[WikiEN-l] WORKABLE solutions for the RK matter: lessons in etiquette and accepting de-cent

Sat Oct 4 05:05:16 UTC 2003

The etiquette lessons are a good idea. For starters, if RK’s coming back, 
there ought to be a gentlemen’s agreement that the Nazi comparisons be 
tossed aside. This pertains to RK in particular.

It is entirely ridiculous for either side to equate the other to Nazism.

Nazism was a product of the contradictions of German society, within the 
context of Germany’s political culture, German traditions, the peculiarities 
of the various actors, and the capacity of Germany’s material development. 
It was not the product of a mutual, mass-based conflict between Jews and 
gentiles in Germany, whereas the Israeli-Palestinian matter is an “us versus 
them” conflict, which escalated in such a way that bred hatred. If one were 
provide similes, the suicide bombings and targeted assassinations would be 
analogous to a couple of old, bitter enemies finally having enough, and 
lashing out violently against each other. The “final solution,” on the other 
hand, would be analogous to a serial killer, such as John Wayne Gacy, Ted 
Bundy, or Jeffrey Dahmer, acting out his frustrations and arbitrarily 
picking out certain types of people in a killing spree.

At this point, we can still set some informal agreements to avoid having 
peoples’ feelings hurt. We could firmly set limits on the more outlandish 
hyperbole, such as the historically groundless use of the Nazi tag as a 
means of rhetoric.

Now, let me address the issue of mass-based conflicts (not the Holocaust – 
which was no mutual conflict, but sheep being led to the slaughter house) 
played out on Wikipedia flame wars. In general, among the parties involved 
in an escalated conflict, the conceptions of reality (vis-à-vis the other 
party) start taking on ideas that have little basis in reality. Conflict is 
never primordial, but when they take on a mass-based element, and escalate 
ideologically to a certain level, easy settlements (e.g., carrot and stick, 
incorporation, concessions, separation, or coalition) become extremely 
difficult. Attrition, more conflict, or total defeat of one group, are the 
only realistic outcomes.

Thus, it’s no coincidence – although other factors are certainly involved – 
that the total wars of the past century coincided with the modern age of 
mass culture, nationalism, and mass society. While cleavages breeding mass 
hatreds certainly predate modern times, the capacity for mass hatred between 
peoples was certainly facilitated by advancements in communication and 
transportation, the rise of the nation-state, and new social contradictions. 
As an aside, Israel’s leaders were not skillful enough to handle the 
Palestinian matter before generations were born and reared in refugee camps.

For good or for ill, a free online medium like Wikipedia will inevitably 
become a form for anyone with internet access who has found the site to play 
out these strong tensions. And any attempts to avoid this, so long as we can 
stop anyone from SUCCESSFULLY using the site to promote an agenda, will be 
futile. Anyone can log in; and if we start banning people in droves, and 
developing committees to keep the RK-types and proxy wars out, then we no 
longer have a free encyclopedia. Furthermore, with Wikipedia more popular 
than Britannica, oversight committees and planning becomes impossible.

Let me use another analogy. Rationalized planning worked well in the Soviet 
Union until a point: achieving the fastest rate of industrial development 
ever, fastest rate of social mobility ever, and incredible advancements in 
living standards (between the period in which the Soviets started reaping 
the benefits of industrialization and the onset of stagnation in the 1970s), 
but it eventually exhausted its capacity. Eventually, it was the victim of 
its own success, creating complexity (e.g., technological development, an 
intricate division of labor, so much diversification, such a high degree of 
occupational specialization) that the planners couldn’t handle. It worked 
when for the Soviets when they had a lot of peasants and a lot of 
hard-to-extract resources (not a humane combination…) in the beginning; and 
regulating things to avoid partisan flame wars on Wikipedia might work for 
us in the beginning. But this site is growing so fast that ability for all 
these conflicts to be managed by a tight community will be exhausted. It’s 
time to accept that we’re going to have to deal with a more de-centralized 
approach. RK’s rivals will do a better job managing him than committees, 
mailing lists, and developers.

_________________________________________________________________
Add MSN 8 Internet Software to your existing Internet access and enjoy 
patented spam protection and more.  Sign up now!   
http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/byoa