Masong
Junior Member
Posts • 2,204
Likes • 2,842
Member is Online
March 2017
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by Masong on Jun 6, 2018 22:50:09 GMT 1, So are you saying the hotel itself was selling copies? No, Ebay.
Just read it again. Talk about reading things wrong. Would say my bad but way too old
So are you saying the hotel itself was selling copies? No, Ebay. Just read it again. Talk about reading things wrong. Would say my bad but way too old
|
|
kalm
Junior Member
Posts • 1,005
Likes • 354
November 2010
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by kalm on Jun 8, 2018 2:16:32 GMT 1, #freePalestine
As an American, I am very disheartened at Israel’s seemingly lawless ways. They need to be held accountable for murdering children and press in an international court of law. I really hope every one in the art world boycotts anything Israeli until they stop the senseless bloodshed.
#freePalestine
As an American, I am very disheartened at Israel’s seemingly lawless ways. They need to be held accountable for murdering children and press in an international court of law. I really hope every one in the art world boycotts anything Israeli until they stop the senseless bloodshed.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by met on Jun 9, 2018 8:35:35 GMT 1, #freePalestine As an American, I am very disheartened at Israel’s seemingly lawless ways. They need to be held accountable for murdering children and press in an international court of law. I really hope every one in the art world boycotts anything Israeli until they stop the senseless bloodshed.
When it comes to human rights, there's no room for complacency.
__________
Thinking aloud here, perhaps you and I can work together on this. Maybe by starting a Change.org petition.
But one thing that's important is to avoid appearing biased or blinkered. This would weaken the legitimacy of our case. Care must be taken to ensure consistency in approach (as well as in our own outrage).
And so, when we accuse Israel of acting in a manner that violates our core values, we also need to check the yardstick we're using is one we're comfortable applying across the board.
You see, I don't wish to hand over ammunition to our enemies. It would be awkward if they could undermine the petition — for example, by claiming the standard we hold Israel to is different to the one by which we judge other nations.
Consequently, what I've done for us is sift through recent data (2016–2017) on the human rights situation in countries around the world. My sources were Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Freedom House, and the Verisk Maplecroft Human Rights Risk Index (HRRI).
The HRRI looks at multiple types of human rights violations by the state or private security. These include extrajudicial executions; disappearances; torture and inhumane treatment; deaths in custody; prisoners of conscience; unfair trials; detention without charge or trial; sentences of death; and abuses by armed opposition groups. Through a points system, countries are categorised as Extreme risk, High risk, Medium risk, Low risk, or No data.
In 2017 (Q4), Israel was classed Medium risk and the Palestinian territories (or possibly just the West Bank) were High risk.
It would be very tempting (and easier) to focus our petition exclusively on Israel. However, as referred to above, I fear this would expose us to accusations of applying double standards. The added risk is that we might then be mistaken for being patronising (maybe even a bit racist) towards all of the black, brown and yellow people living in places where they don't really "get" the idea of human rights.
__________
What I therefore suggest is we broaden our petition to include all countries listed by the HRRI as Extreme risk and High risk.
Here's some draft text I've come up with for Change.org:
"The countries below are guilty of serious human rights violations. We, kalm and met, are disheartened by their seemingly lawless ways.
We hereby call upon everyone in the art world to boycott anything Libya, Sudan, Eritrea, Somalia, South Sudan, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, Myanmar, North Korea, >>> Israel <<<, Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Surinam, Brazil, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Paraguay, Argentina, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad, Senegal, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Côte d'Ivoire, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Togo, Benin, Nigeria, Cameroon, Gabon, Republic of the Congo, Angola, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Swaziland, Madagascar, Tanzania, Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti, Egypt, Kosovo, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, India, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh, Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Philippines, and Papua New Guinea.
Thank you."
If you have proposed amendments (or if I accidentally left out some countries), just let me know.
#freePalestine As an American, I am very disheartened at Israel’s seemingly lawless ways. They need to be held accountable for murdering children and press in an international court of law. I really hope every one in the art world boycotts anything Israeli until they stop the senseless bloodshed. When it comes to human rights, there's no room for complacency. __________ Thinking aloud here, perhaps you and I can work together on this. Maybe by starting a Change.org petition. But one thing that's important is to avoid appearing biased or blinkered. This would weaken the legitimacy of our case. Care must be taken to ensure consistency in approach (as well as in our own outrage). And so, when we accuse Israel of acting in a manner that violates our core values, we also need to check the yardstick we're using is one we're comfortable applying across the board. You see, I don't wish to hand over ammunition to our enemies. It would be awkward if they could undermine the petition — for example, by claiming the standard we hold Israel to is different to the one by which we judge other nations. Consequently, what I've done for us is sift through recent data (2016–2017) on the human rights situation in countries around the world. My sources were Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Freedom House, and the Verisk Maplecroft Human Rights Risk Index (HRRI). The HRRI looks at multiple types of human rights violations by the state or private security. These include extrajudicial executions; disappearances; torture and inhumane treatment; deaths in custody; prisoners of conscience; unfair trials; detention without charge or trial; sentences of death; and abuses by armed opposition groups. Through a points system, countries are categorised as Extreme risk, High risk, Medium risk, Low risk, or No data. In 2017 (Q4), Israel was classed Medium risk and the Palestinian territories (or possibly just the West Bank) were High risk. It would be very tempting (and easier) to focus our petition exclusively on Israel. However, as referred to above, I fear this would expose us to accusations of applying double standards. The added risk is that we might then be mistaken for being patronising (maybe even a bit racist) towards all of the black, brown and yellow people living in places where they don't really "get" the idea of human rights. __________ What I therefore suggest is we broaden our petition to include all countries listed by the HRRI as Extreme risk and High risk. Here's some draft text I've come up with for Change.org: "The countries below are guilty of serious human rights violations. We, kalm and met, are disheartened by their seemingly lawless ways.
We hereby call upon everyone in the art world to boycott anything Libya, Sudan, Eritrea, Somalia, South Sudan, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, Myanmar, North Korea, >>> Israel <<<, Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Surinam, Brazil, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Paraguay, Argentina, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad, Senegal, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Côte d'Ivoire, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Togo, Benin, Nigeria, Cameroon, Gabon, Republic of the Congo, Angola, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Swaziland, Madagascar, Tanzania, Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti, Egypt, Kosovo, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, India, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh, Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Philippines, and Papua New Guinea.
Thank you."If you have proposed amendments (or if I accidentally left out some countries), just let me know.
|
|
Deleted
Posts • 0
Likes •
January 1970
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by Deleted on Jun 9, 2018 11:28:13 GMT 1, #freePalestine As an American, I am very disheartened at Israel’s seemingly lawless ways. They need to be held accountable for murdering children and press in an international court of law. I really hope every one in the art world boycotts anything Israeli until they stop the senseless bloodshed. When it comes to human rights, there's no room for complacency. __________ Thinking aloud here, perhaps you and I can work together on this. Maybe by starting a Change.org petition. But one thing that's important is to avoid appearing biased or blinkered. This would weaken the legitimacy of our case. Care must be taken to ensure consistency in approach (as well as in our own outrage). And so, when we accuse Israel of acting in a manner that violates our core values, we also need to check the yardstick we're using is one we're comfortable applying across the board. You see, I don't wish to hand over ammunition to our enemies. It would be awkward if they could undermine the petition — for example, by claiming the standard we hold Israel to is different to the one by which we judge other nations. Consequently, what I've done for us is sift through recent data (2016–2017) on the human rights situation in countries around the world. My sources were Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Freedom House, and the Verisk Maplecroft Human Rights Risk Index (HRRI). The HRRI looks at multiple types of human rights violations by the state or private security. These include extrajudicial executions; disappearances; torture and inhumane treatment; deaths in custody; prisoners of conscience; unfair trials; detention without charge or trial; sentences of death; and abuses by armed opposition groups. Through a points system, countries are categorised as Extreme risk, High risk, Medium risk, Low risk, or No data. In 2017 (Q4), Israel was classed Medium risk and the Palestinian territories (or possibly just the West Bank) were High risk. It would be very tempting (and easier) to focus our petition exclusively on Israel. However, as referred to above, I fear this would expose us to accusations of applying double standards. The added risk is that we might then be mistaken for being patronising (maybe even a bit racist) towards all of the black, brown and yellow people living in places where they don't really "get" the idea of human rights. __________ What I therefore suggest is we broaden our petition to include all countries listed by the HRRI as Extreme risk and High risk. Here's some draft text I've come up with for Change.org: "The countries below are guilty of serious human rights violations. We, kalm and met, are disheartened by their seemingly lawless ways.
We hereby call upon everyone in the art world to boycott anything Libya, Sudan, Eritrea, Somalia, South Sudan, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, Myanmar, North Korea, >>> Israel <<<, Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Surinam, Brazil, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Paraguay, Argentina, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad, Senegal, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Côte d'Ivoire, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Togo, Benin, Nigeria, Cameroon, Gabon, Republic of the Congo, Angola, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Swaziland, Madagascar, Tanzania, Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti, Egypt, Kosovo, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, India, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh, Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Philippines, and Papua New Guinea.
Thank you."If you have proposed amendments (or if I accidentally left out some countries), just let me know.
LOL
And this is why nothing ever gets done
Good job
#freePalestine As an American, I am very disheartened at Israel’s seemingly lawless ways. They need to be held accountable for murdering children and press in an international court of law. I really hope every one in the art world boycotts anything Israeli until they stop the senseless bloodshed. When it comes to human rights, there's no room for complacency. __________ Thinking aloud here, perhaps you and I can work together on this. Maybe by starting a Change.org petition. But one thing that's important is to avoid appearing biased or blinkered. This would weaken the legitimacy of our case. Care must be taken to ensure consistency in approach (as well as in our own outrage). And so, when we accuse Israel of acting in a manner that violates our core values, we also need to check the yardstick we're using is one we're comfortable applying across the board. You see, I don't wish to hand over ammunition to our enemies. It would be awkward if they could undermine the petition — for example, by claiming the standard we hold Israel to is different to the one by which we judge other nations. Consequently, what I've done for us is sift through recent data (2016–2017) on the human rights situation in countries around the world. My sources were Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Freedom House, and the Verisk Maplecroft Human Rights Risk Index (HRRI). The HRRI looks at multiple types of human rights violations by the state or private security. These include extrajudicial executions; disappearances; torture and inhumane treatment; deaths in custody; prisoners of conscience; unfair trials; detention without charge or trial; sentences of death; and abuses by armed opposition groups. Through a points system, countries are categorised as Extreme risk, High risk, Medium risk, Low risk, or No data. In 2017 (Q4), Israel was classed Medium risk and the Palestinian territories (or possibly just the West Bank) were High risk. It would be very tempting (and easier) to focus our petition exclusively on Israel. However, as referred to above, I fear this would expose us to accusations of applying double standards. The added risk is that we might then be mistaken for being patronising (maybe even a bit racist) towards all of the black, brown and yellow people living in places where they don't really "get" the idea of human rights. __________ What I therefore suggest is we broaden our petition to include all countries listed by the HRRI as Extreme risk and High risk. Here's some draft text I've come up with for Change.org: "The countries below are guilty of serious human rights violations. We, kalm and met, are disheartened by their seemingly lawless ways.
We hereby call upon everyone in the art world to boycott anything Libya, Sudan, Eritrea, Somalia, South Sudan, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, Myanmar, North Korea, >>> Israel <<<, Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Surinam, Brazil, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Paraguay, Argentina, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad, Senegal, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Côte d'Ivoire, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Togo, Benin, Nigeria, Cameroon, Gabon, Republic of the Congo, Angola, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Swaziland, Madagascar, Tanzania, Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti, Egypt, Kosovo, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, India, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh, Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Philippines, and Papua New Guinea.
Thank you."If you have proposed amendments (or if I accidentally left out some countries), just let me know. LOL And this is why nothing ever gets done Good job
|
|
kalm
Junior Member
Posts • 1,005
Likes • 354
November 2010
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by kalm on Jun 9, 2018 22:35:21 GMT 1, Exactly...it’s all deflection.
Poor Palestine...sucks they will never be free.
Exactly...it’s all deflection.
