Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site spar.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!spar!ellis
From: ellis@spar.UUCP (Michael Ellis)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Rich has a point there..
Message-ID: <554@spar.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 30-Sep-85 21:14:08 EDT
Article-I.D.: spar.554
Posted: Mon Sep 30 21:14:08 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 3-Oct-85 05:06:49 EDT
References: <460@ecsvax.UUCP> <1753@pyuxd.UUCP> <1666@umcp-cs.UUCP> <1787@pyuxd.UUCP>
Reply-To: ellis@spar.UUCP (Michael Ellis)
Organization: Schlumberger Palo Alto Research, CA
Lines: 40

>>>"Hmmm, Darwinism talks about survival of the fittest.  Obviously my Aryan
>>>race is superior and more fit than those Jews, who cause all our problems.
>>>(An example of a proven scientific fact that introduced a "horror of
>>>science"?)  The obvious thing to do is to purify the Aryan race and get
>>>rid of the Jews!"  Let's get serious, really.  [Rich?]

>> Well, you for one are not so pure. [Charles????]

>It is because of foul crap like this that it is likely you will not see me
>respond to the obnoxious Wingate in the future.  Doubtless he will call this
>a "victory".  Good for him.  Notice that his "victory" consisted of his not
>in any way responding to what I said in the previous paragraph.  That the
>"horrors" that Gary Smith spoke of come not from science but from
>application of scientific facts by people who add in other bogus
>assumptions, such as the one I described.  I take Charles' silence (outside
>of his stupid remark--is he saying I'm not pure because I'm Jewish, reliving
>his anti-Semitic remarks of the past?---hard to tell WHAT it is he means) to
>mean that he has nothing constructive to say about that issue.  I am forced
>to interpret that silence as concurrence.  I not that Wingate is often
>silent (again, with the exception of some snotty remark) after I and others
>say things he seems to have no answer for. [Rich]

    As a person who has frequently clashed with Rich Rosen in this forum,
    I FIRMLY SUPPORT RICH'S INSISTENCE THAT ANTI-SEMITIC REMARKS HAVE NO
    PLACE IN NET.PHILOSOPHY -- OR ANYWHERE ELSE FOR THAT MATTER.

    In Charles' defense, his original remark is quite ambiguous --
    furthermore, I have never had any reason to doubt his honor or
    good will towards all humans, regardless of cultural or ancestral
    backgrounds.

    The problem here is that regardless of Charles' intent, his
    philosophically empty remark is liable to the vilest misinterpretation
    (unlike the innocuous silliness of Rosenisms like "You betchum Red
    Rider"). We must not unknowingly encourage future propaganda from
    members of hate groups.
  
    I respectfully urge Charles to clarify his potentially dangerous remark.

-michael