Cla68's doomsday scenario about Wikipedia begins to become reality

[Ognistysztorm]

Lately the Jewish community is on a streak to criticize Wikipedia, as of anti-Wikipedia is starting to become fashionable. By now we have the following:

https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-819899

https://www.israelhayom.com/2024/09/17/ ... lonialism/

https://thewikipediaflood.blogspot.com/ ... s-who.html

https://x.com/RitchieTorres/status/1836068546452877675

https://www.jns.org/wikipedia-defines-z ... g-outrage/

In case anyone new here doesn't know what Cla68's doomsday scenario is, here it is:

Crossposting this here since this is the appropriate thread:

I understand that this thread isn't meant primarily to discuss the latest Poland history cabal arbitration case, but there is nowhere else for me to say this, and that's that there is something singularly salient about this case.

Judging from the arbitrator comments on the case proposal page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... se#Support ), they have no idea what they're involved with here. Wikipedia administrators, and established users, are so used to being inside their insular Wikipedia bubble, and quickly reverting and banning any IP or new editors who mess with it, that they don't realize when they're overmatched or in over their heads. They don't understand that this issue has already been decided, and Wikipedia and its administration has no say in the decision.

The Holocaust remembrance industry is arguably the most organized, active, and motivated grievance machine in world history. They have good reason for their motivation, as violent antisemitism has been almost a constant throughout history, culminating in the genocide in WWII, and they obviously want to keep it from happening again, among other reasons.

It the participants in that community don't get what they want from this arbitration case, they are going to go after the Wikimedia Foundation, including its officers, and could very well go after the arbitrators. They have the full weight behind them of all Western media, all Western governments, all Western corporate industry, and all popular culture and social media. The WMF and arbitrators don't appear to understand this. The Grabowski essay is a shot across the bow, giving Wikipedia a chance to correct information about the Holocaust that the Holocaust scholars believe is problematic. If Wikipedia doesn't fix it to their satisfaction, the gloves will come off.

If any established Wikipedian or administrator reads this, you need to warn the arbitrators. Personally, I don't have much sympathy for the arbitrators, as I think the people administering one of the biggest websites on the planet deserve some consequences for their ineptness and laziness. However, what may be coming is something I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy.

Strangely enough, my accounts on Reddit and X have been shadowbanned or reach-restricted, the latter after posting too much. Therefore this is also a cry for help, please DM me if you have any accounts that is visible in search results which you're comfortable sharing with, preferably with the delegate function.

[Ognistysztorm]

Elsewhere, there are these:

https://www.worldreligionnews.com/wikip ... roduction/

https://www.worldreligionnews.com/wikip ... clopedia/#

https://www.worldreligionnews.com/wikip ... sive-list/

[Ognistysztorm]

Wikipedia Attacks German Antisemitism Fight

https://thewikipediaflood.blogspot.com/ ... itism.html

[Ognistysztorm]

Wikipedia Administrators: Toe the Anti-Zionist Line or Be Blocked

https://thewikipediaflood.blogspot.de/2 ... -anti.html

[Archer]

Wikipedia Administrators: Toe the Anti-Zionist Line or Be Blocked

https://thewikipediaflood.blogspot.de/2 ... -anti.html

The blog entry you linked cites Wikipedia's page on Zionism. This is an enormous article and I've not read it all, however most Wikipedia articles that seriously propagandize for or against their subject typically establish this context right in the lede, which is probably the only part most visitors are going to read anyway. That does not seem the case here - the lede of Wikipedias Zionism article does not give one a negative impression of the subject, let alone one that's unduly negative. For the sake of comparison, see Korean ethnic nationalism. I know very little about Korea and its history, but clearly these two subjects are analogous.

If anyone knows of a high-traffic Wikipedia article having a general and significant bias against Israel or Zionism, then please do share it. If there is actually a serious bias on Wikipedia, it should not be hard to furnish at least one such example. Otherwise I don't see much substance to these complaints about anti-Israel/zionist bias. Not that I doubt their complaints about admin abuse necessarily, but that's a separate issue.

This is an exasperating topic but I feel morally obligated to address it. Am I being unfair? I do not believe so and I hope it does not seem that way.

[Ognistysztorm]

Meanwhile, Congressional House Ways & Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith Demands IRS Revoke Tax-Exempt Status of organizations accused of "Fueling Chaos, Illegal Conduct, and Antisemitic Activity." Organizations named in the 111-page series of letters to IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel includes the Tides Foundation.

https://waysandmeans.house.gov/2024/09/ ... rorist-ne/

[Archer]

Meanwhile, Congressional House Ways & Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith Demands IRS Revoke Tax-Exempt Status of organizations accused of "Fueling Chaos, Illegal Conduct, and Antisemitic Activity." Organizations named in the 111-page series of letters to IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel includes the Tides Foundation.

https://waysandmeans.house.gov/2024/09/ ... rorist-ne/

Is there any reason to believe these accusations aren't just trumped-up nonsense? We've heard this rhetoric before. Not a few hours after the ICJ issued the first interim ruling, the US along with several other nations suspended UNRWA's funding on grounds that they had "Possible Ties to Terrorist Networks" according to Israel. (https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/ ... a-funding/) Considering that Israel and lobby seem not to have any scruples about sabotaging a humanitarian organization with false accusations, and in an act of apparent retaliation for the ICJs interim ruling no less, it's rather hard to give them the benefit of the doubt in this case. I'm not going to read Smith's entire 111 page letter letter, but it does not seem very impressive from a cursory look, nor do statements like