Poor Palestine...sucks they will never be free.
|
|
tab1
Full Member
Posts • 8,519
Likes • 3,679
September 2011
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by tab1 on Jun 9, 2018 23:18:48 GMT 1, #freePalestine As an American, I am very disheartened at Israel’s seemingly lawless ways. They need to be held accountable for murdering children and press in an international court of law. I really hope every one in the art world boycotts anything Israeli until they stop the senseless bloodshed. When it comes to human rights, there's no room for complacency. __________ Thinking aloud here, perhaps you and I can work together on this. Maybe by starting a Change.org petition. But one thing that's important is to avoid appearing biased or blinkered. This would weaken the legitimacy of our case. Care must be taken to ensure consistency in approach (as well as in our own outrage). And so, when we accuse Israel of acting in a manner that violates our core values, we also need to check the yardstick we're using is one we're comfortable applying across the board. You see, I don't wish to hand over ammunition to our enemies. It would be awkward if they could undermine the petition — for example, by claiming the standard we hold Israel to is different to the one by which we judge other nations. Consequently, what I've done for us is sift through recent data (2016–2017) on the human rights situation in countries around the world. My sources were Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Freedom House, and the Verisk Maplecroft Human Rights Risk Index (HRRI). The HRRI looks at multiple types of human rights violations by the state or private security. These include extrajudicial executions; disappearances; torture and inhumane treatment; deaths in custody; prisoners of conscience; unfair trials; detention without charge or trial; sentences of death; and abuses by armed opposition groups. Through a points system, countries are categorised as Extreme risk, High risk, Medium risk, Low risk, or No data. In 2017 (Q4), Israel was classed Medium risk and the Palestinian territories (or possibly just the West Bank) were High risk. It would be very tempting (and easier) to focus our petition exclusively on Israel. However, as referred to above, I fear this would expose us to accusations of applying double standards. The added risk is that we might then be mistaken for being patronising (maybe even a bit racist) towards all of the black, brown and yellow people living in places where they don't really "get" the idea of human rights. __________ What I therefore suggest is we broaden our petition to include all countries listed by the HRRI as Extreme risk and High risk. Here's some draft text I've come up with for Change.org: "The countries below are guilty of serious human rights violations. We, kalm and met, are disheartened by their seemingly lawless ways.
We hereby call upon everyone in the art world to boycott anything Libya, Sudan, Eritrea, Somalia, South Sudan, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, Myanmar, North Korea, >>> Israel <<<, Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Surinam, Brazil, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Paraguay, Argentina, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad, Senegal, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Côte d'Ivoire, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Togo, Benin, Nigeria, Cameroon, Gabon, Republic of the Congo, Angola, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Swaziland, Madagascar, Tanzania, Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti, Egypt, Kosovo, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, India, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh, Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Philippines, and Papua New Guinea.
Thank you."If you have proposed amendments (or if I accidentally left out some countries), just let me know.
Most of those countries you have listed have corrupt goverments The Education system is poor and there is a high rate of uneducated people and unemployed people in those countries
Not really a comparison to isreal , which has a high rate of degree level educated population in comparison to countries listed ,also leading development in new technologies in science , medical and computer based fields
Generally people look at isreal as a developed leading country and should resolve the situation better also as previous generations has suffered unjust segregation so assume should be more understanding ,
Agree all countries should be treated the same but some people pick up on points above .
#freePalestine As an American, I am very disheartened at Israel’s seemingly lawless ways. They need to be held accountable for murdering children and press in an international court of law. I really hope every one in the art world boycotts anything Israeli until they stop the senseless bloodshed. When it comes to human rights, there's no room for complacency. __________ Thinking aloud here, perhaps you and I can work together on this. Maybe by starting a Change.org petition. But one thing that's important is to avoid appearing biased or blinkered. This would weaken the legitimacy of our case. Care must be taken to ensure consistency in approach (as well as in our own outrage). And so, when we accuse Israel of acting in a manner that violates our core values, we also need to check the yardstick we're using is one we're comfortable applying across the board. You see, I don't wish to hand over ammunition to our enemies. It would be awkward if they could undermine the petition — for example, by claiming the standard we hold Israel to is different to the one by which we judge other nations. Consequently, what I've done for us is sift through recent data (2016–2017) on the human rights situation in countries around the world. My sources were Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Freedom House, and the Verisk Maplecroft Human Rights Risk Index (HRRI). The HRRI looks at multiple types of human rights violations by the state or private security. These include extrajudicial executions; disappearances; torture and inhumane treatment; deaths in custody; prisoners of conscience; unfair trials; detention without charge or trial; sentences of death; and abuses by armed opposition groups. Through a points system, countries are categorised as Extreme risk, High risk, Medium risk, Low risk, or No data. In 2017 (Q4), Israel was classed Medium risk and the Palestinian territories (or possibly just the West Bank) were High risk. It would be very tempting (and easier) to focus our petition exclusively on Israel. However, as referred to above, I fear this would expose us to accusations of applying double standards. The added risk is that we might then be mistaken for being patronising (maybe even a bit racist) towards all of the black, brown and yellow people living in places where they don't really "get" the idea of human rights. __________ What I therefore suggest is we broaden our petition to include all countries listed by the HRRI as Extreme risk and High risk. Here's some draft text I've come up with for Change.org: "The countries below are guilty of serious human rights violations. We, kalm and met, are disheartened by their seemingly lawless ways.
We hereby call upon everyone in the art world to boycott anything Libya, Sudan, Eritrea, Somalia, South Sudan, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, Myanmar, North Korea, >>> Israel <<<, Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Surinam, Brazil, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Paraguay, Argentina, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad, Senegal, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Côte d'Ivoire, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Togo, Benin, Nigeria, Cameroon, Gabon, Republic of the Congo, Angola, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Swaziland, Madagascar, Tanzania, Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti, Egypt, Kosovo, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, India, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh, Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Philippines, and Papua New Guinea.
Thank you."If you have proposed amendments (or if I accidentally left out some countries), just let me know. Most of those countries you have listed have corrupt goverments The Education system is poor and there is a high rate of uneducated people and unemployed people in those countries Not really a comparison to isreal , which has a high rate of degree level educated population in comparison to countries listed ,also leading development in new technologies in science , medical and computer based fields Generally people look at isreal as a developed leading country and should resolve the situation better also as previous generations has suffered unjust segregation so assume should be more understanding , Agree all countries should be treated the same but some people pick up on points above .
|
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by met on Jun 11, 2018 4:12:42 GMT 1, [...] It would be very tempting (and easier) to focus our petition exclusively on Israel. However, as referred to above, I fear this would expose us to accusations of applying double standards. The added risk is that we might then be mistaken for being patronising (maybe even a bit racist) towards all of the black, brown and yellow people living in places where they don't really "get" the idea of human rights. __________ What I therefore suggest is we broaden our petition to include all countries listed by the HRRI as Extreme risk and High risk. Here's some draft text I've come up with for Change.org: "The countries below are guilty of serious human rights violations. We, kalm and met, are disheartened by their seemingly lawless ways.
We hereby call upon everyone in the art world to boycott anything Libya, Sudan, Eritrea, Somalia, South Sudan, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, Myanmar, North Korea, >>> Israel <<<, Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Surinam, Brazil, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Paraguay, Argentina, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad, Senegal, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Côte d'Ivoire, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Togo, Benin, Nigeria, Cameroon, Gabon, Republic of the Congo, Angola, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Swaziland, Madagascar, Tanzania, Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti, Egypt, Kosovo, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, India, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh, Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Philippines, and Papua New Guinea.
Thank you."If you have proposed amendments (or if I accidentally left out some countries), just let me know. Most of those countries you have listed have corrupt goverments The Education system is poor and there is a high rate of uneducated people and unemployed people in those countries Not really a comparison to isreal , which has a high rate of degree level educated population in comparison to countries listed ,also leading development in new technologies in science , medical and computer based fields Generally people look at isreal as a developed leading country and should resolve the situation better also as previous generations has suffered unjust segregation so assume should be more understanding , Agree all countries should be treated the same but some people pick up on points above .
Cheers for your post.
The political, economic and educational differences between those nations is understood.
I also agree with you that, notwithstanding these differences, countries should be judged in the same manner.
__________
As suggested earlier, any forum member is free to call upon the entire art world to boycott all things Israeli. However, intellectual and moral consistency requires that they also be prepared to advocate the same in relation to, say, China. And Iran. And Pakistan. And Sudan. And Turkey, etc. These are places where the levels of human rights abuses are so much worse that they aren't even in the same ball park as Israel.
If such forum member is therefore unwilling to state, "I really hope everyone in the art world boycotts anything Chinese", then even the pretence of fairness is lost — and with that, their credibility. It immediately becomes clear that their advocacy is not founded on justice principles, because they aren't treating people the same.
__________
Now, one could try to claim that the bar for human rights needs to be set higher for Jews and Israeli Arabs. "Because, you know, those Chinese, they're corrupt and uneducated and just don't know any better." But if somebody were tempted to say this in public, in their own interest, my recommendation would be to keep quiet instead.
Rarely will arguments based on cultural or racial prejudice and discrimination reflect well on the people making them.
[...] It would be very tempting (and easier) to focus our petition exclusively on Israel. However, as referred to above, I fear this would expose us to accusations of applying double standards. The added risk is that we might then be mistaken for being patronising (maybe even a bit racist) towards all of the black, brown and yellow people living in places where they don't really "get" the idea of human rights. __________ What I therefore suggest is we broaden our petition to include all countries listed by the HRRI as Extreme risk and High risk. Here's some draft text I've come up with for Change.org: "The countries below are guilty of serious human rights violations. We, kalm and met, are disheartened by their seemingly lawless ways.
We hereby call upon everyone in the art world to boycott anything Libya, Sudan, Eritrea, Somalia, South Sudan, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, Myanmar, North Korea, >>> Israel <<<, Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Surinam, Brazil, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Paraguay, Argentina, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad, Senegal, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Côte d'Ivoire, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Togo, Benin, Nigeria, Cameroon, Gabon, Republic of the Congo, Angola, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Swaziland, Madagascar, Tanzania, Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti, Egypt, Kosovo, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, India, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh, Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Philippines, and Papua New Guinea.
Thank you."If you have proposed amendments (or if I accidentally left out some countries), just let me know. Most of those countries you have listed have corrupt goverments The Education system is poor and there is a high rate of uneducated people and unemployed people in those countries Not really a comparison to isreal , which has a high rate of degree level educated population in comparison to countries listed ,also leading development in new technologies in science , medical and computer based fields Generally people look at isreal as a developed leading country and should resolve the situation better also as previous generations has suffered unjust segregation so assume should be more understanding , Agree all countries should be treated the same but some people pick up on points above . Cheers for your post. The political, economic and educational differences between those nations is understood. I also agree with you that, notwithstanding these differences, countries should be judged in the same manner. __________ As suggested earlier, any forum member is free to call upon the entire art world to boycott all things Israeli. However, intellectual and moral consistency requires that they also be prepared to advocate the same in relation to, say, China. And Iran. And Pakistan. And Sudan. And Turkey, etc. These are places where the levels of human rights abuses are so much worse that they aren't even in the same ball park as Israel. If such forum member is therefore unwilling to state, "I really hope everyone in the art world boycotts anything Chinese", then even the pretence of fairness is lost — and with that, their credibility. It immediately becomes clear that their advocacy is not founded on justice principles, because they aren't treating people the same. __________ Now, one could try to claim that the bar for human rights needs to be set higher for Jews and Israeli Arabs. "Because, you know, those Chinese, they're corrupt and uneducated and just don't know any better." But if somebody were tempted to say this in public, in their own interest, my recommendation would be to keep quiet instead. Rarely will arguments based on cultural or racial prejudice and discrimination reflect well on the people making them.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by met on Jun 11, 2018 4:46:25 GMT 1, LOL And this is why nothing ever gets done Good job
The above is too vague for me to grasp where our views may differ, and where we have common ground.
Does your reference to the word "this" relate to something other than foresight?
If you believe we're in disagreement about anything, help me out by disclosing what that is specifically, and then let's discuss.
