[Imc-uk-features] Decisions to make, was: Re: GILAD ATZMON'S LETTER TO INDYMEDIA UK (AS YET NOT ONLINE)

[Chris]

Hi

I'm not meaning to go against Tony's very good suggestions
[1] with this email, rather I hope it might clarify what
things we need to decide on...

On Tue 13-Nov-2007 at 09:49:00AM +0000, phunkee wrote:
> 
> Contray to calls from people to wrap up the debate on
> the features list about Greenstein vs. Atzmon, I think
> it's worth posting Gilad Atzmon's and Mary Rizzo's
> 'letters' to Indymedia UK, which i understand haven't
> been allowed through to the list. His letter also
> outlines some of the harrassement Ftp has had to endure
> during the course of this 'exchange'.

Thanks, I though that was interesting, I still haven't
read all the material from this row but I have had some
thoughts about what decisions we collectively need to
makes:

1. Is Gilad Atzmon a racist?

   - If we think he is then we hide all existing and all
     future article by him on the site, as we would with
     articles from a BNP spokesperson.

   - If we don't think he is then we need to consider each
     article in turn, on it's merits.

2. Are the Gilad Atzmon articles on Indymedia racist?

   - If we think they are then we should hide them.

   - If we don't think they are we should let people
     discuss them via the comments.

I think there are also, even at this stage, before we have
discussed this face-to-face, some things we could all
agree on, like:

- Gilad Atzmon's writings are provocative, borderline,
  antagonistic, push the boundaries of what is acceptable
  and are in many way hard to understand and quite
  impenetrable, they are also are very effective at
  winding people up and this is clearly the *intention*.

- The manner in which those who want his articles deleted
  have behaved is not good, they have been rude and
  offensive and shown little or no understanding of how
  Indymedia works (anyone can publish articles, they do
  *not* have to be approved before they appear on the
  site) or our collective decisions making and it feels
  like they want to bully us into doing what they want.

- This isn't about whether we *agree* with Gilad Atzmon's
  articles, I don't think any of us do (and we would have
  to understand them first!) -- it's about our response to
  material which pushes the boundaries of freedom of
  expression and thought and to when extent we want to
  allow discussions take place on the site and to what
  extent we want to ban things and deem them as being
  unfit for discussion.  

- Which ever way we go it's going to make people unhappy,
  if we hide his articles we will be accused of being
  "left gatekeepers", censors, authoritian guardians of
  the boundaries of acceptable political discourse and
  such like. On the other hand if we don't hide them we
  will be probably be accuseed of being, racists,
  anti-semites and holocaust deniers.

I don't know if the above helps any... if nothing else it
might have cleared up some things in my mind...

Chris

[1] http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-features/2007-November/1112-1w.html

-- 
Aktivix -- Free Software for a Free World