[IMC-UK-Features] feature proposal: Indymedia UK and the Atzmon-Greenstein affair

[Shiar]

On Wed, February 20, 2008 10:17 am, yossarian wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have been hesitant to get involved in this discussion because I see
> the article as a defense of Atzmon.  For each criticism of him, there
> follows a rebuttal.
> I can understand why it was written this way,
> showing both views, but the (unintended) overall effect seems to me to
> legitimize Atzmon's views, which I think are quite ugly.

Others could argue exactly the opposite. Note, for example, the concluding
 paragraph of the first section (which's dealing with Atzmon):
"This does not seem to have helped much and it was argued that simply
replacing the word "Jewish" with "Zionist", while keeping the 'same
logic', does not mean the underlying discourse is not anti-Semitic. In
fact, this kind of word-conflation has been used by neo-Nazis in their
anti-Semitic literature."

There is a historical (and logical) reason why "rebuttals" follow
criticisms: what happened here (and that's usually the case in the human
world) is that someone accused Atzmon of being anti-Semitic, THEN defense
and 'rebuttal' followed, then more argument from the first, then more
argument from the second and so on.

> There are a
> bunch of other issues, primarily with the way issues are framed, and
> what is left out of the feature.

Can you be more specific please?

> I think that we would be better off putting out a short statement along
> the lines of "there has been disagreement within the collective
> regarding anti-semitism, some people have left, the issue is not
> resolved, here are some links to get you started if you're interested in
> the subject".  The first link could be to this feature proposal.

Well, good luck with that.

> Perhaps it would be possible to react to this whole thing in a positive
> way by running a series of debates on the site?  They do this at Zmag
> all the time, maybe that format could work here.  Just a suggestion.
> Something like this:  http://www.zmag.org/calllinicosalbertdebate.htm
>
> That's just an idea.  It could be a way to try and contain the rhetoric
> in a constructive framework, educate readers, and bring the issues into
> focus so that collectives can make decisions about the subject of what
> constitutes anti-semitism.

Good idea, but do you really think it's gonna work? I mean, do you think
people will engage with this in a constructive way? And have you seen all
those emails saying Indymedia is not a place for political and religious
debates?

> Personally I am not very interested in foregrounding the
> Greenstein/Atzmon thing.  In my view our main moderation problem for the
> past two years is that what some admins think is crazy neo-Nazi garbage
> is sometimes viewed by other admins as a great contribution to the
> site.  We can use the Atzmon/Greenstein case as an interesting point of
> reference, but the problem isn't Greenstein or Atzmon, it's imc-uk.  And
> that's the problem it is possible for us to solve.

It has certainly been an interesting case.

> I have quite a few specific criticisms regarding the text, but it's
> probably best to leave it there for now.  I do not consider myself
> responsible for imc-uk editorial policy at this time, have not re-joined
> the features list, and will check in and get involved with the
> discussion between other commitments.

Again, if people are not being specific, how do you expect me to respond?

---
Shiar