__________
One point which does interest me in your post is what seems to be an implied statement:
It's better that something get done than not get done.
I appreciate the idea. I also think it can be dangerously irresponsible if used as a mantra and put into application without proper thought.
__________
Both of us can probably come up with a dozen cases in recent history where, with the benefit of looking back, abstention would have been preferable to the actions taken.
Here's an extreme scenario to illustrate:
Years ago, we were in a high-level meeting behind closed doors, with a very restricted number of attendees. The approach you took was frustratingly conservative. It didn't hold sway in the end, but I still wanted to wring your neck. At the time, you were cautious to the degree of arguably being cowardly, even criminally obstructive.
bren: What is it exactly that we're looking to accomplish? - Will our proposed actions achieve those objectives, or at least take us a step closer to reaching them? - Do we really know what we're doing? - Are we fully aware of all the variables, complexities and nuances on the ground? - How credible is our intel? How much of it has been corroborated by independent sources? - What is the likelihood that our proposed actions will be ineffective? Or even counterproductive and make things worse? - Are we being consistent in our policies? - How will this look to our allies? Are they likely to come on board? Or do we risk alienating them or making life more difficult for them? - How will this look to our adversaries? - Is there a chance that our proposed actions might actually galvanise the enemy and bolster their ranks? Might they become more entrenched in their positions as a result, and more determined and committed? - Could our proposed actions perhaps even lead to the creation of new enemies, or the opening of new fronts we haven't anticipated? - What is our exit strategy?
Maybe it's best if we held off and stepped back. Maybe we should spend more time thinking all of these things through.
met: And this is why nothing ever gets done!
Let's stop right now with all the pussyfooting and just show that tyrant who's boss. We need to kick Saddam's ass and free the Iraqi people.
LOL And this is why nothing ever gets done Good job The above is too vague for me to grasp where our views may differ, and where we have common ground. Does your reference to the word "this" relate to something other than foresight? If you believe we're in disagreement about anything, help me out by disclosing what that is specifically, and then let's discuss. __________ One point which does interest me in your post is what seems to be an implied statement: It's better that something get done than not get done.
I appreciate the idea. I also think it can be dangerously irresponsible if used as a mantra and put into application without proper thought. __________ Both of us can probably come up with a dozen cases in recent history where, with the benefit of looking back, abstention would have been preferable to the actions taken. Here's an extreme scenario to illustrate: Years ago, we were in a high-level meeting behind closed doors, with a very restricted number of attendees. The approach you took was frustratingly conservative. It didn't hold sway in the end, but I still wanted to wring your neck. At the time, you were cautious to the degree of arguably being cowardly, even criminally obstructive. bren: What is it exactly that we're looking to accomplish? - Will our proposed actions achieve those objectives, or at least take us a step closer to reaching them? - Do we really know what we're doing? - Are we fully aware of all the variables, complexities and nuances on the ground? - How credible is our intel? How much of it has been corroborated by independent sources? - What is the likelihood that our proposed actions will be ineffective? Or even counterproductive and make things worse? - Are we being consistent in our policies? - How will this look to our allies? Are they likely to come on board? Or do we risk alienating them or making life more difficult for them? - How will this look to our adversaries? - Is there a chance that our proposed actions might actually galvanise the enemy and bolster their ranks? Might they become more entrenched in their positions as a result, and more determined and committed? - Could our proposed actions perhaps even lead to the creation of new enemies, or the opening of new fronts we haven't anticipated? - What is our exit strategy?
Maybe it's best if we held off and stepped back. Maybe we should spend more time thinking all of these things through.met: And this is why nothing ever gets done!
Let's stop right now with all the pussyfooting and just show that tyrant who's boss. We need to kick Saddam's ass and free the Iraqi people.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by met on Jun 11, 2018 5:44:35 GMT 1, Exactly...it’s all deflection. Poor Palestine...sucks they will never be free.
Occasionally, when a person doubles down, it's simply out of pride. They won't acknowledge (or they're incapable of admitting) they may have got something wrong.
But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume your Israeli-boycott proposal was carefully considered.
How would it work in practice?
From the top of my head, here are questions relating to just three areas:
1. Presumably, all travel to Israel is a no-no — including any religious or historical trips to the likes of Jerusalem, Nazareth or Masada.
And since Ben Gurion International Airport is Israeli, I suppose landing there would also be frowned upon. So if forum members (or anyone else in the art world) wish to stay at the Walled Off Hotel, how should they make their way over? Via the beacon for human rights that is Jordan?
2. A number of members here (myself included) appreciate the art of Know Hope. In addition, I often follow Broken Fingaz Crew, whose work I enjoy along with their general ethos. And occasionally I'll check out Klone Yourself. Tel Aviv in particular has a vibrant creative scene of artists, illustrators, designers and photographers.
Would you recommend that all of us boycott their exhibitions, and refuse to purchase any of their work?
I don't want to be seen as "deflecting". I wish to be part of the solution, not part of the problem. If you think it might help, I could also tell those artists to go fuck themselves. You know, because of what they're doing to the Palestinians and stuff.
3. The UK (where I'm based) imports a significant amount of medicine / medicaments from Israel. Diamonds too. And, unsurprisingly, fruit, vegetables, nuts and spices.
Personally, I'm rather fond of avocados. They're an outward signifier of how sophisticated I am. And I get pleasure from cutting them in half (the less overlap in the cut, the more I can boast about my very impressive knife-handling skills).
The problem is that many avocados in UK shops have Israel as their country of origin. Should I shun those ones in favour of, say, Peruvian avocados? [Peru has a worse record than Israel when it comes to human rights abuses. But maybe that can be excused because Peruvians are, you know, kind of "Third World", living in huts in the jungle and that kind of thing.]
If everyone in the art world (or the whole wide world) boycotted all Israeli exports, I'm sure we could succeed in bankrupting a few farmers and forcing many average workers out of their jobs. That would compromise as well the mental health, general welfare and futures of their children. Sounds like an effective way to teach Israel a lesson. No doubt this kind of pressure would lead to a volte-face by Netanyahu and his government on the Palestinian situation.
Exactly...it’s all deflection. Poor Palestine...sucks they will never be free. Occasionally, when a person doubles down, it's simply out of pride. They won't acknowledge (or they're incapable of admitting) they may have got something wrong. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume your Israeli-boycott proposal was carefully considered. How would it work in practice? From the top of my head, here are questions relating to just three areas: 1. Presumably, all travel to Israel is a no-no — including any religious or historical trips to the likes of Jerusalem, Nazareth or Masada. And since Ben Gurion International Airport is Israeli, I suppose landing there would also be frowned upon. So if forum members (or anyone else in the art world) wish to stay at the Walled Off Hotel, how should they make their way over? Via the beacon for human rights that is Jordan? 2. A number of members here (myself included) appreciate the art of Know Hope. In addition, I often follow Broken Fingaz Crew, whose work I enjoy along with their general ethos. And occasionally I'll check out Klone Yourself. Tel Aviv in particular has a vibrant creative scene of artists, illustrators, designers and photographers. Would you recommend that all of us boycott their exhibitions, and refuse to purchase any of their work? I don't want to be seen as "deflecting". I wish to be part of the solution, not part of the problem. If you think it might help, I could also tell those artists to go fu ck themselves. You know, because of what they're doing to the Palestinians and stuff. 3. The UK (where I'm based) imports a significant amount of medicine / medicaments from Israel. Diamonds too. And, unsurprisingly, fruit, vegetables, nuts and spices. Personally, I'm rather fond of avocados. They're an outward signifier of how sophisticated I am. And I get pleasure from cutting them in half (the less overlap in the cut, the more I can boast about my very impressive knife-handling skills). The problem is that many avocados in UK shops have Israel as their country of origin. Should I shun those ones in favour of, say, Peruvian avocados? [Peru has a worse record than Israel when it comes to human rights abuses. But maybe that can be excused because Peruvians are, you know, kind of "Third World", living in huts in the jungle and that kind of thing.] If everyone in the art world (or the whole wide world) boycotted all Israeli exports, I'm sure we could succeed in bankrupting a few farmers and forcing many average workers out of their jobs. That would compromise as well the mental health, general welfare and futures of their children. Sounds like an effective way to teach Israel a lesson. No doubt this kind of pressure would lead to a volte-face by Netanyahu and his government on the Palestinian situation.
|
|
moron
Junior Member
Posts • 2,711
Likes • 1,051
September 2017
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by moron on Jun 12, 2018 9:52:28 GMT 1, When it comes to human rights, there's no room for complacency. __________ Thinking aloud here, perhaps you and I can work together on this. Maybe by starting a Change.org petition. But one thing that's important is to avoid appearing biased or blinkered. This would weaken the legitimacy of our case. Care must be taken to ensure consistency in approach (as well as in our own outrage). And so, when we accuse Israel of acting in a manner that violates our core values, we also need to check the yardstick we're using is one we're comfortable applying across the board. You see, I don't wish to hand over ammunition to our enemies. It would be awkward if they could undermine the petition — for example, by claiming the standard we hold Israel to is different to the one by which we judge other nations. Consequently, what I've done for us is sift through recent data (2016–2017) on the human rights situation in countries around the world. My sources were Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Freedom House, and the Verisk Maplecroft Human Rights Risk Index (HRRI). The HRRI looks at multiple types of human rights violations by the state or private security. These include extrajudicial executions; disappearances; torture and inhumane treatment; deaths in custody; prisoners of conscience; unfair trials; detention without charge or trial; sentences of death; and abuses by armed opposition groups. Through a points system, countries are categorised as Extreme risk, High risk, Medium risk, Low risk, or No data. In 2017 (Q4), Israel was classed Medium risk and the Palestinian territories (or possibly just the West Bank) were High risk. It would be very tempting (and easier) to focus our petition exclusively on Israel. However, as referred to above, I fear this would expose us to accusations of applying double standards. The added risk is that we might then be mistaken for being patronising (maybe even a bit racist) towards all of the black, brown and yellow people living in places where they don't really "get" the idea of human rights. __________ What I therefore suggest is we broaden our petition to include all countries listed by the HRRI as Extreme risk and High risk. Here's some draft text I've come up with for Change.org: "The countries below are guilty of serious human rights violations. We, kalm and met, are disheartened by their seemingly lawless ways.
We hereby call upon everyone in the art world to boycott anything Libya, Sudan, Eritrea, Somalia, South Sudan, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, Myanmar, North Korea, >>> Israel <<<, Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Surinam, Brazil, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Paraguay, Argentina, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad, Senegal, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Côte d'Ivoire, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Togo, Benin, Nigeria, Cameroon, Gabon, Republic of the Congo, Angola, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Swaziland, Madagascar, Tanzania, Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti, Egypt, Kosovo, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, India, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh, Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Philippines, and Papua New Guinea.
Thank you."If you have proposed amendments (or if I accidentally left out some countries), just let me know. Most of those countries you have listed have corrupt goverments The Education system is poor and there is a high rate of uneducated people and unemployed people in those countries Not really a comparison to isreal , which has a high rate of degree level educated population in comparison to countries listed ,also leading development in new technologies in science , medical and computer based fields Generally people look at isreal as a developed leading country and should resolve the situation better also as previous generations has suffered unjust segregation so assume should be more understanding , Agree all countries should be treated the same but some people pick up on points above . Religion and money makes smart people do stupid things.
