rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Arthur Pewtey) (06/01/85)
> This is what Rich implied by saying Don Black wants to "take over." Nice of you to make bizarre, misquoted, out of context statements like this. Why not insert a quote documenting my sayinh this? I'll tell you why not: because I didn't say it. What I said was that Don Black is a member of a group holding an ideology that advocates usurping control of this nation to impose its heinous religiocentric morality/system on us all. Ask him, and I'm sure he'll tell you it's true. > Recall that the original discussion was confined to Don Black's > postings. Sure there is a threat out there... but it's not on the net, > unless you wish to consider the effect Black will have on the more > gullible net-nerds. It strikes me that there are fewer of those than > Rich says there are. I incrementing the count by 1 after reading your articles. >>Here it is easy for us to ignore him; hit the 'n' and he disappears. > Exactly. If EVERYONE hit the 'n' key then he WOULD disappear, along > with his neo.net.nonsense. That's all I was saying. Of course, there > will always be a gullible few who read, and believe, the philosophy of > Don Black. But acting like flaming zealots will only confirm their > misguided opinions. Like they 'n'ed Hitler. It is NEVER worth just blithely ignoring hatred. It is always worthwhile to show it for what it is, for hatred will engage in deception of the basest and most manipulative kind to sway its audience. And we've seen how easily that tactic works on the uninformed. > Also, my primary CONCERN is not the net. My primary concern is the > effect these postings have on the net community. The domain of > discussion with Rich Rosen was "the net"... but Rich seems determined > to hammer his point home by artificially expanding the topic of > conversation. Give references of what you are talking about. Artificially? Expanding? The sphere of influence of the net is its readership, and perhaps associates of its readership, and if the articles dissecting what Black is all about make a point driven home and understood by ONE person, it is more than worthwhile. > I never denied that there is "a threat" but no one seems to want to > think about exactly where that threat is coming from. Beating Don > Black's postings senseless will not change that threat. What is your complaint? As I mentioned above, the counterpostings are certainly not doing harm, and are probably doing some good in informing some. Is it just that you don't like to see them and seek to squelch those who would say those things? Or what? >>Look at the people going around preaching hatred. Don't look at words >>and dots on your screen. What Rich and the rest of us are attacking is >>not the articles on the net, it is the philosophy behind these >>articles. What we are trying to do is show others the danger of letting >>people like Black talk out, without attacking their premeses. To ignore >>them now when they are weak will only cause problems later when they >>are strong. > I have no problem with this. Attack their premeses. Expose the > danger. Just understand that YOU TOO can go too far by embarking on a > righteous crusade to purge the net of anti-semetic philosophies. You > can only beat a dead horse so many times before the stink makes you > realize that that's a dead horse lying there. Let's hear YOUR definition of "too far". I think it's at variance with that of others. I think it falls short of pointing out what manipulative trash in the guise of patriotism or moralism or religion is really saying, for whatever reasons you have for that. The horse we are beating is not dead; it is alive and kicking. And it is worth beating. (Sorry, equuphiles, for the crude analogy.) > Remember also that not every net.nazi poses a threat. Neither do his > postings... necessarily. Sometimes you just ignore childern. Sometimes. I don't ignore children that engage in harrassment and violence. >>However, some postings are needed; to show people like you that a problem >>does exist... > No no no... not people like me. Right. It clearly doesn't work on closed minds like yours. > People like me are well aware of the events and beliefs circulating in the > world. Not every person is "like you". ... > Each person must take responsibility for his or her ideas in such a public > forum. This is a good time to start. Imagine that. I thought we were making Black and his kind accountable for his ideas in this public forum. But that's what you're complaining about. I don't understand... -- "If you offend everybody, you're doing a good job." --David Steinberg on the subject of satire Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr