LWDT VI: Kropotkin's Bread Dead Redemption.

[Torrocca]

Seems my sarcasm's made someone uncomfortable :^)

Your unprovoked sarcasm implies a hint of truth within it :^)

When I say, "no genocide," that's code for, "please genocide white people in South Africa!" :^3

[Proctopeo]

Your unprovoked sarcasm implies a hint of truth within it :^)

When I say, "no genocide," that's code for, "please genocide white people in South Africa!" :^3

When you say it snarkily without a valid provocation, it very well might be :^)

[Torrocca]

When I say, "no genocide," that's code for, "please genocide white people in South Africa!" :^3

When you say it snarkily without a valid provocation, it very well might be :^)

Only if you can actually prove I support genocide, that is :^)

[Liriena]

I stopped reading when I realized that he was just regurgitating the same old white supremacist propaganda about the (false) genocidal peril supposedly faced by white South Africans today.

They're definitely on a direct course to full-on genocide

First of all, your own source kinda disagrees with you.

One of the false uses of Genocide Watch's model for genocide prediction is the claim by some South
Africans, racists in the United States (like the mass killer in Charleston and David Duke), and a few South
African expatriates, that South Africa is undergoing a "white genocide." Genocide Watch has never said
"white genocide" is underway in South Africa and in fact South Africa is not even close to stage nine,
which would legally be called genocide. Hate crimes fall short of genocide.

Also...

https://africacheck.org/2016/09/15/anal ... thodology/

However, the theory has its shortcomings, according to experts in the field of forecasting and genocide studies.

The theory behind the Ten Stages of Genocide is limited in its “reliance on a set of strong assumptions about the process by which mass atrocities unfold”, according to political forecaster and independent consultant in the US, Jay Ulfelder.

“Genocide Watch’s framework codifies narratives about how genocide emerged in a few archetypal cases, including the Holocaust and Rwanda in 1994.”

The organisation’s theory of genocide is based on a limited number of cases where genocide or violence of that nature did occur, according to research director of the World Peace Foundation and lead researcher on the Mass Atrocities Research Program, Bridget Conley-Zilkic.

She said that when analysts only compare instances where genocide occurred, they come up with “warning signs” that they treat as unique to the lead up of genocide. However, these “warning signs” occur in many countries where they do not produce or lead to large-scale killings or genocide.

The methodology used to rank countries is also a concern.

“One of the general challenges with these types of rankings is that the specific ranking method is often not made publicly available,” associate professor at the University of Notre Dame’s political science department, Ernesto Verdeja, told Africa Check.

“So, we get a broad outline of a model, with the various stage, ‘indicators’, and the like, but we don’t necessarily know how the in-house analysts interpret information in light of those indicators.”

We asked Stanton about Genocide Watch’s “in-house” interpretations used to determine South Africa’s ranking.

South Africa’s stage 6 ranking has a very detailed description. At this stage, the organisation claims that “extremists drive the groups apart”, “hate groups broadcast polarising propaganda”, “extremist terrorism targets moderates”, “moderates from the perpetrators’ own group…are the first to be arrested and killed”, “leaders in targeted groups are the next to be arrested and murdered”, “laws erode fundamental civil rights and liberties” and “targeted groups are disarmed to make them incapable of self-defense”.

Stanton told Africa Check that these “qualitative indicators” were based on news reports and direct reports from people of all races and groups in South Africa. He said that he made the final determination of a country’s ranking after consulting with Genocide Watch’s interns and its board of advisors.

We had a lot of questions. How did Genocide Watch determine that South Africa met the stage 6 description? What events in the country ticked these boxes? What sources in particular were used?

We put these questions to Stanton but didn’t get answers.

He wrote back saying that “evidently you are treating our descriptions of each stage as separate sentences that can be added up as factors. That is a complete misunderstanding of our model.”

But if the Ten Stages of Genocide’s explicit and detailed descriptions are not used to determine the ranking… then what is? At this stage, it’s not clear.

The Atrocity Forecasting Project, based at Australia’s University of Sydney, uses a statistical model to forecast mass atrocities and genocide around the world.

It takes a number of factors into account, including ethnic divisions, infant mortality rates, political institutions, elections, recent regime change, assassinations, conflicts in neighbouring states and the use of guerrilla war tactics.

The most recent findings gave South Africa a very low risk of genocide or politicide onset for the period 2016-2020, the project’s chief investigator, Benjamin Goldsmith, told Africa Check.

South Africa was ranked 110th out of the 149 studied countries, between Australia and the Slovak Republic.

“While there may be serious and troubling communal violence in South Africa (for example against immigrants from other parts of Africa), according to our model it is not at high risk of the onset of genocidal violence, and has not been at high risk in recent years, either,” said Goldsmith.

“That’s our best estimate.”

“Some people might ask, does it matter if a place is mistakenly identified as at risk? Wouldn’t the extra attention be good in any case?” Conley-Zilkic asked in an email to Africa Check.

“I am torn on this, tending to worry that the framework can do harm.”

She suggests that Genocide Watch’s ranking, and the interventions it proposes, may make it more difficult to identify and solve pressing problems in a country.

“South Africa has an enormously high homicide rate. The ‘genocide’ framework is unlikely to help improve this matter, which is a real and present threat of lethal violence in the country.”

Genocide Watch’s intentions for predicting, preventing, stopping, and punishing genocide and other forms of mass murder are admirable. But the tool they use to advance this work – the Ten Stages of Genocide – is thin on transparency.

The organisation’s president was not prepared to provide the sources or methodology he used to determine a country’s ranking. Neither would he pinpoint the events in South Africa that met the detailed description of stage 6.