When it comes to human rights, there's no room for complacency. __________ Thinking aloud here, perhaps you and I can work together on this. Maybe by starting a Change.org petition. But one thing that's important is to avoid appearing biased or blinkered. This would weaken the legitimacy of our case. Care must be taken to ensure consistency in approach (as well as in our own outrage). And so, when we accuse Israel of acting in a manner that violates our core values, we also need to check the yardstick we're using is one we're comfortable applying across the board. You see, I don't wish to hand over ammunition to our enemies. It would be awkward if they could undermine the petition — for example, by claiming the standard we hold Israel to is different to the one by which we judge other nations. Consequently, what I've done for us is sift through recent data (2016–2017) on the human rights situation in countries around the world. My sources were Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Freedom House, and the Verisk Maplecroft Human Rights Risk Index (HRRI). The HRRI looks at multiple types of human rights violations by the state or private security. These include extrajudicial executions; disappearances; torture and inhumane treatment; deaths in custody; prisoners of conscience; unfair trials; detention without charge or trial; sentences of death; and abuses by armed opposition groups. Through a points system, countries are categorised as Extreme risk, High risk, Medium risk, Low risk, or No data. In 2017 (Q4), Israel was classed Medium risk and the Palestinian territories (or possibly just the West Bank) were High risk. It would be very tempting (and easier) to focus our petition exclusively on Israel. However, as referred to above, I fear this would expose us to accusations of applying double standards. The added risk is that we might then be mistaken for being patronising (maybe even a bit racist) towards all of the black, brown and yellow people living in places where they don't really "get" the idea of human rights. __________ What I therefore suggest is we broaden our petition to include all countries listed by the HRRI as Extreme risk and High risk. Here's some draft text I've come up with for Change.org: "The countries below are guilty of serious human rights violations. We, kalm and met, are disheartened by their seemingly lawless ways.
We hereby call upon everyone in the art world to boycott anything Libya, Sudan, Eritrea, Somalia, South Sudan, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, Myanmar, North Korea, >>> Israel <<<, Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Surinam, Brazil, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Paraguay, Argentina, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad, Senegal, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Côte d'Ivoire, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Togo, Benin, Nigeria, Cameroon, Gabon, Republic of the Congo, Angola, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Swaziland, Madagascar, Tanzania, Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti, Egypt, Kosovo, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, India, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh, Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Philippines, and Papua New Guinea.
Thank you."If you have proposed amendments (or if I accidentally left out some countries), just let me know. Most of those countries you have listed have corrupt goverments The Education system is poor and there is a high rate of uneducated people and unemployed people in those countries Not really a comparison to isreal , which has a high rate of degree level educated population in comparison to countries listed ,also leading development in new technologies in science , medical and computer based fields Generally people look at isreal as a developed leading country and should resolve the situation better also as previous generations has suffered unjust segregation so assume should be more understanding , Agree all countries should be treated the same but some people pick up on points above . Religion and money makes smart people do stupid things.
|
|
|
swissmade
New Member
Posts • 149
Likes • 142
October 2016
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by swissmade on Jun 13, 2018 18:55:37 GMT 1, Exactly...it’s all deflection. Poor Palestine...sucks they will never be free. Occasionally, when a person doubles down, it's simply out of pride. They won't acknowledge (or they're incapable of admitting) they may have got something wrong. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume your Israeli-boycott proposal was carefully considered. How would it work in practice? From the top of my head, here are questions relating to just three areas: 1. Presumably, all travel to Israel is a no-no — including any religious or historical trips to the likes of Jerusalem, Nazareth or Masada. And since Ben Gurion International Airport is Israeli, I suppose landing there would also be frowned upon. So if forum members (or anyone else in the art world) wish to stay at the Walled Off Hotel, how should they make their way over? Via the beacon for human rights that is Jordan? 2. A number of members here (myself included) appreciate the art of Know Hope. In addition, I often follow Broken Fingaz Crew, whose work I enjoy along with their general ethos. And occasionally I'll check out Klone Yourself. Tel Aviv in particular has a vibrant creative scene of artists, illustrators, designers and photographers. Would you recommend that all of us boycott their exhibitions, and refuse to purchase any of their work? I don't want to be seen as "deflecting". I wish to be part of the solution, not part of the problem. If you think it might help, I could also tell those artists to go fu ck themselves. You know, because of what they're doing to the Palestinians and stuff. 3. The UK (where I'm based) imports a significant amount of medicine / medicaments from Israel. Diamonds too. And, unsurprisingly, fruit, vegetables, nuts and spices. Personally, I'm rather fond of avocados. They're an outward signifier of how sophisticated I am. And I get pleasure from cutting them in half (the less overlap in the cut, the more I can boast about my very impressive knife-handling skills). The problem is that many avocados in UK shops have Israel as their country of origin. Should I shun those ones in favour of, say, Peruvian avocados? [Peru has a worse record than Israel when it comes to human rights abuses. But maybe that can be excused because Peruvians are, you know, kind of "Third World", living in huts in the jungle and that kind of thing.] If everyone in the art world (or the whole wide world) boycotted all Israeli exports, I'm sure we could succeed in bankrupting a few farmers and forcing many average workers out of their jobs. That would compromise as well the mental health, general welfare and futures of their children. Sounds like an effective way to teach Israel a lesson. No doubt this kind of pressure would lead to a volte-face by Netanyahu and his government on the Palestinian situation. Met - I am sorry to hear that your love of avocados and third rate artists is stopping you from not only offering any assistance to the plight of Palestinians yourself it forces you to prevent anyone else from doing so. I am reminded of ... something about evil and good men doing nothing.
While you are enjoying your prawn cocktails in avocado shells think South Africa.
Exactly...it’s all deflection. Poor Palestine...sucks they will never be free. Occasionally, when a person doubles down, it's simply out of pride. They won't acknowledge (or they're incapable of admitting) they may have got something wrong. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume your Israeli-boycott proposal was carefully considered. How would it work in practice? From the top of my head, here are questions relating to just three areas: 1. Presumably, all travel to Israel is a no-no — including any religious or historical trips to the likes of Jerusalem, Nazareth or Masada. And since Ben Gurion International Airport is Israeli, I suppose landing there would also be frowned upon. So if forum members (or anyone else in the art world) wish to stay at the Walled Off Hotel, how should they make their way over? Via the beacon for human rights that is Jordan? 2. A number of members here (myself included) appreciate the art of Know Hope. In addition, I often follow Broken Fingaz Crew, whose work I enjoy along with their general ethos. And occasionally I'll check out Klone Yourself. Tel Aviv in particular has a vibrant creative scene of artists, illustrators, designers and photographers. Would you recommend that all of us boycott their exhibitions, and refuse to purchase any of their work? I don't want to be seen as "deflecting". I wish to be part of the solution, not part of the problem. If you think it might help, I could also tell those artists to go fu ck themselves. You know, because of what they're doing to the Palestinians and stuff. 3. The UK (where I'm based) imports a significant amount of medicine / medicaments from Israel. Diamonds too. And, unsurprisingly, fruit, vegetables, nuts and spices. Personally, I'm rather fond of avocados. They're an outward signifier of how sophisticated I am. And I get pleasure from cutting them in half (the less overlap in the cut, the more I can boast about my very impressive knife-handling skills). The problem is that many avocados in UK shops have Israel as their country of origin. Should I shun those ones in favour of, say, Peruvian avocados? [Peru has a worse record than Israel when it comes to human rights abuses. But maybe that can be excused because Peruvians are, you know, kind of "Third World", living in huts in the jungle and that kind of thing.] If everyone in the art world (or the whole wide world) boycotted all Israeli exports, I'm sure we could succeed in bankrupting a few farmers and forcing many average workers out of their jobs. That would compromise as well the mental health, general welfare and futures of their children. Sounds like an effective way to teach Israel a lesson. No doubt this kind of pressure would lead to a volte-face by Netanyahu and his government on the Palestinian situation. Met - I am sorry to hear that your love of avocados and third rate artists is stopping you from not only offering any assistance to the plight of Palestinians yourself it forces you to prevent anyone else from doing so. I am reminded of ... something about evil and good men doing nothing. While you are enjoying your prawn cocktails in avocado shells think South Africa.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by met on Jun 14, 2018 10:36:00 GMT 1, Met - I am sorry to hear that your love of avocados and third rate artists is stopping you from not only offering any assistance to the plight of Palestinians yourself it forces you to prevent anyone else from doing so. I am reminded of ... something about evil and good men doing nothing. While you are enjoying your prawn cocktails in avocado shells think South Africa.
Considered and informed viewpoints that differ to mine are what I actively seek out. In addition, I make regular efforts to argue against myself. The idea is to uncover weaknesses in my opinions, tailor them accordingly, and think them through more carefully. They need to be capable of withstanding scrutiny from all sides.
My duty therefore is to abandon any position held by me that I discover is based on (a) factually inaccurate, incomplete or misleading information, or (b) flawed reasoning. Getting a clear, full picture is the objective. I want to arrive as closely as possible to what can be described as the whole truth (or truths) on particular issues. You'll appreciate this is a never-ending work-in-progress.
So whenever I can make the time, I'm happy to have open, honest discussions with anyone. At least with anyone who is also willing to have such discussions themselves.
__________
Intellectual honesty really is key here. It relates to a person's integrity and their sense of fair play. Without this foundation, parties hoping for a productive exchange are wasting their efforts.
Consequently, I do try to avoid engaging with forum members I perceive as being disingenuous. Or who seem too close-minded to contemplate alternative perspectives. They aren't interested in sincere dialogue, even if they might pretend for appearances. Instead, the intention will often be to shut down competing views, propagandise, or find others with the same opinions who can offer the warm comfort of mutually-reinforced belief systems.
There are various ways in which the intellectual dishonesty of a party (or just their cowardice) may be exposed in communications. They include:
(i) ignoring arguments raised, refusing to answer direct questions, general evasiveness;
(ii) ad hominem attacks and other distraction tactics;
(iii) straw man attacks, i.e. deliberately misrepresenting, distorting or exaggerating the other side's position;
(iv) faux obtuseness and refusal to acknowledge deficiencies in one's arguments, or to concede any point regardless of the circumstances;
(v) goalpost-shifting, i.e. changes to one's arguments after those initially advanced have been refuted; and
(vi) obfuscation, misdirection and other attempts to change either the subject or its precise focus when challenged.
__________
I'll be straightforward, swissmade. The sense I get from your post is an element of bad faith, plus lack of interest on your part in having a genuine discussion. You've attributed to me an outlook and motivations that are not mine. And it feels as if your effort to falsely discredit was intentional, rather than the result of confusion.
This is the reason I'm wary of replying to you. Nobody likes squandering time. Especially if the other side may resort to taking the spineless approach of wholesale dismissiveness — or grandstanding to save face, while painstakingly avoiding specific areas of conversation.
__________
But if I've misread you, it would please me a great deal. Finding someone whose honour prevents them from ducking awkward questions is always encouraging.
We could then go back to the very restricted point I challenged kalm about — his hope that everyone in the art world "boycotts anything Israeli".
Now, he was sadly unable or unwilling to defend his statement. But your own post suggests you're in agreement with the boycott option. So how about stepping up as a ringer and addressing the issues below?
Here's a recap of the two principal issues raised by me:
1. The first seeks to identify whether any double standard is at play. This argument assumes honourable motives (like the right to life, liberty and security of person — as opposed to motives based on bigotry):
A forum member advocating sanctions against one country for human rights abuses must also be willing to advocate sanctions against other countries whose records are far more appalling. Examples I cited included China, Iran, Pakistan, Sudan and Turkey. Let's use China as our test case:
Would you be comfortable publicly calling upon everyone in the art world to boycott all things Chinese?
2. The second relates to how a boycott would work in practice. My sample scenarios were travel to Israel (including to Ben Gurion International Airport); the stance to be taken towards Israeli creatives (Jewish, Israeli Arab, etc.) and their artwork; and the treatment of Israeli exports (when alternatives will often be from countries with human rights records that are worse than Israel's).
What are your thoughts and proposals on each of those three?
