User talk:The Four Deuces

Antifa Dispute.

Hey to stop the back and forth I created a dispute resolution here. [1] 3Kingdoms (talk) 19:30, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Strategic Intelligence Assessment and Data on Domestic Terrorism

https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/fbi-dhs-domestic-terrorism-strategic-report.pdf/view

Starting on page 29 is a list of FBI Designated Significant Terrorism Incidents fr 2015-2019. Not only is Hodgekinson obviously on the list but the still labeled work place shooting at Ft Hood is on the list along with a few others missing from the left wing terrorism page which still appears as if left wing terrorism all but ended.

And fwiw cabal is not an anti semitic trope-when in doubt consult the ADL-whom do not consider it as such

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:46:c801:b1f0:5113:f20a:ffb:99aa (talk • contribs) 20:01, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Just because the ADL has not listed a term as a trope, does not mean it is not a trope. You don't seem to understand that a trope is not a term that always has bigoted connotations but takes on connotations depending on context. So while talking about Corbyn's insiders may not be a trope, it becomes a trope in the context of talking about "globalists and bankers." Bigots use these terms because it gives them plausible deniability. They can say for example that a British MP used the term and he's not a bigot. They are able to convey to other anti-Semites that they are talking about Jews without actually mentioning them directly.

Don't know why you want me to read a report from a police department. Best to stick to reliable secondary sources since articles are supposed to be based on them.

Also, can you please sign your posts. I have better things to do than to sign them for you.

TFD (talk) 21:05, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Of course I understand that. That page is a hyper partisan disaster. There are obviously huge similarities between critical social theory and critical race theory. That page mentions race once in passing. "Critical race theory is a practice. It's an approach to grappling with a history of White supremacy that rejects the belief that what's in the past is in the past, and that the laws and systems that grow from that past are detached from it," Critical race theorists believe that racism is an everyday experience for most people of color, and that a large part of society has no interest in doing away with it because it benefits White elites.

Many also believe that American institutions are racist and that people are privileged or oppressed because of their race. https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/01/us/critical-race-theory-explainer-trnd/index.html

Critical theory (also capitalized as Critical Theory)[1] is a Marxist approach to social philosophy that focuses on reflective assessment and critique of society and culture in order to reveal and challenge power structures. With origins in sociology and literary criticism, it argues that social problems are influenced and created more by societal structures and cultural assumptions than by individual and psychological factors. Maintaining that ideology is the principal obstacle to human liberation,[2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_theory

They both further to go on to argue peoples fates are dependent on societal biases.

Almost identical or anyone calling critical race theory culturally Marxist would be right on the money anyone calling it cultural Marxism is a bigot! Thank you for your time.2601:46:C801:B1F0:ADA1:DB59:BFCA:6D52 (talk) 05:33, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Community Sanctions Alert

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date. You have shown interest in Uyghur genocide. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has enacted a more stringent set of rules. Any administrator may impose sanctions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic. For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

Template:Z33 — Mikehawk10 (talk) 23:01, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

RfC bias?

Hello again! You recently said that the RfC prompt I wrote was biased. I don't understand what you mean, but I'd certainly be willing to think about it if you were willing to identify more specifically what you thought was biased. Anyhow, cheerio! Benevolent human (talk) 00:13, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

A concise, neutral RfC would read: "Should Omar's alleged stereotyping of American Jews be mentioned in the lead?"

You begin by saying that while the previous RfC failed because of lack of continuing news coverage, that had now been met. You then provide evidence to support your position. You even state as a fact in the second sentence that Omar stereotyped Jews. An editor who wanted to exclude this information would not have phrased the RfC this way.

TFD (talk) 03:47, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Actually, I think you're right. Some of the other RfC prompts are also pretty long, like this one which I was comparing it with in my head, but they don't have evidence for or against in the position in the RfC prompt itself, they put that below. Benevolent human (talk) 03:25, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for saying that. What I do is after writing a brief, neutral question is make sure I am the first to answer it. You could have done that by using the wording I suggested and putting the rest of it into your vote. Also, it's helpful to set up a separate discussion section. A lot of discussion in the survey/vote section discourages editors from voting.

It looks like the the anti-Semitism accusations against AOC, Omar and Tlaib never really went anywhere. That surprised me because they had been used extensively in the UK against Jeremy Corbyn. You'll avoid a lot of conflict if you accept that it's not up to Wikipedia editors to decide what is important but merely to summarize what is considered important in the body of reliable sources. If the only interest is in Israeli and U.S. Jewish publications, then it lacks weight for inclusion until major U.S. media decide to pick up on it.

Bear in mind that all of us have our own opinions about what is important and that partly explains why different people rely on different news sources. If we were to decide what was important based on our own opinions, there would never be consensus. Americans today are polarized and mainstream media including Fox News represent a small minority of public opinion with most people being either to the left or right of their views. You have to decide whether or not you are willing to work within that.

TFD (talk) 04:00, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Invalid RfC closure?

I reverted your RfC closure because I thought the rule was it needed to be closed by an uninvolved editor? Feel free to {ping} me if you want to discuss. Anyhow, I left a message on the talk page of an arbcom member to ask advice for what we should do: User_talk:CaptainEek#Scope_of_ARBPIA. Benevolent human (talk) 14:32, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Benevolent human, since I haven't contributed to the RfC, I believe I am am uninvolved. There is nothing however to stop you from closing the RfC and moving your request to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification and Amendment. That is the only place where ARBCOM issues can we decided. TFD (talk) 14:43, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Benevolent human, if you do file a clarification request, I would appreciate being notified or named as a party. If you don't intend to, I would similarly appreciate knowing so. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 14:49, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

TFD, just FYI: in your ARCA statement, you linked a few times to Ilhan Omar where you almost certainly meant to link Talk:Ilhan Omar, and it means the section links aren't working. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 18:24, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. Now corrected. TFD (talk) 18:28, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Warning

I'm gravely concerned with your recent policy violation, and would encourage you to correct your behavior. Benevolent human (talk) 16:32, 17 June 2021 (UTC)