion that Trudeau was the one to raise the issue should not colour the reaction of babblers.
News flash: Rabble does not take marching orders from the MSM.. We can discuss what they write in the politics threads but bringing them into the reactions section to advise people how they should behave is not what Rabble was created for.
In the case I am referring to babblers did take their marching orders from the MSM but that is neither here nor there. It shouldn't matter one way or another what the stance of the MSM is.
From the speech being referenced:
http://www.macleans.ca/politics/for-the-record-justin-trudeau-on-liberty...
We haven’t always been at our best. We have had many failures, the most pernicious and invidious of which is still very much with us: the second-class citizenship of indigenous peoples.
There are other dark episodes: the Chinese head tax, the internment of Ukrainian, Japanese, and Italian Canadians during the First and Second World Wars, our turning away boats of Jewish or Punjabi refugees, our own history of slavery. No Irish need apply. We don’t speak French here, so “speak white.” The discrimination faced by Greek and Portuguese Canadians in this very city.
For each and every one of these, we look back with regret and shame. And we should.
But we should also learn from them. Mackenzie King ordered those internments because they were popular. In fact, he did it despite evidence from the RCMP and Defence that they were unwarranted. He did it because people were afraid.
When I talk to young people today about these episodes, they can hardly believe they happened. It doesn’t sound possible, not in Canada.
So we should all shudder to hear the same rhetoric that led to a “none is too many” immigration policy toward Jews in the ’30s and ’40s, being used to raise fears against Muslims today.
That’s because the Canada we all cherish stands for the opposite of those dark moments.
So in all of this, the most important point to the MSM and to babblers is that Trudeau dared to reference "none too many" in the same breath as the rising anti-muslim rhetoric in Canada. No one has a problem with him referencing our other sins. The central point that we are unfamiliar with our past and the danger that represents is of no interest to the MSM or babblers.
I never heard of the "none too many" thing until this popped up in the news. I'm willing to bet this is the first a lot of Canadians heard about it and that many still don't know about it and the other examples in our past.
There are a lot of valid reasons for criticizing Trudeau; this isn't one of them. This was and is a message people need to hear.
No one even noticed this:
We haven’t always been at our best. We have had many failures, the most pernicious and invidious of which is still very much with us: the second-class citizenship of indigenous peoples.
I am utterly astounded that not one media outlet found this to be a shocking acknowledgement for a politician to make. He is calling it out as present day racism in Canada akin to all the other examples of our racist history. The "none too many" comment pales in comparison.
Fri, 2015-04-10 15:28
#7
swallow
Please consider moving this to the Trudeau: Saint or Sinner? (sorry, election 2015) forum. If we posted every reaction to other babblers in rabble reactions, then 90% of the entire site would be here.
Anyways, everyone knows this is the forum to bash our under-appreciated moderators!
I think it would be great, more than great, to have a discussion in antiracism forum about how to acknowledge Canada's racist past (and link it to Canada's racist present, too, if I can dream a bit). This article would make a good opening post for such a conversation. Let's not frame it around the Great (or Despised) Justin, though. let's frame it around the racism and the racialized peopels who were (are) targetted.
Fri, 2015-04-10 17:09
#8
I have no problem with the moderators moving this discussion elsewhere if they think another forum would be more appropriate.
The topic is not Canada's racist past nor Trudeau.
The topic is current racism in Canada and the focus of the progressive community. I am challenging progressives to walk the talk.
A man who is in the running to be the next Prime Minister of Canada just said that indigenous people in Canada are second-class citizens and it was ignored in favor of criticizing him for daring to mention the "none too many" policy of the 1930s in relation to the rising rhetoric against Muslims.
Really, mentioning "none too many" from the 1930s in relation to rising anti-Muslim rhetoric is just outrageous. After all, it's not like Muslim refugees face death if we turn them away, oh wait, many of them do. It's not like we are not living up to our obligation to accept refugees that we committed to, oh wait, didn't I read something about not taking in the Syrian refugees we promised to accept? But it's not really our problem because we aren't responsible for mid-East unrest, well except for a little bombing here and there and some weapon sales.
It would be great to have a discussion on how to acknowledge Canada's racist past but not as a means of avoiding soul-searching by the progressive community on Canada's racist present and how important that is in comparison to partisan politics.
In my opinion it is not progressive to place the issue of current racism in Canada secondary to political partisanship.
Fri, 2015-04-10 19:01
#9
In my opinion it is not progressive to place the issue of current racism in Canada secondary to political partisanship.
people may want to hold you to this.
Fri, 2015-04-10 19:25
#10
In my opinion it is not progressive to place the issue of current racism in Canada secondary to political partisanship.
people may want to hold you to this.
I hope they do. I am not a perfect person.
Fri, 2015-04-10 19:50
#11
swallow
In my opinion it is not progressive to place the issue of current racism in Canada secondary to political partisanship.
Damn straight it's not. So, where do you want the conversaiton to go now?
Fri, 2015-04-10 20:05
#12
In my opinion it is not progressive to place the issue of current racism in Canada secondary to political partisanship.
Damn straight it's not. So, where do you want the conversaiton to go now?
You have already made the best suggestion on this.
Fri, 2015-04-10 20:09
#13
In my opinion it is not progressive to place the issue of current racism in Canada secondary to political partisanship.
people may want to hold you to this.
I hope they do. I am not a perfect person.
Ok that's fair good advice for all.