Met - I am sorry to hear that your love of avocados and third rate artists is stopping you from not only offering any assistance to the plight of Palestinians yourself it forces you to prevent anyone else from doing so. I am reminded of ... something about evil and good men doing nothing. While you are enjoying your prawn cocktails in avocado shells think South Africa. Considered and informed viewpoints that differ to mine are what I actively seek out. In addition, I make regular efforts to argue against myself. The idea is to uncover weaknesses in my opinions, tailor them accordingly, and think them through more carefully. They need to be capable of withstanding scrutiny from all sides. My duty therefore is to abandon any position held by me that I discover is based on (a) factually inaccurate, incomplete or misleading information, or (b) flawed reasoning. Getting a clear, full picture is the objective. I want to arrive as closely as possible to what can be described as the whole truth (or truths) on particular issues. You'll appreciate this is a never-ending work-in-progress. So whenever I can make the time, I'm happy to have open, honest discussions with anyone. At least with anyone who is also willing to have such discussions themselves. __________ Intellectual honesty really is key here. It relates to a person's integrity and their sense of fair play. Without this foundation, parties hoping for a productive exchange are wasting their efforts. Consequently, I do try to avoid engaging with forum members I perceive as being disingenuous. Or who seem too close-minded to contemplate alternative perspectives. They aren't interested in sincere dialogue, even if they might pretend for appearances. Instead, the intention will often be to shut down competing views, propagandise, or find others with the same opinions who can offer the warm comfort of mutually-reinforced belief systems. There are various ways in which the intellectual dishonesty of a party (or just their cowardice) may be exposed in communications. They include: (i) ignoring arguments raised, refusing to answer direct questions, general evasiveness; (ii) ad hominem attacks and other distraction tactics; (iii) straw man attacks, i.e. deliberately misrepresenting, distorting or exaggerating the other side's position; (iv) faux obtuseness and refusal to acknowledge deficiencies in one's arguments, or to concede any point regardless of the circumstances; (v) goalpost-shifting, i.e. changes to one's arguments after those initially advanced have been refuted; and (vi) obfuscation, misdirection and other attempts to change either the subject or its precise focus when challenged. __________ I'll be straightforward, swissmade. The sense I get from your post is an element of bad faith, plus lack of interest on your part in having a genuine discussion. You've attributed to me an outlook and motivations that are not mine. And it feels as if your effort to falsely discredit was intentional, rather than the result of confusion. This is the reason I'm wary of replying to you. Nobody likes squandering time. Especially if the other side may resort to taking the spineless approach of wholesale dismissiveness — or grandstanding to save face, while painstakingly avoiding specific areas of conversation. __________ But if I've misread you, it would please me a great deal. Finding someone whose honour prevents them from ducking awkward questions is always encouraging. We could then go back to the very restricted point I challenged kalm about — his hope that everyone in the art world "boycotts anything Israeli". Now, he was sadly unable or unwilling to defend his statement. But your own post suggests you're in agreement with the boycott option. So how about stepping up as a ringer and addressing the issues below? Here's a recap of the two principal issues raised by me:1. The first seeks to identify whether any double standard is at play. This argument assumes honourable motives (like the right to life, liberty and security of person — as opposed to motives based on bigotry): A forum member advocating sanctions against one country for human rights abuses must also be willing to advocate sanctions against other countries whose records are far more appalling. Examples I cited included China, Iran, Pakistan, Sudan and Turkey. Let's use China as our test case: Would you be comfortable publicly calling upon everyone in the art world to boycott all things Chinese? 2. The second relates to how a boycott would work in practice. My sample scenarios were travel to Israel (including to Ben Gurion International Airport); the stance to be taken towards Israeli creatives (Jewish, Israeli Arab, etc.) and their artwork; and the treatment of Israeli exports (when alternatives will often be from countries with human rights records that are worse than Israel's). What are your thoughts and proposals on each of those three?
|
|
bjoern
Junior Member
Posts • 1,293
Likes • 569
September 2014
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by bjoern on Jun 15, 2018 11:43:12 GMT 1, Hi all,
selling one "Box Set" from the Walled Off Hotel.
Comes with receipt and will be shipped insured.
Price: 300€ + Shipping.
Thanks & have a great weekend.
Hi all,
selling one "Box Set" from the Walled Off Hotel.
Comes with receipt and will be shipped insured.
Price: 300€ + Shipping.
Thanks & have a great weekend.
|
|
|
swissmade
New Member
Posts • 149
Likes • 142
October 2016
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by swissmade on Jun 15, 2018 16:58:00 GMT 1, met I have to say your arrogance and unbridled conceit made me chuckle.
I am not going to pick apart your argument I don’t have the time or the desire but…
You say you “try to avoid engaging with forum members …. who seem too close-minded to contemplate alternative perspectives” you also say “I make regular efforts to argue against myself”. Well, if former is true I suggest you avoid the latter.
If you had spent as much time looking up South Africa’s transition from an apartheid pariah state to what it is today, as you did sitting at your keyboard pontificating your intellect and superior intelligence you might have realised my point.
That which you suggest in your argument cannot work did work in bringing South Africa in from the cold – including art and sports boycotts. There were people at the time who said sanctions and boycotts cannot and will not work – in the end it was those very sanctions and boycotts that did.
You're argument at the end of the day is not to take any action against Israel because, well there are other bad guys in the world too. That to me is a coward's attitude.
Have a nice day.
met I have to say your arrogance and unbridled conceit made me chuckle. I am not going to pick apart your argument I don’t have the time or the desire but… You say you “try to avoid engaging with forum members …. who seem too close-minded to contemplate alternative perspectives” you also say “I make regular efforts to argue against myself”. Well, if former is true I suggest you avoid the latter. If you had spent as much time looking up South Africa’s transition from an apartheid pariah state to what it is today, as you did sitting at your keyboard pontificating your intellect and superior intelligence you might have realised my point. That which you suggest in your argument cannot work did work in bringing South Africa in from the cold – including art and sports boycotts. There were people at the time who said sanctions and boycotts cannot and will not work – in the end it was those very sanctions and boycotts that did. You're argument at the end of the day is not to take any action against Israel because, well there are other bad guys in the world too. That to me is a coward's attitude. Have a nice day.
|
|
rbk
New Member
Posts • 196
Likes • 168
March 2015
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by rbk on Jun 15, 2018 17:06:54 GMT 1, met I have to say your arrogance and unbridled conceit made me chuckle. I am not going to pick apart your argument I don’t have the time or the desire but… You say you “try to avoid engaging with forum members …. who seem too close-minded to contemplate alternative perspectives” you also say “I make regular efforts to argue against myself”. Well, if former is true I suggest you avoid the latter. If you had spent as much time looking up South Africa’s transition from an apartheid pariah state to what it is today, as you did sitting at your keyboard pontificating your intellect and superior intelligence you might have realised my point. That which you suggest in your argument cannot work did work in bringing South Africa in from the cold – including art and sports boycotts. There were people at the time who said sanctions and boycotts cannot and will not work – in the end it was those very sanctions and boycotts that did. You're argument at the end of the day is not to take any action against Israel because, well there are other bad guys in the world too. That to me is a coward's attitude. Have a nice day.
£100 on met not answering this, any takers?
met I have to say your arrogance and unbridled conceit made me chuckle. I am not going to pick apart your argument I don’t have the time or the desire but… You say you “try to avoid engaging with forum members …. who seem too close-minded to contemplate alternative perspectives” you also say “I make regular efforts to argue against myself”. Well, if former is true I suggest you avoid the latter. If you had spent as much time looking up South Africa’s transition from an apartheid pariah state to what it is today, as you did sitting at your keyboard pontificating your intellect and superior intelligence you might have realised my point. That which you suggest in your argument cannot work did work in bringing South Africa in from the cold – including art and sports boycotts. There were people at the time who said sanctions and boycotts cannot and will not work – in the end it was those very sanctions and boycotts that did. You're argument at the end of the day is not to take any action against Israel because, well there are other bad guys in the world too. That to me is a coward's attitude. Have a nice day. £100 on met not answering this, any takers?
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by met on Jun 17, 2018 1:35:07 GMT 1, met I have to say your arrogance and unbridled conceit made me chuckle. I am not going to pick apart your argument I don’t have the time or the desire but… You say you “try to avoid engaging with forum members …. who seem too close-minded to contemplate alternative perspectives” you also say “I make regular efforts to argue against myself”. Well, if former is true I suggest you avoid the latter. If you had spent as much time looking up South Africa’s transition from an apartheid pariah state to what it is today, as you did sitting at your keyboard pontificating your intellect and superior intelligence you might have realised my point. That which you suggest in your argument cannot work did work in bringing South Africa in from the cold – including art and sports boycotts. There were people at the time who said sanctions and boycotts cannot and will not work – in the end it was those very sanctions and boycotts that did. You're argument at the end of the day is not to take any action against Israel because, well there are other bad guys in the world too. That to me is a coward's attitude. Have a nice day. £100 on met not answering this, any takers? I accept your bet, rbk.
Give me a couple of hours to formulate my thoughts. Afterwards, I'd be grateful if the £100 could please be donated to Alzheimer’s Society:
www.alzheimers.org.uk/get-involved/make-donation
Proof of donation not required. Your word will suffice.
met I have to say your arrogance and unbridled conceit made me chuckle. I am not going to pick apart your argument I don’t have the time or the desire but… You say you “try to avoid engaging with forum members …. who seem too close-minded to contemplate alternative perspectives” you also say “I make regular efforts to argue against myself”. Well, if former is true I suggest you avoid the latter. If you had spent as much time looking up South Africa’s transition from an apartheid pariah state to what it is today, as you did sitting at your keyboard pontificating your intellect and superior intelligence you might have realised my point. That which you suggest in your argument cannot work did work in bringing South Africa in from the cold – including art and sports boycotts. There were people at the time who said sanctions and boycotts cannot and will not work – in the end it was those very sanctions and boycotts that did. You're argument at the end of the day is not to take any action against Israel because, well there are other bad guys in the world too. That to me is a coward's attitude. Have a nice day. £100 on met not answering this, any takers? I accept your bet, rbk. Give me a couple of hours to formulate my thoughts. Afterwards, I'd be grateful if the £100 could please be donated to Alzheimer’s Society: www.alzheimers.org.uk/get-involved/make-donationProof of donation not required. Your word will suffice.
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by met on Jun 17, 2018 2:50:23 GMT 1, met I have to say your arrogance and unbridled conceit made me chuckle. I am not going to pick apart your argument I don’t have the time or the desire but… You say you “try to avoid engaging with forum members …. who seem too close-minded to contemplate alternative perspectives” you also say “I make regular efforts to argue against myself”. Well, if former is true I suggest you avoid the latter. If you had spent as much time looking up South Africa’s transition from an apartheid pariah state to what it is today, as you did sitting at your keyboard pontificating your intellect and superior intelligence you might have realised my point. That which you suggest in your argument cannot work did work in bringing South Africa in from the cold – including art and sports boycotts. There were people at the time who said sanctions and boycotts cannot and will not work – in the end it was those very sanctions and boycotts that did. You're argument at the end of the day is not to take any action against Israel because, well there are other bad guys in the world too. That to me is a coward's attitude. Have a nice day.
To be clear, I don't expect you to pick apart my argument if you haven't the time or desire.
[This forum hosts a very rich variety of art enthusiasts and opinions. Nevertheless, there's still one assertion each of us can probably agree on: It's much easier (and faster) to attack the person presenting an argument than it is to go after the argument itself.]
All I ask from your side is good faith. Does that request sound fair and reasonable?
Of course what good faith requires is the intellectual honesty referred to earlier. This includes not trying to cloud an issue or shift the focus of a specific discussion, and not ducking awkward questions.
__________
Assuming your hope is that the art world "boycotts anything Israeli", then we differ on this particular point.
If that's correct, I'll repeat my original questions:
1. Would you also be comfortable publicly calling upon everyone in the art world to boycott anything, say, Chinese?
2. What are your thoughts and proposals regarding (a) people travelling to or via Israel; (b) the stance to be taken towards Israeli creatives and their artwork; (c) and the treatment of Israeli exports?
__________
By way of an aside, it's worth mentioning I fully appreciate the temptation of resorting to distraction tactics here.
Responding honestly to the above two questions would in my view undermine your case. I suspect it would expose you as having double standards. It may even show that your position isn't based on morally-consistent, sound reasoning. And what other possibilities remain? Unsound reasoning? Bias? Perhaps your answers would also reveal hypocrisy — for example, if you spent time at the Walled Off Hotel, but arrived there via TLV rather than AMM.
My belief is that you're acutely aware of this. So I do understand the evasiveness regarding both questions. Nobody but a masochist would enjoy losing face.
__________
All pretty trivial, but it highlights a serious obstacle too. When the emphasis is on point-scoring, insults or avoiding personal embarrassment at any cost, there isn't much room left for discussing complicated and delicate issues in a forthright, sincere manner.
