Blog-a-torium
Thursday, June 04, 2009
“Everyone Is Entitled To My Opinion!!”
Experts
In an article on CNN.com entitled “Facebook urged to remove Holocaust-denial groups” Lisa Respers France makes the statement:
“Part of the power of social networking is the ability to form communities with like-minded individuals. But what happens when those communities are offensive to others?”
Whether Lisa is quoting Dallas Attorney Brian Cuban or not, she states in her article:
“The Holocaust Denial movement seeks to deny or minimize the Holocaust, in which Nazis killed about six million European Jews during World War II.”
The Holocaust
Rush, a Canadian rock group, had a song called “Red Sector A” on their 1984 “Grace Under Pressure” album. The song gives a first-person account of a nameless person living in an unspecified prison camp setting during the holocaust, which is based upon Geddy Lee’s own mother’s accounts of the Holocaust. One of the videos for the song used the backdrop of scenes from the TV Miniseries “Band of Brothers”. I personally think this emphasizes the horror of “The Holocaust”, perhaps you will too. In the song Geddy sings:
“All that we can do is just survive
All that we can do to help ourselves is stay alive
All that we can do is just survive
All that we can do to help ourselves is stay alive
Ragged lines of ragged grey
Skeletons, they shuffle away
Shouting guards and smoking guns
Will cut down the unlucky ones”
~ Red Sector A - Rush
(Warning: You can click on the link to see the Video, but be forewarned that there may be images and language offensive to you.)
“The Scholars” argue whether the term “Holocaust” should apply to all victims of genocide by the Nazis or be used only for only the genocide of the Jews. Personally I think since “Shoah” and “(the) Final Solution” are already used exclusively for those of Jewish descent, the word “Holocaust” should be a general term for all of the victims of genocide by the Nazis. In addition the term should not just be limited to those dying in the Concentration and Death Camps.
As a side note, there are a lot of people descended from the Irish that still deplore and mourn the Irish Diaspora. They still feel an ill will towards the English for the deaths and treatment of the Irish during that period. Those of Jewish descent seem to have a similar feeling about “The Holocaust”, as do others descended from different groups that were singled out and murdered by the Nazis.
The Facebook Debate
Facebook repreprentative Barry Schnitt stated that “his company is in agreement with Cuban that the Holocaust-denial pages are offensive and objectionable”, but this is where Facebook and Cuban part ways. Mr. Schnitt went on to say:
“It’s a difficult decision to make. We have a lot of internal debate and we bring in experts to talk about it,” Schnitt said. “Just being offensive or objectionable doesn’t get it taken off Facebook. We want it [the site] to be a place where people can discuss all kinds of ideas, including controversial ones.”
Furthermore, in an email to Chris Matyszczyk on the CNET blog “Technically Correct”, Mr. Schnitt stated:
“The experts we’ve talked to have generally been Internet law experts, free speech people, and experts on radicalism and technology. They haven’t been specifically related to the Holocaust but that is a good idea.”
On the Cuban Revolution Blog, Brian Cuban states in his article “Professor Alan Desshowitz Addresses Facebook And Holocaust-denial”:
“Despite requests to Facebook as to the names of the experts that were consulted on the above issues and on the issue of whether Holocaust Denial constitutes hate speech, there has been no response. CEO Mark Zuckerberg has shown no transparency on this issue. I therefore decided to consult an expert of my own.”
“So who are these “Experts” that Facebook conulted?”
This query may not be ‘important” or ‘appreciated” to many who supports the perceived rights known as the “Freedom of Speech” and the “Freedom of Expression” for these Holocaust-deniers, but never-the-less the question is a very important one to be answered -- if Facebook wishes their stance to be considered as “Valid”. Anyone can claim they ‘consulted’ experts, additionally anyone can claim to be an “expert”, but without knowledge of who these supposed “Experts” are and their qualifications to be classified as an ‘expert’ in the field of which they are speaking with alleged authority… any citation of what these people say has no more merit that the words of the common person.
In other words... for Facebook to cite unnamed experts, as if the act has some merit and validity, is a rather “Trollish” thing and somewhat insulting to any Facebook member who uses their head for anything more than a hat rack. The members of Facebook should expect more from those who are responsible for making policies and enforcing the rules of Facebook than some feeble attempt to justify their position by the use of such methods.