Fri, 2015-04-10 20:21
#14
Does this really belong in "Reactions" the way, say "I can't upload a link to a picture" does?
For that matter, does the rebuttal thread, "What Liberals are missing when they feel persecuted here" really belong in "Reactions", the way "Should Rabble support Disqus?" does?
Isn't this mostly just partisans, noticing that there's still one small area of the carpet that hasn't been shat on yet?
Here's an idea that's at least in keeping with the purpose of "Reactions":
Let's ditch all the different forums, and delete all the old threads, and just go with an unnamed forum and two threads:
1. "Ukraine: What is the coward Justin Trudeau not brave enough to say about it??"
2. "The Liberals: Couldn't a real man like Putin teach us a lot about the Trudeau boy-child??"
That should cover it, no? Well, okay, we can keep "Bless me now.." but only if either Justin or Vlad make a statement.
Fri, 2015-04-10 20:42
#15
swallow
I tink we'll also need Chantal Hebert's views, won't we?
Sun, 2015-04-12 19:13
#16
Magoo, that was brilliant.
Though let's not let the angst-ridden feel like they are being ignored. There's gotta be room for the "things aren't like they used to be since the brainwashed outsiders took over" thread. Otherwise some might think there's a conspiracy afoot.
Mon, 2015-04-13 09:53
#17
Someone made a point upthread about the MSM position not being relevent. This isn't so - it's incredibly important to know how things are being reported in the MSM. It's vital to understand the bias of the MSM in order to offer an alternative to it, which is what rabble.ca does.
Isn't this mostly just partisans, noticing that there's still one small area of the carpet that hasn't been shat on yet?Tell me about it. Yarg.
Mon, 2015-04-13 10:00
#18
Someone made a point upthread about the MSM position not being relevent. This isn't so - it's incredibly important to know how things are being reported in the MSM. It's vital to understand the bias of the MSM in order to offer an alternative to it, which is what rabble.ca does.
Isn't this mostly just partisans, noticing that there's still one small area of the carpet that hasn't been shat on yet?Tell me about it. Yarg.
Not sure I understand this-- if the first comment is true how is the second?
I did not start this thread but I did start the one referenced in it -- and I did that to provide the context you acknowledge is vitally important. I was not being overly partisan politically either as I acknowledged the important issue of NDP voices drowning other alternate voices even as I did define the Liberal talking points as not being an alternative view left out of MSM.
Mon, 2015-04-13 12:38
#19
Anyways, everyone knows this is the forum to bash our under-appreciated moderators!
This thread is about the community not the mods.
Someone made a point upthread about the MSM position not being relevent. This isn't so - it's incredibly important to know how things are being reported in the MSM. It's vital to understand the bias of the MSM in order to offer an alternative to it, which is what rabble.ca does.
Babble and MSM both chastized Trudeau for using "none too many" as an example of racism in Canada.
Babble and the MSM both ignored Trudeau stating that indigenous peoples in Canada are second class citizens and the heart of his speech which was to point out Canada's racist history and present day racism.
Babble echoed the MSM; it did not offer an alternative. The Tyee offered an alternative.
That the MSM does or does not take a particular position or favor a particular political party should not dictate the position taken by babble.
The narrative that the MSM is pro-Liberal or pro-Trudeau therefore babble should favor the NDP in some manner is faulty. It requires babble to endorse one party above another presenting a biased point of view to offset the percieved imbalance in the MSM. That leads to the situation I am describing in this thread. Babble did not present the alternative point of view in the evaluation of Trudeau's speech. It was a shallow kneejerk response that echoed the MSM rather than offering the progressive perspective.
Mon, 2015-04-13 12:45
#20
swallow
Babble and MSM both chastized Trudeau for using "none too many" as an example of racism in Canada.
You seem to ahve mis-spelled "some babblers."
Mon, 2015-04-13 14:47
#21
The second comment refers to how painful it is to moderate partisan bickering, name-calling and hair-pulling and refers to no individual nor their political party of choice specifically.Someone made a point upthread about the MSM position not being relevent. This isn't so - it's incredibly important to know how things are being reported in the MSM. It's vital to understand the bias of the MSM in order to offer an alternative to it, which is what rabble.ca does.
Isn't this mostly just partisans, noticing that there's still one small area of the carpet that hasn't been shat on yet?Tell me about it. Yarg.Not sure I understand this-- if the first comment is true how is the second?
I did not start this thread but I did start the one referenced in it -- and I did that to provide the context you acknowledge is vitally important. I was not being overly partisan politically either as I acknowledged the important issue of NDP voices drowning other alternate voices even as I did define the Liberal talking points as not being an alternative view left out of MSM.
Mon, 2015-04-13 21:08
#22
Babble and MSM both chastized Trudeau for using "none too many" as an example of racism in Canada.
You seem to ahve mis-spelled "some babblers."
True, some babblers were critical, but no babblers offered an alternative perspective and no babblers picked up on the comment concerning present day second class citizenship of indigenous peoples. To me if Trudeau becomes PM this is a statement he can be held to.
Many Canadians still see racism as something that primarily afflicts the US with only relatively minor incidences occuring in Canada. To have a potential PM acknowledge our racist history and it's present day expression is ground-breaking. It's not just "yeah we did some bad stuff in the olden days so hey, we're sorry".
When a PM acknowledges the second class status of a large group of citizens it becomes the responsibility of the PM to take concrete action to correct the situation.