That's discouraging — to the point where many people no longer bother voicing their opinions. Instead, they self-censor. For the sake of a simpler life with less hassle or abuse.
The field is then left wide open to the demagogues, idealogues and zealots. [These individuals are easy to spot. The starting point for them is always their conclusion. Selected facts are useful, but only to the extent they support the conclusion.]
What we end up with is a combination of largely-disengaged masses, and a vocal few — who are speaking at each other with their parallel monologues or just name-calling. As a societal recipe, it's less than ideal.
met I have to say your arrogance and unbridled conceit made me chuckle. I am not going to pick apart your argument I don’t have the time or the desire but… You say you “try to avoid engaging with forum members …. who seem too close-minded to contemplate alternative perspectives” you also say “I make regular efforts to argue against myself”. Well, if former is true I suggest you avoid the latter. If you had spent as much time looking up South Africa’s transition from an apartheid pariah state to what it is today, as you did sitting at your keyboard pontificating your intellect and superior intelligence you might have realised my point. That which you suggest in your argument cannot work did work in bringing South Africa in from the cold – including art and sports boycotts. There were people at the time who said sanctions and boycotts cannot and will not work – in the end it was those very sanctions and boycotts that did. You're argument at the end of the day is not to take any action against Israel because, well there are other bad guys in the world too. That to me is a coward's attitude. Have a nice day. To be clear, I don't expect you to pick apart my argument if you haven't the time or desire. [This forum hosts a very rich variety of art enthusiasts and opinions. Nevertheless, there's still one assertion each of us can probably agree on: It's much easier (and faster) to attack the person presenting an argument than it is to go after the argument itself.]All I ask from your side is good faith. Does that request sound fair and reasonable? Of course what good faith requires is the intellectual honesty referred to earlier. This includes not trying to cloud an issue or shift the focus of a specific discussion, and not ducking awkward questions. __________ Assuming your hope is that the art world "boycotts anything Israeli", then we differ on this particular point. If that's correct, I'll repeat my original questions: 1. Would you also be comfortable publicly calling upon everyone in the art world to boycott anything, say, Chinese? 2. What are your thoughts and proposals regarding (a) people travelling to or via Israel; (b) the stance to be taken towards Israeli creatives and their artwork; (c) and the treatment of Israeli exports? __________ By way of an aside, it's worth mentioning I fully appreciate the temptation of resorting to distraction tactics here. Responding honestly to the above two questions would in my view undermine your case. I suspect it would expose you as having double standards. It may even show that your position isn't based on morally-consistent, sound reasoning. And what other possibilities remain? Unsound reasoning? Bias? Perhaps your answers would also reveal hypocrisy — for example, if you spent time at the Walled Off Hotel, but arrived there via TLV rather than AMM. My belief is that you're acutely aware of this. So I do understand the evasiveness regarding both questions. Nobody but a masochist would enjoy losing face. __________ All pretty trivial, but it highlights a serious obstacle too. When the emphasis is on point-scoring, insults or avoiding personal embarrassment at any cost, there isn't much room left for discussing complicated and delicate issues in a forthright, sincere manner. That's discouraging — to the point where many people no longer bother voicing their opinions. Instead, they self-censor. For the sake of a simpler life with less hassle or abuse. The field is then left wide open to the demagogues, idealogues and zealots. [These individuals are easy to spot. The starting point for them is always their conclusion. Selected facts are useful, but only to the extent they support the conclusion.] What we end up with is a combination of largely-disengaged masses, and a vocal few — who are speaking at each other with their parallel monologues or just name-calling. As a societal recipe, it's less than ideal.
|
|
kalm
Junior Member
Posts • 1,005
Likes • 354
November 2010
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by kalm on Jun 17, 2018 2:55:10 GMT 1, What a fucking nut job! Is this what Pro-Israeli rhetoric has devolved too? Thinking logical, non-partisan people have got it all wrong? If they could only see the other sides plight?? “THE ONLY DEMOCRACY IN THE MIDDLE EAST” THAT FORCES PEOPLE INTO CAGES, CUTS OFF BASIC HUMAN NECESSITIES AND SEGRAGATES BY RELIGIOUS BELIEFS/BIRTH ORDER...only too maim & kill children and the “FREE” press?
-Jesus Christ.
What a fucking nut job! Is this what Pro-Israeli rhetoric has devolved too? Thinking logical, non-partisan people have got it all wrong? If they could only see the other sides plight?? “THE ONLY DEMOCRACY IN THE MIDDLE EAST” THAT FORCES PEOPLE INTO CAGES, CUTS OFF BASIC HUMAN NECESSITIES AND SEGRAGATES BY RELIGIOUS BELIEFS/BIRTH ORDER...only too maim & kill children and the “FREE” press? -Jesus Christ.
|
|
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by Rouen Cathedral on Jun 17, 2018 2:55:46 GMT 1, Can we stop ruining ahmads sales thread?
Can we stop ruining ahmads sales thread?
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by met on Jun 17, 2018 3:50:06 GMT 1, £100 on met not answering this, any takers? Allow me to try drawing you in further.
If you wish to limit your input to sniping from the sidelines and then running away, that isn't a problem for me. I'll understand, and no hard feelings.
But if you believe it's preferable — and more respectful of the subject being discussed — to have a genuine dialogue instead, then I'd very much welcome this from you.
__________
swissmade once again distorted my words and attributed to me a position which isn't mine.
Now, as a rhetorical technique, straw man arguments can be highly effective if an audience is a bit slow off the mark. But the simple antidote (allowing the deceit to be recognised) is just to read and pay attention.
People who resort to such tactics are primarily interested in giving the appearance of "winning" a debate or shouting down alternative viewpoints. That approach is fundamentally different to my own.
As mentioned previously, the concern for me is to discover (to the extent possible) what can be described as the truth or truths. This can easily mean acknowledging somebody else's arguments are more persuasive. And if it requires me to discard previously-held opinions and beliefs (for example, because they turned out to be based on falsehoods, or incomplete facts, or prejudice rather than reason), then the sooner that happens, the better.
__________
In case you do have the courage to stick your head above the parapet, let's return to the actual subject. We should also resist dishonest attempts to shift focus away from this subject before fully thinking it through:
kalm expressed a hope that everyone in the art world "boycotts anything Israeli".
For emphasis, that is the very specific and restricted point I challenged him on. I feel a need to repeat this because of the way my challenge has already been misrepresented, whether cynically or just mistakenly.
So the question, rbk, is whether you share his position. Do you also hope that everyone in the art world boycotts anything Israeli?
If that isn't your hope — or not quite your hope — then I'm unaware of any disagreement between us on the matter.
£100 on met not answering this, any takers? Allow me to try drawing you in further. If you wish to limit your input to sniping from the sidelines and then running away, that isn't a problem for me. I'll understand, and no hard feelings. But if you believe it's preferable — and more respectful of the subject being discussed — to have a genuine dialogue instead, then I'd very much welcome this from you. __________ swissmade once again distorted my words and attributed to me a position which isn't mine. Now, as a rhetorical technique, straw man arguments can be highly effective if an audience is a bit slow off the mark. But the simple antidote (allowing the deceit to be recognised) is just to read and pay attention. People who resort to such tactics are primarily interested in giving the appearance of "winning" a debate or shouting down alternative viewpoints. That approach is fundamentally different to my own. As mentioned previously, the concern for me is to discover (to the extent possible) what can be described as the truth or truths. This can easily mean acknowledging somebody else's arguments are more persuasive. And if it requires me to discard previously-held opinions and beliefs (for example, because they turned out to be based on falsehoods, or incomplete facts, or prejudice rather than reason), then the sooner that happens, the better. __________ In case you do have the courage to stick your head above the parapet, let's return to the actual subject. We should also resist dishonest attempts to shift focus away from this subject before fully thinking it through: kalm expressed a hope that everyone in the art world "boycotts anything Israeli". For emphasis, that is the very specific and restricted point I challenged him on. I feel a need to repeat this because of the way my challenge has already been misrepresented, whether cynically or just mistakenly. So the question, rbk, is whether you share his position. Do you also hope that everyone in the art world boycotts anything Israeli? If that isn't your hope — or not quite your hope — then I'm unaware of any disagreement between us on the matter.
|
|
mmmike
Junior Member
Posts • 2,421
Likes • 759
March 2010
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by mmmike on Jun 17, 2018 4:36:41 GMT 1, met I have to say your arrogance and unbridled conceit made me chuckle. I am not going to pick apart your argument I don’t have the time or the desire but… You say you “try to avoid engaging with forum members …. who seem too close-minded to contemplate alternative perspectives” you also say “I make regular efforts to argue against myself”. Well, if former is true I suggest you avoid the latter. If you had spent as much time looking up South Africa’s transition from an apartheid pariah state to what it is today, as you did sitting at your keyboard pontificating your intellect and superior intelligence you might have realised my point. That which you suggest in your argument cannot work did work in bringing South Africa in from the cold – including art and sports boycotts. There were people at the time who said sanctions and boycotts cannot and will not work – in the end it was those very sanctions and boycotts that did. You're argument at the end of the day is not to take any action against Israel because, well there are other bad guys in the world too. That to me is a coward's attitude. Have a nice day. To be clear, I don't expect you to pick apart my argument if you haven't the time or desire. [This forum hosts a very rich variety of art enthusiasts and opinions. Nevertheless, there's still one assertion each of us can probably agree on: It's much easier (and faster) to attack the person presenting an argument than it is to go after the argument itself.]All I ask from your side is good faith. Does that request sound fair and reasonable? Of course what good faith requires is the intellectual honesty referred to earlier. This includes not trying to cloud an issue or shift the focus of a specific discussion, and not ducking awkward questions. __________ Assuming your hope is that the art world "boycotts anything Israeli", then we differ on this particular point. If that's correct, I'll repeat my original questions: 1. Would you also be comfortable publicly calling upon everyone in the art world to boycott anything, say, Chinese? 2. What are your thoughts and proposals regarding (a) people travelling to or via Israel; (b) the stance to be taken towards Israeli creatives and their artwork; (c) and the treatment of Israeli exports? __________ By way of an aside, it's worth mentioning I fully appreciate the temptation of resorting to distraction tactics here. Responding honestly to the above two questions would in my view undermine your case. I suspect it would expose you as having double standards. It may even show that your position isn't based on morally-consistent, sound reasoning. And what other possibilities remain? Unsound reasoning? Bias? Perhaps your answers would also reveal hypocrisy — for example, if you spent time at the Walled Off Hotel, but arrived there via TLV rather than AMM. My belief is that you're acutely aware of this. So I do understand the evasiveness regarding both questions. Nobody but a masochist would enjoy losing face. __________ All pretty trivial, but it highlights a serious obstacle too. When the emphasis is on point-scoring, insults or avoiding personal embarrassment at any cost, there isn't much room left for discussing complicated and delicate issues in a forthright, sincere manner. That's discouraging — to the point where many people no longer bother voicing their opinions. Instead, they self-censor. For the sake of a simpler life with less hassle or abuse. The field is then left wide open to the demagogues, idealogues and zealots. [These individuals are easy to spot. The starting point for them is always their conclusion. Selected facts are useful, but only to the extent they support the conclusion.] What we end up with is a combination of largely-disengaged masses, and a vocal few — who are speaking at each other with their parallel monologues or just name-calling. As a societal recipe, it's less than ideal. Hey Met, I suspect with all your talk you really have no interest in challenging your own beliefs but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt once and answer your questions since it seems others are tired of responding.
1. Would you also be comfortable publicly calling upon everyone in the art world to boycott anything, say, Chinese?
Those are not comparable examples. They are two very different situation. None the less I would say yes. With China it is much more difficult to do but I would encourage people to buy less sweat shop made products from all parts of the world especially China who also has a less tan stelar human rights record. I try to buy clothes not made in sweat shops. I do buy electronics from China. It is quite hard not to but every bit helps.
With Israel it is easier to do and also can be much more effective because the genocide they are perpetrating would not be possible without the extensive propaganda campaign they run and the continued indifference (due to ignorance) in much of the world. BDS can bring awareness as well as economic hardship. That is why the Israeli government is so scared of BDS that they go to great lengths to stop it around the world. Here in Canada my provincial government in addition to the federal government as come out against BDS under pressure from lobbyists.