“So What Is An Expert?”
According to Answers.com, my bible, an Expert is:
A person with a high degree of skill in or knowledge of a certain subject
However there are other ideas on what constitutes “an Expert”, for example… Malcolm S. Forbes stated once:
“What's an expert? I read somewhere, that the more a man knows, the more he knows, he doesn't know. So I suppose one definition of an expert would be someone who doesn't admit out loud that he knows enough about a subject to know he doesn't really know how much.”
On the other hand Dr. Laurence J. Peters, an American “Hierarchiologist”, stated:
“Expert: a man who makes three correct guesses consecutively.”
Gregory Nunn has been quoted as saying:
“Expert: Someone who brings confusion to simplicity”
Whereas the economist Thomas Sowell, Jr. has stated:
“For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert; but for every fact there is not necessarily an equal and opposite fact”
… and Peter McWilliams said:
“The media tends to report rumors, speculations, and projections as facts... How does the media do this? By quoting some "expert"... you can always find some expert who will say something hopelessly hopeless about anything.”
But I personally like the comment of “An expert is someone who knows more and more about less and less, until eventually he knows everything about nothing.”
The fact is that in almost any situation you can find experts that know their subject well, yet disagrees with others who know the same subject equally well. We won’t get into the idea of ‘False Experts” out there, or the idea of people who are expert in one field as not being experts in other fields.
Overview of “Experts”
In Robert A. Heinlein’s 1973 Novel “Time Enough For Love”, the character Lazarus Long is attributed with the sage bit of advice:
“Always listen to experts. They’ll tell you what can’t be done and why. Then do it!”
The point of the saying is basically putting forth the idea that people should not simply follow what an “expert” might tell you, think for yourself and take their advice ‘into consideration when making your decisions. Just because someone is, claims to be, or is cited as "being an expert" doesn’t make them infallible.
What’s Wrong with our Society today?
An article on The Cuban Revolution blog site, called “What’s Wrong With Our Jewish Youth?”, asks the question of “What is wrong with our Jewish Youth?”
In this article Brian Cuban responded to a reply he received to his article “Open Letter To Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg”. The email was written by a person known only as “Timothy”, a person who saw it as fitting to choose the name of “King Poopy Poop” for his MSN email account. In his reply Timothy accused Brian of “overplaying” and “exaggerating” “the issue”. In addition Tim felt it necessary to make a personal attacks against Mr. Cuban and give him unsolicited advise on how to better spend his time. Finally Timothy asked the question of:
“How were you and I effected by any of this, or how might we be in the future?“
Mr. Cuban admitted his viewing of this reply to be the “most disturbing” reply he received concerning this subject. It may be the ‘most disturbing’ reply that Brian has received concerning this subject, however I found Timothy’s reply to be of a variety commonly seen on the Internet.
Timothy’s Comment
Timothy’s comment is the type of comment that usually comes from one of two types of Net Users. Those two types of people are:
“The Internet Troll”: An “Internet Troll” or “Troll” is an individual who regularly posts specious arguments, flames or personal attacks to a newsgroup, discussion list, or in email for no other purpose than to annoy someone or disrupt a discussion. A major recognizable fact about the Troll is that they have no real interest in discussing or debating an issue; instead their goal is to disrupt and create discord in order to interrupt the conversation.
“The Immature Net User”: The Immature Net User is a person who isn’t mature about the way they make replies on the net. This type of Net User could be a Troll, but he or she can also simply be an Internet User who has an interest in the topic – but little or no interest in a thing called Net-etiquette. This type of person is usually unskilled in the ways of “Discussion and Debate” and doesn’t care how they say things. It should be known that not all ‘immature Net Users” are Trolls. Some people may ‘appear’ to be trolls on the surface, but upon a second look it can be found that the person ion as the troll, but their primary reason for entering the conversation was not for pure disruption or discord.
Concerning Timothy!
The first thing that I found interesting about Tim was his choice to use the name “King Poopy Poop” as a part of his email address. The use of such names normally a thing that an immature “Netizen” or the “Troll” would opt to do. The majority of mature “Netizens” shy away from such monikers, because of their wish to be taken seriously. Most, if not all, Internet Trolls are “immature Net Users”… but
My intentions are not to “label” Timothy as a Troll for the simple reason of his using some ‘cutesy Juvenile moniker” for his email address, however we should be aware of the fact that normally the use of such names lessens the credibility of the person and is an indicator that the intent of the person is simply to disrupt or cause discord within the forum.