"American taxpayers are rightfully outraged by what has transpired on American college campuses this past year, and they are even more disgusted to learn their tax dollars have subsidized the groups organizing this illegal activity at home and potentially terrorist organizations overseas. "

I think most of them would be more outraged at the eleven-figure check that congress has decided to send to Israel in spite of a pending genocide case in the ICJ. Who's he trying to fool? What's the point of harassing organizations like Americans for Justice in Palestine in the first place? Does he not know or not care how wicked he looks? Even if these organizations are giving money to Hamas, why should the public think Hamas and their objectives are any worse, by any objective measure, than his? I'm at a loss here.

What a complete trainwreck.

[Ognistysztorm]

Meanwhile, Congressional House Ways & Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith Demands IRS Revoke Tax-Exempt Status of organizations accused of "Fueling Chaos, Illegal Conduct, and Antisemitic Activity." Organizations named in the 111-page series of letters to IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel includes the Tides Foundation.

https://waysandmeans.house.gov/2024/09/ ... rorist-ne/

Is there any reason to believe these accusations aren't just trumped-up nonsense? We've heard this rhetoric before. Not a few hours after the ICJ issued the first interim ruling, the US along with several other nations suspended UNRWA's funding on grounds that they had "Possible Ties to Terrorist Networks" according to Israel. (https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/ ... a-funding/) Considering that Israel and lobby seem not to have any scruples about sabotaging a humanitarian organization with false accusations, and in an act of apparent retaliation for the ICJs interim ruling no less, it's rather hard to give them the benefit of the doubt in this case. I'm not going to read Smith's entire 111 page letter letter, but it does not seem very impressive from a cursory look, nor do statements like

"American taxpayers are rightfully outraged by what has transpired on American college campuses this past year, and they are even more disgusted to learn their tax dollars have subsidized the groups organizing this illegal activity at home and potentially terrorist organizations overseas. "

I think most of them would be more outraged at the eleven-figure check that congress has decided to send to Israel in spite of a pending genocide case in the ICJ. Who's he trying to fool? What's the point of harassing organizations like Americans for Justice in Palestine in the first place? Does he not know or not care how wicked he looks? Even if these organizations are giving money to Hamas, why should the public think Hamas and their objectives are any worse, by any objective measure, than his? I'm at a loss here.

What a complete trainwreck.

Even though I'd vehemently disagree with you on that, I don't want to argue about that and other politics with you or others here, because I have a feeling that it's not going to end well, and is going to be counterproductive for the anti-Wikipedia cause instead.

The only thing I want to say is that, these developments would be unthinkable just a few years ago when criticism of Wikipedia used to be a fringe topic.

[Archer]

Even though I'd vehemently disagree with you on that, I don't want to argue about that and other politics with you or others here, because I have a feeling that it's not going to end well, and is going to be counterproductive for the anti-Wikipedia cause instead.

The only thing I want to say is that, these developments would be unthinkable just a few years ago when criticism of Wikipedia used to be a fringe topic.

Fine, I don't want to fight with you, though like I mentioned in another thread here, I think any good critique of Wikipedia's article content (or at least those related to politics) is really just a critique of political media as a whole. Wikipedia's role is simply to launder the content as public consensus. I've made the critique about Wikipedia's laundering before here, but even this sort of social engineering would not in and of itself be so much a problem if the beliefs and behavior it encourages weren't anti-social.

What really gets me is that, in spite of all the people who complain about Israel, nobody seems willing to assign blame where it belongs. Israel would not have had the means to get itself into so much trouble without US aid, and as far as I can see, the only reason the US has continued this aid is because a subset of the American Jewry has used its power to make it so. Among the set of Jewish-American intellectuals and public figures who criticize Israel, 'Zionism' and so on, how many of them blame this particular set of Jewish Americans instead of deflecting blame to Israel, or worse still, complain in the abstract about things like imperialism? Please do share if you can think of any, but it seems to me that while there are many who are willing to complain about Israel, none of them seem to care enough that they're willing to blame the disproportionate influence and selfish decisions of other Jewish Americans. I can't speak for anyone else, but that would certainly improve rather than damage my opinion of them. Most people appreciate honesty though, so really the only thing at risk is their gravy train. Am I wrong?

[Archer]

[...] Israel would not have had the means to get itself into so much trouble without US aid, and as far as I can see, the only reason the US has continued this aid is because a subset of the American Jewry has used its power to make it so. [...]

This, by the way, is not something that can plausibly be written off as an antisemitic talking point anymore. Walt and Mearsheimer talk about the disproportionate influence of the lobby in front of college audiences. From a PR standpoint, would it not be better if the public were also hearing this from a few Jewish Americans? Instead the public sees Jason Smith lying through his teeth and many others doing the same. This does not look good. Maybe I'm entirely wrong and the status quo will continue as usual. Not only would that would be morally and even aesthetically repulsive, but also entirely senseless and unnecessary. 'We have to keep lying, otherwise they'll think we're complete liars' is a grossly maladaptive way of thinking. Here's a rather interesting story: https://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/23/your ... arted.html