China doesn't give two shits if the US doesn't support its actions in Tibet. Israel does care about perception around Palestine. Israel could not continue whit its acts of aggression, war crimes and continued abuse of international law without US support.
BDS has the power to do even more than boycotts did in South Africa.
2. What are your thoughts and proposals regarding (a) people travelling to or via Israel; Try not to. If you have to, spend as little as possible and stay in Palestine. (b) the stance to be taken towards Israeli creatives and their artwork; If the creatives don't stand up against the Israeli government then don't support the creatives. (c) and the treatment of Israeli exports? Don't buy them.
If boycotts don't work why does the Israeli government put so much effort into stopping them?
In addition to BDS, I would suggest asking for a meeting with your elected representatives to ask them what they are doing to stop the human rights abuses in Palestine. People don't usually take the time to write and ask for meetings so if several people do on a single issue it may have an impact. I have met with my PM and will continue to hound him until he takes action or looses his seat.
Just as an FYI I likely won't read any long winded replies. Life is too short. If you have honest questions happy to try to help. Shoot me a DM.
met I have to say your arrogance and unbridled conceit made me chuckle. I am not going to pick apart your argument I don’t have the time or the desire but… You say you “try to avoid engaging with forum members …. who seem too close-minded to contemplate alternative perspectives” you also say “I make regular efforts to argue against myself”. Well, if former is true I suggest you avoid the latter. If you had spent as much time looking up South Africa’s transition from an apartheid pariah state to what it is today, as you did sitting at your keyboard pontificating your intellect and superior intelligence you might have realised my point. That which you suggest in your argument cannot work did work in bringing South Africa in from the cold – including art and sports boycotts. There were people at the time who said sanctions and boycotts cannot and will not work – in the end it was those very sanctions and boycotts that did. You're argument at the end of the day is not to take any action against Israel because, well there are other bad guys in the world too. That to me is a coward's attitude. Have a nice day. To be clear, I don't expect you to pick apart my argument if you haven't the time or desire. [This forum hosts a very rich variety of art enthusiasts and opinions. Nevertheless, there's still one assertion each of us can probably agree on: It's much easier (and faster) to attack the person presenting an argument than it is to go after the argument itself.]All I ask from your side is good faith. Does that request sound fair and reasonable? Of course what good faith requires is the intellectual honesty referred to earlier. This includes not trying to cloud an issue or shift the focus of a specific discussion, and not ducking awkward questions. __________ Assuming your hope is that the art world "boycotts anything Israeli", then we differ on this particular point. If that's correct, I'll repeat my original questions: 1. Would you also be comfortable publicly calling upon everyone in the art world to boycott anything, say, Chinese? 2. What are your thoughts and proposals regarding (a) people travelling to or via Israel; (b) the stance to be taken towards Israeli creatives and their artwork; (c) and the treatment of Israeli exports? __________ By way of an aside, it's worth mentioning I fully appreciate the temptation of resorting to distraction tactics here. Responding honestly to the above two questions would in my view undermine your case. I suspect it would expose you as having double standards. It may even show that your position isn't based on morally-consistent, sound reasoning. And what other possibilities remain? Unsound reasoning? Bias? Perhaps your answers would also reveal hypocrisy — for example, if you spent time at the Walled Off Hotel, but arrived there via TLV rather than AMM. My belief is that you're acutely aware of this. So I do understand the evasiveness regarding both questions. Nobody but a masochist would enjoy losing face. __________ All pretty trivial, but it highlights a serious obstacle too. When the emphasis is on point-scoring, insults or avoiding personal embarrassment at any cost, there isn't much room left for discussing complicated and delicate issues in a forthright, sincere manner. That's discouraging — to the point where many people no longer bother voicing their opinions. Instead, they self-censor. For the sake of a simpler life with less hassle or abuse. The field is then left wide open to the demagogues, idealogues and zealots. [These individuals are easy to spot. The starting point for them is always their conclusion. Selected facts are useful, but only to the extent they support the conclusion.] What we end up with is a combination of largely-disengaged masses, and a vocal few — who are speaking at each other with their parallel monologues or just name-calling. As a societal recipe, it's less than ideal. Hey Met, I suspect with all your talk you really have no interest in challenging your own beliefs but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt once and answer your questions since it seems others are tired of responding. 1. Would you also be comfortable publicly calling upon everyone in the art world to boycott anything, say, Chinese? Those are not comparable examples. They are two very different situation. None the less I would say yes. With China it is much more difficult to do but I would encourage people to buy less sweat shop made products from all parts of the world especially China who also has a less tan stelar human rights record. I try to buy clothes not made in sweat shops. I do buy electronics from China. It is quite hard not to but every bit helps.
With Israel it is easier to do and also can be much more effective because the genocide they are perpetrating would not be possible without the extensive propaganda campaign they run and the continued indifference (due to ignorance) in much of the world. BDS can bring awareness as well as economic hardship. That is why the Israeli government is so scared of BDS that they go to great lengths to stop it around the world. Here in Canada my provincial government in addition to the federal government as come out against BDS under pressure from lobbyists.
China doesn't give two shits if the US doesn't support its actions in Tibet. Israel does care about perception around Palestine. Israel could not continue whit its acts of aggression, war crimes and continued abuse of international law without US support.
BDS has the power to do even more than boycotts did in South Africa. 2. What are your thoughts and proposals regarding (a) people travelling to or via Israel; Try not to. If you have to, spend as little as possible and stay in Palestine. (b) the stance to be taken towards Israeli creatives and their artwork; If the creatives don't stand up against the Israeli government then don't support the creatives. (c) and the treatment of Israeli exports? Don't buy them.If boycotts don't work why does the Israeli government put so much effort into stopping them?
In addition to BDS, I would suggest asking for a meeting with your elected representatives to ask them what they are doing to stop the human rights abuses in Palestine. People don't usually take the time to write and ask for meetings so if several people do on a single issue it may have an impact. I have met with my PM and will continue to hound him until he takes action or looses his seat.
Just as an FYI I likely won't read any long winded replies. Life is too short. If you have honest questions happy to try to help. Shoot me a DM.
|
|
|
met
Junior Member
Posts • 2,782
Likes • 6,706
June 2009
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by met on Jun 17, 2018 6:32:45 GMT 1, Hey Met, I suspect with all your talk you really have no interest in challenging your own beliefs but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt once and answer your questions since it seems others are tired of responding. 1. Would you also be comfortable publicly calling upon everyone in the art world to boycott anything, say, Chinese? Those are not comparable examples. They are two very different situation. None the less I would say yes. With China it is much more difficult to do but I would encourage people to buy less sweat shop made products from all parts of the world especially China who also has a less tan stelar human rights record. I try to buy clothes not made in sweat shops. I do buy electronics from China. It is quite hard not to but every bit helps.
With Israel it is easier to do and also can be much more effective because the genocide they are perpetrating would not be possible without the extensive propaganda campaign they run and the continued indifference (due to ignorance) in much of the world. BDS can bring awareness as well as economic hardship. That is why the Israeli government is so scared of BDS that they go to great lengths to stop it around the world. Here in Canada my provincial government in addition to the federal government as come out against BDS under pressure from lobbyists.
China doesn't give twos**ts if the US doesn't support its actions in Tibet. Israel does care about perception around Palestine. Israel could not continue whit its acts of aggression, war crimes and continued abuse of international law without US support.
BDS has the power to do even more than boycotts did in South Africa. 2. What are your thoughts and proposals regarding (a) people travelling to or via Israel; Try not to. If you have to, spend as little as possible and stay in Palestine. (b) the stance to be taken towards Israeli creatives and their artwork; If the creatives don't stand up against the Israeli government then don't support the creatives. (c) and the treatment of Israeli exports? Don't buy them.If boycotts don't work why does the Israeli government put so much effort into stopping them?
In addition to BDS, I would suggest asking for a meeting with your elected representatives to ask them what they are doing to stop the human rights abuses in Palestine. People don't usually take the time to write and ask for meetings so if several people do on a single issue it may have an impact. I have met with my PM and will continue to hound him until he takes action or looses his seat.
Just as an FYI I likely won't read any long winded replies. Life is too short. If you have honest questions happy to try to help. Shoot me a DM.
Thanks for this, mmmike.
You've got me wrong regarding challenging my own beliefs, but the effort made with your response is much appreciated. I'll read it through once again more carefully and give it further thought.
[As for long-winded replies, your position is completely understood. When I see walls of text, I often find them off-putting too. But I also think they're critical. Complex issues cannot be adequately dealt with in tweet-length exchanges. That doesn't allow for context, nuance or qualifications. What you then typically get is assertions instead of reasoned arguments backed by evidence. This in turn promotes misunderstanding and polarisation. It can actually discourage discussion — especially if opposing sides aren't even aware there may be common ground between them. To my mind, the general shortening of attention spans is a real threat to our social fabric.
Separately, much obliged for the invitation to direct message you with any questions. That said, the value of this forum to me (and its potential benefit to others) lies in the public exchange of information, ideas and opinions. Partly as well for want of time, when I'm here I therefore try to avoid private messaging, in favour of my priority: open debate and transparency.]
Hey Met, I suspect with all your talk you really have no interest in challenging your own beliefs but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt once and answer your questions since it seems others are tired of responding. 1. Would you also be comfortable publicly calling upon everyone in the art world to boycott anything, say, Chinese? Those are not comparable examples. They are two very different situation. None the less I would say yes. With China it is much more difficult to do but I would encourage people to buy less sweat shop made products from all parts of the world especially China who also has a less tan stelar human rights record. I try to buy clothes not made in sweat shops. I do buy electronics from China. It is quite hard not to but every bit helps.
With Israel it is easier to do and also can be much more effective because the genocide they are perpetrating would not be possible without the extensive propaganda campaign they run and the continued indifference (due to ignorance) in much of the world. BDS can bring awareness as well as economic hardship. That is why the Israeli government is so scared of BDS that they go to great lengths to stop it around the world. Here in Canada my provincial government in addition to the federal government as come out against BDS under pressure from lobbyists.
China doesn't give twos**ts if the US doesn't support its actions in Tibet. Israel does care about perception around Palestine. Israel could not continue whit its acts of aggression, war crimes and continued abuse of international law without US support.
BDS has the power to do even more than boycotts did in South Africa. 2. What are your thoughts and proposals regarding (a) people travelling to or via Israel; Try not to. If you have to, spend as little as possible and stay in Palestine. (b) the stance to be taken towards Israeli creatives and their artwork; If the creatives don't stand up against the Israeli government then don't support the creatives. (c) and the treatment of Israeli exports? Don't buy them.If boycotts don't work why does the Israeli government put so much effort into stopping them?
In addition to BDS, I would suggest asking for a meeting with your elected representatives to ask them what they are doing to stop the human rights abuses in Palestine. People don't usually take the time to write and ask for meetings so if several people do on a single issue it may have an impact. I have met with my PM and will continue to hound him until he takes action or looses his seat.
Just as an FYI I likely won't read any long winded replies. Life is too short. If you have honest questions happy to try to help. Shoot me a DM.
