Remix.run Logo
wongarsu 2 days ago

Ok, saying things like "The left marched through this institution. There’s no reason we can’t march right back" is pretty bad.

To be clear: it would be equally bad if you swapped left and right in that sentence. I don't know if his assessment of the issues with Wikipedia is correct, but his solutions aren't what you propose if you want to make Wikipedia more neutral

Aurornis 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

> Ok, saying things like "The left marched through this institution. There’s no reason we can’t march right back" is pretty bad.

He’s not saying they need to “march through this institution”. He’s saying they need to learn how to navigate the increasingly Byzantine rules set up by the small number of editors so they can contribute to the site.

Why would it be bad to counter bias by bringing in people from the under-represented group? What would be permissible to you, if not bringing in people from that group to participate?

2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
throwawaypath 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

vrganj 2 days ago | parent [-]

> Why is that bad?

Because it's a far-right conspiracy theory implying Wikipedia editors are Red Guards purging universities, and calls for a counter-purge.

In other words, it is a thinly veiled call for violence based on a conspiracy theory.

The same conspiracy theory Anders Breivik explicitly cited after murdering 77 people.

throwawaypath a day ago | parent | next [-]

>Because it's a far-right conspiracy theory

It's not a conspiracy theory, it's a documented leftist political strategy [0].

>implying Wikipedia editors are Red Guards purging universities, and calls for a counter-purge.

No one is making the claim that Wikipedia editors are purging universities.

>In other words, it is a dog-whistled call of violence based on a conspiracy theory.

No one is calling for violence. Attempting to paint the inclusion of non-far-left voices as "violence" is a propaganda tactic.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entryism

throwawaypath a day ago | parent | prev [-]

>The same conspiracy theory Anders Breivik explicitly cited after murdering 77 people.

Anders Breivik explicitly cited Wikipedia editors are Red Guards purging universities?

vrganj a day ago | parent [-]

It's a rephrasing of the "Cultural Marxism" conspiracy theory, which was at the core of Breivik's Manifesto. A conspiracy theory that originated as "Cultural Bolshevism", the justification the actual Nazis used to justify their mass murder.

bit-anarchist a day ago | parent | next [-]

Cultural Bolshevism wasn't the justification to the mass murder the Nazis committed. The genocide was motivated due to Nazis' own racial theories. The rest were killed due to strict authoritarianism of the ideology. At best, it was an excuse.

vrganj a day ago | parent [-]

> Cultural Bolshevism wasn't the justification to the mass murder the Nazis committed. The genocide was motivated due to Nazis' own racial theories.

Those two are one and the same. Cultural Bolshevism was a Jewish plot in the Nazi world view.

bit-anarchist a day ago | parent [-]

No they aren't the same. Jews, as a race, were seen as subhuman and antisocial, sufficient justifications in Nazi world view to exterminate.

Cultural Bolshevism was, at best, an attempt to link anything seen as degenerate to jews to further strengthen persecution of such. Even if Jews weren't a thing, Nazis would still mass murder, hence it was an excuse.

vrganj a day ago | parent [-]

Jews were the evil geniuses behind Bolshevism in the deranged Nazi world view: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Bolshevism

Cultural Bolshevism was seen as the Jewish plot to destroy the West.

It is all the same. To spread "Cultural Marxism" theories is to spread antisemitism.

bit-anarchist a day ago | parent [-]

You might be confusing a couple of things. Nazis couldn't care less about the "west". In fact, in the Nazi world view, Jews already controlled most of western contries. They were, first and foremost, "aryan" supremacists (not white supremacists, as commonly understand today), and saw the world under a dialectic lens of Aryans vs. everyone else. There is no "west" there.

The people who most talk about "Cultural Marxism" (conservatives) tend to be Israel shills, even on when it commit atrocities. In the same line, most discussions of cultural marxism don't invoke race, maybe religion (but not often Judaism).

vrganj a day ago | parent [-]

Please read the article I linked. It addresses both of your points.

bit-anarchist 11 hours ago | parent [-]

I read it. In my second reading, I found nothing that contradict the first point, and that address the second point. If you found otherwise, could you cite the relevant sections?

vrganj 7 hours ago | parent [-]

Sure, I feel like both of your points are addressed by the first paragraph already:

> Jewish Bolshevism, also Judeo–Bolshevism, is an antisemitic, anti-communist conspiracy theory, and myth[2] that claims that a Jewish conspiracy was behind the Russian Revolution of 1917, controlled the Soviet Union and international communist movements, and had a secret plan to control or destroy Western civilization; or, more generally, it is the antisemitic myth that Bolshevism was fundamentally Jewish.[3] It was one of the main Nazi beliefs that served as an ideological justification for the German invasion of the Soviet Union and the Holocaust.[4]

I had a history education in Austria, a big part of it was trying to teach how we ever got to the atrocities that were committed, and as part of that we were thought how the Nazi ideological apparatus worked.

The conflating of Jewishness and Communism was a key pillar of their ideology.

bit-anarchist 5 hours ago | parent [-]

As the citation says, it was one of the main beliefs that justified the invasion and the Holocaust. Even if Jewish Bolshevism wasn't a thing (which could happen, if Jews didn't get better representation in the USSR in comparison to the Empire), Nazis would still commit the holocaust, invade the USSR, and, most importantly, still exist, thus, it can't be called a key pillar of Nazism. It's more accurately described as a key pillar of Nazi propaganda, supported here:

> Michael Kellogg in his Ph.D. thesis argued that the racist ideology of Nazis was to a significant extent influenced by White émigrés in Germany, [...]

p.s. Kellogg is mentioned below to argue that this was the origin of Hitler's antisemitism, but that is contested, and there's plenty of evidence of Hitler antisemitism from early on. Still, Jewish Bolshevism is well accepted as a key propaganda element.

Moving to the second point, I don't see how your citation address it. "Cultural Marxism" is primarily spoken without referring to religion. Unlike Cultural Bolshevism, there's no modern equivalent to Jewish Bolshevism, and, as I stated previously, the ones who primarily talk about Cultural Marxism don't even mention religion, and if they do, they often treat Judaism and Christianity as if they are in the same boat. If anything, the closest religious scapegoats would be Muslims, but they aren't treated as "masterminds". Don't even get started on race (which is what Nazis actually cared about).

throwawaypath 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

>It's a rephrasing of the "Cultural Marxism" conspiracy theory, which was at the core of Breivik's Manifesto

False and a non sequitur.

It's not a conspiracy theory, it's a documented leftist political strategy [0].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entryism