Jump to content

Talk:Medea Benjamin

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Stonewhite (talk | contribs) at 10:49, 2 May 2012. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconBiography: Politics and Government Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the politics and government work group.
WikiProject iconAnti-war B‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Anti-war, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the anti-war movement on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WTO and arrests

Benjamin disputes the statement that she wanted anyone arrested here. Kellen T 17:46, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism by Horowitz

I understand the validity of mentioning David Horowitz's criticism of Benjamin. However, since Horowitz makes it his job to accuse virtually all leftists as being Communist sympathizers, I wonder how one makes a determination to include his criticisms and at what length? Does he get a nice long paragraph in the entry for every prominent proponent of universal health care, lifting the embargo on Cuba or ending the US occupation of Iraq?

We need some representative criticism of her from the right. If we could get a better source than Horowitz, that would be great, for the reasons you mention. But a quick google doesn't turn anything else up. Unfortunately, since Horowitz maintains DiscoverTheNetwork and FrontPageMag to criticize specific leftists, he's often the only rightwinger with any specific criticisms of people or organizations, at least online. Kalkin 18:45, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The section in question is titled "Criticism of leftist views" - are the views cited "leftist", or are they just to the left of Horowitz? The section states as fact that "Benjamin is unpopular among conservatives" - yet only one conservative citation can be found, according to Kalkin. Her views are described as "perceived anti-American" and then a Horowitz list of such dreadful, "anti-American" views as siding with the US Congress against aid to the Contras and siding with the majority of Americans by supporting universal health care is provided. I've edited out "anti-American" as baseless even with the adjective "perceived" lest this section seem more McCarthyite than encyclopedic. I happen to share with John Quincy Adams the belief that the US does not go abroad to seek monsters to destroy, but I don't see Bush and Cheney tarred with the anti-American brush on their wikipages. (I admit that I didn't check - if Bush and Cheney are, in fact, named as "perceived anti-American" on their wikipages, please feel free to revert that portion of my edit.) Biederman 22:28, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Money?

On Fox news they called her a trust fund baby. True? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.206.165.32 (talkcontribs)

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me here. -- Jreferee 20:00, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:American anti-Iraq War activists

User:Thoughtman keeps removing this article from Category:American anti-Iraq War activists.

A person qualifies for the category if she (a) is opposed to the war in Iraq and (b) is an American residing in America who has said publicly either that (i) she believes that the Iraq War was illegal from the beginning or (ii) she believes that the Iraq War is being waged imprudently and she has become publicly known as a critic of the war or the justifications used to launch it.

This article is largely made up of instances of Benjamin's public protests against the war in Iraq. In my view, she clearly satisfies the criteria for inclusion in the category. What do other editors think? — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 03:19, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I think you're right. At one point I supported the removal because Benjamin is not only opposed to the Iraq War, but more generally antiwar. However, looking at the category description, I don't think that matters, and looking at the current population of the category, she's far from alone. Kalkin (talk) 13:14, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I agree as well - this is an appropriate category. Kelly hi! 13:17, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not an appropriate category and the only reason others like her are on there is because of Shabazz! --Thoughtman (talk) 17:14, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are nearly 100 articles in that category, and I've only edited three of them. Surely you've got a better argument than "It's Shabazz's fault". — [[::User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] ([[::User talk:Malik Shabazz|talk]] · [[::Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|contribs]]) 17:29, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
How about an argument as to why it's not an appropriate category? You're not being persuasive so far. Kalkin (talk) 20:51, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Halloween White House protest

For those with issues over the white house taunting reference, it's not a text reference -- the Reuters photo clearly shows Benjamin in costume at the gate of the White House. Can't get much more clear than a photo of the person being discussed doing the thing being discussed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.54.77.14 (talk) 16:22, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I looked - the source does not identify her, nor does it look like her as far as I can tell. Considering this is a biography of a living person, where the standards for verifiability are VERY strict, do not re-add this information unless you can provide better sourcing for her presence. SchuminWeb (Talk) 23:03, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Look at the video - It's very clearly her. Her group announced the protest, she describes what they were going to do in the press release, and she clearly identifies what costumes were going to be worn. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.54.79.148 (talk) 14:18, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Politician?

From the first sentence of the article: "Medea Benjamin (born Susan Benjamin on September 10, 1952) is an American politician, and political activist, famous for...."

She has dabbled in politics, but I wouldn't characterize her as a politician. "Political Activist" is more accurate. She's never held a political office. She has run for several offices, but like most third party candidates, she's not running with an expectation/hope/plan of winning the election. The description in the first sentence of the article should probably be changed. At a minimum, "politician" should not be used as the first characterization of her. Maybe move it somewhere else in the introduction? Strike it altogether?

Examples: Is Ross Perot a politician? I think businessman is more accurate. Ralph Nader? Consumer advocate.

I'll concede that using the same logic, Bill Clinton would be called a lawyer; George H.W. Bush would be called a businessman...but we must consider, and factor what they're *best* known for. --Lacarids (talk) 02:23, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think striking "politician" entirely is probably a good idea, and I have done so. SchuminWeb (Talk) 11:49, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]