The Issue
Another item that Timothy brought up in his comments is something he refers to as “The Issue”. Upon reading Tim’s response, my initial thought was “Exactly what ‘issue’ is that, Timbo, you don’t say?”
Tim stated, in his reply, that Brian should “… move on and quit over-playing and exaggerating this issue.” He doesn’t provide us with any clues as to what the “Issue” is and he definitely fails to show how he figures that Brian is ‘over-playing’ and “exaggerating” this ‘issue”.
We can assume that Tim means Brian is overplaying and exaggerating the issue of “Holocaust-denier groups on Facebook”, but he could mean that Brian is overplaying and exaggerating the whole “Holocaust” issue. He also can be saying that Brian is “overplaying” and “exaggerating” the issue of “Holocaust-deniers” in general. Any guess we make on determining what this elusive “Issue” is would still be a guess upon our part and Tim could easily respond by saying “You idiot, I didn’t say that” to any assumption made by us. In short, Tim is vague on this comment, despite his air of presenting himself as some type of expert about this. One of the marks of a Troll is making it a practice of being “vague” in order to cause the most disruption and chaos without them looking like a fool (in their mind). Amazingly this is how Tim comes across.
“As a fellow Jew…”
Another thing Timothy attempt in showing his ‘expertise’ is by the use of a bit of false logic and faulty reasoning by telling Brian “As a fellow Jew, I know of many needy organizations who would appreciate your POSITIVE efforts.”
It surprises me that Mr. Cuban didn’t pick up on the fact that Timothy felt so compelled to insert the “idea” of his “Jewish-ness” into the conversation that the use of the “As a fellow Jew…” comment had nothing to do with the proposition of “knowing of many needy organizations”. On the other hand maybe Brian simply tossed out the comment as ‘irrelevant’ and never considered it as a part of showing that Tim’s whole idea behind his comments was simply for the purpose of “Trolling”.
Personal Attacks
Personal attacks are another tool of the Troll. When Tim makes his unwarranted personal attacks upon Brian, he is giving more cause for the deduction that he is nothing but ‘another troll on the net’. There is no doubt that by Tim’s telling Brian to “Get a life or career or family or hobby or anything positive” is a personal insult aimed at Brian… and stating that Brian was “a real downer and time waster” is another attempt at personally attacking the person – instead of attacking the idea. Additionally Tim's method of replying to Mr. Cuban shows Tim's lack of 'expertise' on the subject, if Tim had a clue he would already know Brian has a life and career. He isn't some kid getting on Mommy's and Daddy's computer after school to play, instead of doing something useful like studying.
Is Timothy a Troll?
The fact is that we cannot honestly say whether Timothy is a troll or simply an immature Internet user that is unable to support his arguments by just one reply. The bottom line of this is to show that there is just cause to believe that Tim is simply some type of “Immature Net User” and if he didn’t want to be known as one then perhaps he should take more care in his replies. Trolls are common enough on the net and in my opinion if Tim is a troll… he isn’t very experienced in the ways of trolldom.
How does any of this affect us?
I originally began this portion of the article with the idea in mind of addressing Tim’s comment of:
“How were you and I effected by any of this, or how might we be in the future?“
The first thing I would like to do is clarify his word usage. In his email Tim used the word “Effected”. Now the word “Effected” means “brought into existence, brought about, or produced as a result”. If Tim’s choice of words is correct then he is asking “How were you and I produced as a result by any of this?” This question simply makes no sense at all, unless he wants to know how we came into existence because of the holocaust. This makes me think that Tim must have meant to use the word “Affected”, which means “influenced on or effected a change in, Acted on the emotions of, or attacked or infected as a disease”. This makes more sense and would make the question as meaning something along the lines of “How did any of this personally influence or effect a change in us)?”
The best answer to this question is that we don’t know, and most probably will never know, exactly how much the Holocaust changed the world. Years ago I remember talking to my Dad one evening, while we overlooked the City of Pittsburgh skyline. Due to whatever the topic of the conversation was, I remember Dad telling me that if he never married my Mother and they didn’t have children together… I probably would not exist. He did say that maybe I would exist, but I would be different in some ways… but he would leave such philosophical answers to those questions to the scholars to debate.