Thanks for this, mmmike. You've got me wrong regarding challenging my own beliefs, but the effort made with your response is much appreciated. I'll read it through once again more carefully and give it further thought. [As for long-winded replies, your position is completely understood. When I see walls of text, I often find them off-putting too. But I also think they're critical. Complex issues cannot be adequately dealt with in tweet-length exchanges. That doesn't allow for context, nuance or qualifications. What you then typically get is assertions instead of reasoned arguments backed by evidence. This in turn promotes misunderstanding and polarisation. It can actually discourage discussion — especially if opposing sides aren't even aware there may be common ground between them. To my mind, the general shortening of attention spans is a real threat to our social fabric. Separately, much obliged for the invitation to direct message you with any questions. That said, the value of this forum to me (and its potential benefit to others) lies in the public exchange of information, ideas and opinions. Partly as well for want of time, when I'm here I therefore try to avoid private messaging, in favour of my priority: open debate and transparency.]
|
|
rbk
New Member
Posts • 196
Likes • 168
March 2015
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by rbk on Jun 17, 2018 7:28:14 GMT 1, £100 on met not answering this, any takers? Allow me to try drawing you in further. If you wish to limit your input to sniping from the sidelines and then running away, that isn't a problem for me. I'll understand, and no hard feelings. But if you believe it's preferable — and more respectful of the subject being discussed — to have a genuine dialogue instead, then I'd very much welcome this from you. __________ swissmade once again distorted my words and attributed to me a position which isn't mine. Now, as a rhetorical technique, straw man arguments can be highly effective if an audience is a bit slow off the mark. But the simple antidote (allowing the deceit to be recognised) is just to read and pay attention. People who resort to such tactics are primarily interested in giving the appearance of "winning" a debate or shouting down alternative viewpoints. That approach is fundamentally different to my own. As mentioned previously, the concern for me is to discover (to the extent possible) what can be described as the truth or truths. This can easily mean acknowledging somebody else's arguments are more persuasive. And if it requires me to discard previously-held opinions and beliefs (for example, because they turned out to be based on falsehoods, or incomplete facts, or prejudice rather than reason), then the sooner that happens, the better. __________ In case you do have the courage to stick your head above the parapet, let's return to the actual subject. We should also resist dishonest attempts to shift focus away from this subject before fully thinking it through: kalm expressed a hope that everyone in the art world "boycotts anything Israeli". For emphasis, that is the very specific and restricted point I challenged him on. I feel a need to repeat this because of the way my challenge has already been misrepresented, whether cynically or just mistakenly. So the question, rbk, is whether you share his position. Do you also hope that everyone in the art world boycotts anything Israeli? If that isn't your hope — or not quite your hope — then I'm unaware of any disagreement between us on the matter.
F’in hell you do like the sound of your own voice don’t you!! Interesting you brought the Chinese into it...........quite Trump like if I may say so!!😂😂I do not however recall the Chinese shooting hundred of people recently
The bit your missing on the point of a complete Isreali product boycott is how many “Western Products” that would involve. This is something you might want to spend your time researching. If widely in place an Israeli boycott could seemany big Western Tech & consumer Elec companies having there products boycotted causing them to change and also put pressure on the economic status & therefore pressure on the state of Israel.
Just as artists etc may also produce art and ask questions of the state. Generally artists are pretty good at asking questions and making political points.
not Bothered in stating my own opinion. As the key point is really whether a boycott or boycotts have an effect.
It is pretty well documented that boycotts or state sanctions do have an effect. So if you want change they do seem to be quite an effective tool.
So I suppose the real question is why would such an effective tool not be used. This topic was about Israel so should not be disrupted by a long list of other countries and topics. However if the action was too be successful as it was with apartied one can always move on to another country/cause
Your welcome to retort. But I’ll not bother to respond as think made my point in one short post as opposed to taking of the whole page.
Thx moving on
£100 on met not answering this, any takers? Allow me to try drawing you in further. If you wish to limit your input to sniping from the sidelines and then running away, that isn't a problem for me. I'll understand, and no hard feelings. But if you believe it's preferable — and more respectful of the subject being discussed — to have a genuine dialogue instead, then I'd very much welcome this from you. __________ swissmade once again distorted my words and attributed to me a position which isn't mine. Now, as a rhetorical technique, straw man arguments can be highly effective if an audience is a bit slow off the mark. But the simple antidote (allowing the deceit to be recognised) is just to read and pay attention. People who resort to such tactics are primarily interested in giving the appearance of "winning" a debate or shouting down alternative viewpoints. That approach is fundamentally different to my own. As mentioned previously, the concern for me is to discover (to the extent possible) what can be described as the truth or truths. This can easily mean acknowledging somebody else's arguments are more persuasive. And if it requires me to discard previously-held opinions and beliefs (for example, because they turned out to be based on falsehoods, or incomplete facts, or prejudice rather than reason), then the sooner that happens, the better. __________ In case you do have the courage to stick your head above the parapet, let's return to the actual subject. We should also resist dishonest attempts to shift focus away from this subject before fully thinking it through: kalm expressed a hope that everyone in the art world "boycotts anything Israeli". For emphasis, that is the very specific and restricted point I challenged him on. I feel a need to repeat this because of the way my challenge has already been misrepresented, whether cynically or just mistakenly. So the question, rbk, is whether you share his position. Do you also hope that everyone in the art world boycotts anything Israeli? If that isn't your hope — or not quite your hope — then I'm unaware of any disagreement between us on the matter. F’in hell you do like the sound of your own voice don’t you!! Interesting you brought the Chinese into it...........quite Trump like if I may say so!!😂😂I do not however recall the Chinese shooting hundred of people recently The bit your missing on the point of a complete Isreali product boycott is how many “Western Products” that would involve. This is something you might want to spend your time researching. If widely in place an Israeli boycott could seemany big Western Tech & consumer Elec companies having there products boycotted causing them to change and also put pressure on the economic status & therefore pressure on the state of Israel. Just as artists etc may also produce art and ask questions of the state. Generally artists are pretty good at asking questions and making political points. not Bothered in stating my own opinion. As the key point is really whether a boycott or boycotts have an effect. It is pretty well documented that boycotts or state sanctions do have an effect. So if you want change they do seem to be quite an effective tool. So I suppose the real question is why would such an effective tool not be used. This topic was about Israel so should not be disrupted by a long list of other countries and topics. However if the action was too be successful as it was with apartied one can always move on to another country/cause Your welcome to retort. But I’ll not bother to respond as think made my point in one short post as opposed to taking of the whole page. Thx moving on
|
|
Deleted
Posts • 0
Likes •
January 1970
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by Deleted on Jun 17, 2018 10:01:17 GMT 1, Please don't forget the big ghetto wall jailing men women and Children.
Please don't forget the big ghetto wall jailing men women and Children.
|
|
Masong
Junior Member
Posts • 2,204
Likes • 2,842
Member is Online
March 2017
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by Masong on Jun 17, 2018 10:30:37 GMT 1, Where’s Ahmad when you need him
Where’s Ahmad when you need him
|
|
irl1
Full Member
Posts • 9,274
Likes • 9,381
December 2017
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by irl1 on Jun 17, 2018 11:27:11 GMT 1,
|
|
irl1
Full Member
Posts • 9,274
Likes • 9,381
December 2017
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by irl1 on Jun 17, 2018 11:28:10 GMT 1, Just to remind you all while your having your chat
Just to remind you all while your having your chat
|
|
cmc
New Member
Posts • 380
Likes • 279
July 2013
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by cmc on Jun 17, 2018 13:03:49 GMT 1, #freePalestine As an American, I am very disheartened at Israel’s seemingly lawless ways. They need to be held accountable for murdering children and press in an international court of law. I really hope every one in the art world boycotts anything Israeli until they stop the senseless bloodshed. When it comes to human rights, there's no room for complacency. __________ Thinking aloud here, perhaps you and I can work together on this. Maybe by starting a Change.org petition. But one thing that's important is to avoid appearing biased or blinkered. This would weaken the legitimacy of our case. Care must be taken to ensure consistency in approach (as well as in our own outrage). And so, when we accuse Israel of acting in a manner that violates our core values, we also need to check the yardstick we're using is one we're comfortable applying across the board. You see, I don't wish to hand over ammunition to our enemies. It would be awkward if they could undermine the petition — for example, by claiming the standard we hold Israel to is different to the one by which we judge other nations. Consequently, what I've done for us is sift through recent data (2016–2017) on the human rights situation in countries around the world. My sources were Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Freedom House, and the Verisk Maplecroft Human Rights Risk Index (HRRI). The HRRI looks at multiple types of human rights violations by the state or private security. These include extrajudicial executions; disappearances; torture and inhumane treatment; deaths in custody; prisoners of conscience; unfair trials; detention without charge or trial; sentences of death; and abuses by armed opposition groups. Through a points system, countries are categorised as Extreme risk, High risk, Medium risk, Low risk, or No data. In 2017 (Q4), Israel was classed Medium risk and the Palestinian territories (or possibly just the West Bank) were High risk. It would be very tempting (and easier) to focus our petition exclusively on Israel. However, as referred to above, I fear this would expose us to accusations of applying double standards. The added risk is that we might then be mistaken for being patronising (maybe even a bit racist) towards all of the black, brown and yellow people living in places where they don't really "get" the idea of human rights. __________ What I therefore suggest is we broaden our petition to include all countries listed by the HRRI as Extreme risk and High risk. Here's some draft text I've come up with for Change.org: "The countries below are guilty of serious human rights violations. We, kalm and met, are disheartened by their seemingly lawless ways.
We hereby call upon everyone in the art world to boycott anything Libya, Sudan, Eritrea, Somalia, South Sudan, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, Myanmar, North Korea, >>> Israel <<<, Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Surinam, Brazil, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Paraguay, Argentina, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad, Senegal, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Côte d'Ivoire, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Togo, Benin, Nigeria, Cameroon, Gabon, Republic of the Congo, Angola, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Swaziland, Madagascar, Tanzania, Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti, Egypt, Kosovo, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, India, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh, Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Philippines, and Papua New Guinea.
Thank you."If you have proposed amendments (or if I accidentally left out some countries), just let me know.
You forgot the USA
#freePalestine As an American, I am very disheartened at Israel’s seemingly lawless ways. They need to be held accountable for murdering children and press in an international court of law. I really hope every one in the art world boycotts anything Israeli until they stop the senseless bloodshed. When it comes to human rights, there's no room for complacency. __________ Thinking aloud here, perhaps you and I can work together on this. Maybe by starting a Change.org petition. But one thing that's important is to avoid appearing biased or blinkered. This would weaken the legitimacy of our case. Care must be taken to ensure consistency in approach (as well as in our own outrage). And so, when we accuse Israel of acting in a manner that violates our core values, we also need to check the yardstick we're using is one we're comfortable applying across the board. You see, I don't wish to hand over ammunition to our enemies. It would be awkward if they could undermine the petition — for example, by claiming the standard we hold Israel to is different to the one by which we judge other nations. Consequently, what I've done for us is sift through recent data (2016–2017) on the human rights situation in countries around the world. My sources were Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Freedom House, and the Verisk Maplecroft Human Rights Risk Index (HRRI). The HRRI looks at multiple types of human rights violations by the state or private security. These include extrajudicial executions; disappearances; torture and inhumane treatment; deaths in custody; prisoners of conscience; unfair trials; detention without charge or trial; sentences of death; and abuses by armed opposition groups. Through a points system, countries are categorised as Extreme risk, High risk, Medium risk, Low risk, or No data. In 2017 (Q4), Israel was classed Medium risk and the Palestinian territories (or possibly just the West Bank) were High risk. It would be very tempting (and easier) to focus our petition exclusively on Israel. However, as referred to above, I fear this would expose us to accusations of applying double standards. The added risk is that we might then be mistaken for being patronising (maybe even a bit racist) towards all of the black, brown and yellow people living in places where they don't really "get" the idea of human rights. __________ What I therefore suggest is we broaden our petition to include all countries listed by the HRRI as Extreme risk and High risk. Here's some draft text I've come up with for Change.org: "The countries below are guilty of serious human rights violations. We, kalm and met, are disheartened by their seemingly lawless ways.
We hereby call upon everyone in the art world to boycott anything Libya, Sudan, Eritrea, Somalia, South Sudan, Central African Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, China, Myanmar, North Korea, >>> Israel <<<, Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Surinam, Brazil, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Paraguay, Argentina, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Mauritania, Mali, Niger, Chad, Senegal, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Côte d'Ivoire, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Togo, Benin, Nigeria, Cameroon, Gabon, Republic of the Congo, Angola, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Swaziland, Madagascar, Tanzania, Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda, Kenya, Ethiopia, Djibouti, Egypt, Kosovo, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Moldova, Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, India, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bangladesh, Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Philippines, and Papua New Guinea.
Thank you."If you have proposed amendments (or if I accidentally left out some countries), just let me know. You forgot the USA
|
|
|
Banksy • Box Set, Walled Off Hotel, by Kevin Anderson on Jun 17, 2018 14:19:05 GMT 1, This banter really needs its own thread.
This banter really needs its own thread.
|
|