Difference between revisions of "Talk:Dreyfus Affair"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Added Talk template) |
|||
| (2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | {{talk}} | ||
What's the point of this article, which looks as if it's simply been lifted from the other place? [[User:Toolbox|Toolbox]] 20:56, 9 August 2010 (IST) | What's the point of this article, which looks as if it's simply been lifted from the other place? [[User:Toolbox|Toolbox]] 20:56, 9 August 2010 (IST) | ||
| − | :Quite a lot of stuff here has been initially lifted from 'the other place' (and other sources). It's a useful way to get started with a topic, usually as a prelude (where clearly necessary to reflect | + | :Quite a lot of stuff here has been initially lifted from 'the other place' (and other sources). It's a useful way to get started with a topic, usually as a prelude (where clearly necessary to reflect Wikispooks editorial policy) to re-balancing it. The Dreyfus affair does have clear 'Deep Political' associations and, as such, I for one judge it an appropriate subject to be on the site. Maybe it needs further tweeking. I haven't had time to vet it thoroughly but do know something of the user who posted it - and she has serious deep politics research credentials. --[[User:Peter|Peter P]] 09:55, 10 August 2010 (IST) |
::Is there an argument anywhere that Dreyfus was in fact guilty as originally charged, and fraudulent accusations of antisemitism is what got him re-habilitated? It's difficult to imagine any other possible "deep politics" interest, and I've never seen such a claim. Under such conditions, holding a copy of an article which is presently going to be out of date does little more than degrade the worth of WS. Or encourage vandalism .... | ::Is there an argument anywhere that Dreyfus was in fact guilty as originally charged, and fraudulent accusations of antisemitism is what got him re-habilitated? It's difficult to imagine any other possible "deep politics" interest, and I've never seen such a claim. Under such conditions, holding a copy of an article which is presently going to be out of date does little more than degrade the worth of WS. Or encourage vandalism .... | ||
::Meanwhile, all material in the other place (as is very obvious in this article again) is heavily contaminated with Zionist sub-texts eg that the French are incurable antisemitic. The article parrots the Zionist argument that Theodore Herzl was some kind of wise philosopher when he was both a dangerous ethnic nationalist and openly defended Jews making other Jews suffer. I'd need to take a spade to clean it up and I'm hardly going to bother if others freely put in cac. [[User:Toolbox|Toolbox]] 14:36, 10 August 2010 (IST) | ::Meanwhile, all material in the other place (as is very obvious in this article again) is heavily contaminated with Zionist sub-texts eg that the French are incurable antisemitic. The article parrots the Zionist argument that Theodore Herzl was some kind of wise philosopher when he was both a dangerous ethnic nationalist and openly defended Jews making other Jews suffer. I'd need to take a spade to clean it up and I'm hardly going to bother if others freely put in cac. [[User:Toolbox|Toolbox]] 14:36, 10 August 2010 (IST) | ||
| − | :::I don't take issue with any of that. However, anti-Semitism (for a whole complex gamut of reasons) was (and to some extent still is) a fact of life throughout Europe through the 19-20th centuries - in much the same fashion as racism of other kinds was and still is. I agree the affair IS often used as a Zionist apologia and this version probably needs some editing to reflect that. However I think Zionism and "Semitism" need very separate treatment even though they are intimately connected. I take your point about Herzl and, having skimmed the article, it could probably be beefed up in that and a few other areas - Care to have a go? | + | :::I don't take issue with any of that. However, anti-Semitism (for a whole complex gamut of reasons) was (and to some extent still is) a fact of life throughout Europe through the 19-20th centuries - in much the same fashion as racism of other kinds was and still is. I agree the affair IS often used as a Zionist apologia and this version probably needs some editing to reflect that. However I think Zionism and "Semitism" need very separate treatment even though they are intimately connected. I take your point about Herzl and, having skimmed the article, it could probably be beefed up in that and a few other areas - Care to have a go? --[[User:Peter|Peter P]] 12:32, 16 October 2010 (IST) |
Latest revision as of 17:14, 14 October 2018
What's the point of this article, which looks as if it's simply been lifted from the other place? Toolbox 20:56, 9 August 2010 (IST)
- Quite a lot of stuff here has been initially lifted from 'the other place' (and other sources). It's a useful way to get started with a topic, usually as a prelude (where clearly necessary to reflect Wikispooks editorial policy) to re-balancing it. The Dreyfus affair does have clear 'Deep Political' associations and, as such, I for one judge it an appropriate subject to be on the site. Maybe it needs further tweeking. I haven't had time to vet it thoroughly but do know something of the user who posted it - and she has serious deep politics research credentials. --Peter P 09:55, 10 August 2010 (IST)
- Is there an argument anywhere that Dreyfus was in fact guilty as originally charged, and fraudulent accusations of antisemitism is what got him re-habilitated? It's difficult to imagine any other possible "deep politics" interest, and I've never seen such a claim. Under such conditions, holding a copy of an article which is presently going to be out of date does little more than degrade the worth of WS. Or encourage vandalism ....
- Meanwhile, all material in the other place (as is very obvious in this article again) is heavily contaminated with Zionist sub-texts eg that the French are incurable antisemitic. The article parrots the Zionist argument that Theodore Herzl was some kind of wise philosopher when he was both a dangerous ethnic nationalist and openly defended Jews making other Jews suffer. I'd need to take a spade to clean it up and I'm hardly going to bother if others freely put in cac. Toolbox 14:36, 10 August 2010 (IST)
- I don't take issue with any of that. However, anti-Semitism (for a whole complex gamut of reasons) was (and to some extent still is) a fact of life throughout Europe through the 19-20th centuries - in much the same fashion as racism of other kinds was and still is. I agree the affair IS often used as a Zionist apologia and this version probably needs some editing to reflect that. However I think Zionism and "Semitism" need very separate treatment even though they are intimately connected. I take your point about Herzl and, having skimmed the article, it could probably be beefed up in that and a few other areas - Care to have a go? --Peter P 12:32, 16 October 2010 (IST)