The Holocaust was responsible for the taking of millions of lives and if those lives were not extinguished there is a possibility some of our ancestors may have married different people. If they did then some of us would probably have never been born, in short this means that today’s world could have been a completely different place from the place we now know.
The second part of Tim’s question asked:
“How might we be (affected by this) in the future?“
The answer to this should be obvious, however I’ve learned over the years that the obvious isn’t always obvious to everyone. I would like to repeat the poem that Brian already posted on his site… one of the names it is known by is “First They Came”.
"In Germany, they came first for the Communists,
And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;
And then they came for the trade unionists,
And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;
And then they came for the Jews,
And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;
And then... they came for me...
And by that time there was no one left to speak up."
According to various sources that I have read over the years, this version of the poem is the one which the author, Pastor Martin Niemöller, preferred. There is also a 1976 version that goes:
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
Then they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
I did not protest;
I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews,
I did not speak out;
I was not a Jew.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out for me.
The poem speaks of the act of burying one’s head in the sand (or turning the blind eye toward a situation) to the bad things going on around us for the sake of personal safety. We often look away in order to not bring any trouble down upon us, but in the end the person finds that his or her turning the blind eye towards some gross miscarriage of justice resulted in the fact of when his or her group received the same type of attention – no one was willing to stand up for them.
If we shirk our duties by allowing these hate groups to grow and flourish, if we support them and their atrocities. Additionally we run the risk of a group of people gaining the power to do things they want without opposition, like the Nazis did in the 30s and 40s.. We can try to fool ourselves that things like that can’t happen here, in this place and/or time, however take a look at the world with open eyes. It not only can happen in today’s world, but it has been happening.
What’s Wrong With Our Jewish Youth?
It seems that it’s not only our “Jewish Youth” who have something “Wrong” with them, Brian, but out “Youth” in general. In fact we may go as far as to say that “People”, in general, that have something “Wrong” with them.
Please understand that I am not claiming that something must be wrong with a person simply because they may disagree with my opinion on an issue, for the record I enjoy reading and hearing the opinions of others for often those opinions give me another perspective to view an issue. I am, however, talking about the opinions expressed by “People” that are so "Anti-whatever" (for example: “Anti-social”, “Anti-government”, “Anti-Religion”) to the point of entering the realm of ‘extremism” and perhaps even "surrealism".
The Jewish Youth of today suffer from the same problems as any other youth of the past 30 or 40 years. I’m not going to get into a long-winded discourse over things like adolescence and the transition of childish thought into mature thinking, but the youth of today still suffer from the same growing pains of rebellion, idealism and naivety that we had to work ourselves through. The young tend to be idealistic and do not realize that philosophical ideas concerning how to right wrongs are great for the classroom debates and discussion with their friends, but they don’t always work in practice. They view the world with a naivety that is sometimes refreshing, but often unrealistic when applied to real world situations. They haven’t really learned that knowledge one acquires from classroom training or from books are most often only the building blocks for dealing with problems in the real world. Most of all the young haven’t really learned the arts of ‘persuasion and propaganda’, in other words how facts and figures can be warped to fit a person’s agenda. All of this and more makes ‘Our Youth’ highly susceptible to idealistic notions that seem ‘fair’ and ‘true’ to their developing minds and makes these young people prized targets for ‘agenda-oriented adults’ with ulterior motives.
“But what of “Our Rights and Freedoms”
I believe “Our” Founding Fathers would be the first ones to tell us that our Rights and Freedoms are not a type of death pact -- nor are they to be used as a protection for the criminal.
There is an article over at Ashmadai’s Blog called “The Neutral Zone of Free Expression” that discusses the Freedom of Expression. The article also shows where there are legal exceptions to the Freedom of Speech and ‘not all speech is free”. I suggest that people give it the once over and then go research the topic themselves before they start preaching about the Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Expression.
The Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Expression are very important things, however neither freedom is a part of some death pact concocted by our founding fathers. Along with any rights or freedom comes responsibility and we must understand that we are not the only ones these rights affect. The very rights we want to cry and moan about being so dear to us also are the same rights that others have who may not agree with our opinions. We must balance our rights and freedoms with the rights and freedoms of others.
Labels: Brian Cuban, Facebook, Facebook removal of holocaust-deniers, Holocaust-deniers