Genocide Watch’s credibility takes a knock without answers to these simple questions.

[Pasong Tirad]

I stopped reading when I realized that he was just regurgitating the same old white supremacist propaganda about the (false) genocidal peril supposedly faced by white South Africans today.

They're definitely on a direct course to full-on genocide instead of just pulling a Zimbabwe and starving themselves out of racism. Time will tell if they actually go the full nine yards, or stop cold once food shortages start to kick in. But it's definitely worth keeping an eye out for. Don't just jam your fingers in your ears.

https://africacheck.org/2016/09/15/anal ... thodology/

The theory behind the Ten Stages of Genocide is limited in its “reliance on a set of strong assumptions about the process by which mass atrocities unfold”, according to political forecaster and independent consultant in the US, Jay Ulfelder.

She said that when analysts only compare instances where genocide occurred, they come up with “warning signs” that they treat as unique to the lead up of genocide. However, these “warning signs” occur in many countries where they do not produce or lead to large-scale killings or genocide.

The methodology used to rank countries is also a concern.

“One of the general challenges with these types of rankings is that the specific ranking method is often not made publicly available,” associate professor at the University of Notre Dame’s political science department, Ernesto Verdeja, told Africa Check.

“So, we get a broad outline of a model, with the various stage, ‘indicators’, and the like, but we don’t necessarily know how the in-house analysts interpret information in light of those indicators.”

South Africa’s stage 6 ranking has a very detailed description. At this stage, the organisation claims that “extremists drive the groups apart”, “hate groups broadcast polarising propaganda”, “extremist terrorism targets moderates”, “moderates from the perpetrators’ own group…are the first to be arrested and killed”, “leaders in targeted groups are the next to be arrested and murdered”, “laws erode fundamental civil rights and liberties” and “targeted groups are disarmed to make them incapable of self-defense”.

Stanton told Africa Check that these “qualitative indicators” were based on news reports and direct reports from people of all races and groups in South Africa. He said that he made the final determination of a country’s ranking after consulting with Genocide Watch’s interns and its board of advisors.

We had a lot of questions. How did Genocide Watch determine that South Africa met the stage 6 description? What events in the country ticked these boxes? What sources in particular were used?

We put these questions to Stanton but didn’t get answers.

He wrote back saying that “evidently you are treating our descriptions of each stage as separate sentences that can be added up as factors. That is a complete misunderstanding of our model.”

But if the Ten Stages of Genocide’s explicit and detailed descriptions are not used to determine the ranking… then what is? At this stage, it’s not clear.

South Africa is ranked as being “polarised” by Genocide Watch, although it didn’t show us how the country meets the stage’s requirements. But is polarisation – theoretically – always a warning sign of genocide?

Conley-Zilkic thinks not. She argues that polarisation can be a sign of many different things.

“One could counter that polarisation might also be considered a sign of political shifts, social activism taking on long-standing polarisation (hence, it’s more visible [but] not actually a new issue), or possibly a sign of instability that could lead to a large number of outcomes, such as electoral changes, political violence at various low levels, or even a very bad and unlikely scenario: civil war without mass killing,” says Conley-Zilkic.

“And in fact, all of these types of outcomes are much more common than genocide.”

South Africa isn’t on the radar of other organisations monitoring the risk of genocide around the world.

As mentioned earlier, the United Nations (UN) has not said that there is or will be a genocide in South Africa.

Human rights officer in the UN’s Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect, Claudia Diaz, told Africa Check that they use a framework to monitor and assess the likelihood of genocide worldwide. She told Africa Check that they have not made statements noting concerns about South Africa.

Genocide Watch’s intentions for predicting, preventing, stopping, and punishing genocide and other forms of mass murder are admirable. But the tool they use to advance this work – the Ten Stages of Genocide – is thin on transparency.

The organisation’s president was not prepared to provide the sources or methodology he used to determine a country’s ranking. Neither would he pinpoint the events in South Africa that met the detailed description of stage 6.

Genocide Watch’s credibility takes a knock without answers to these simple questions.

[Pasong Tirad]

Oh damn - I got ninja'd!

[Liriena]

Oh damn - I got ninja'd!

Amazing.

[Proctopeo]

They're definitely on a direct course to full-on genocide

First of all, your own source kinda disagrees with you.

One of the false uses of Genocide Watch's model for genocide prediction is the claim by some South
Africans, racists in the United States (like the mass killer in Charleston and David Duke), and a few South
African expatriates, that South Africa is undergoing a "white genocide." Genocide Watch has never said
"white genocide" is underway in South Africa and in fact South Africa is not even close to stage nine,
which would legally be called genocide. Hate crimes fall short of genocide.

>from 2012
Many things can change in six years, and I doubt the author of that PDF could see the future. Countries aren't nearly static enough for six years to change little.

Also...

As I said, we should pay attention. Just because it doesn't mean a genocide will happen doesn't mean that a genocide won't happen, and even if it doesn't, there are other concerning outcomes.

Also, from the comments:

SA not on the radar of other organisations:

Again, we do not have much more information as to the methodology of prediction compared to GW, so they can’t really be used as a comparison point. I would also suggest that ‘everyone else doesn’t agree’ is not a good argument, considering that a huge majority of polling companies had the same opinion on the outcome of the US election.

Admirable intentions but lacking credibility:

The information available as to analytical framework for GW is not far off any other the other bodies, including the United Nations. It appears that the author took a confrontational approach to communicating with Stanton, and totally misinterpreted what he tired to communicate to her.

https://africacheck.org/2016/09/15/anal ... ent-100179

[Liriena]

Also...

As I said, we should pay attention. Just because it doesn't mean a genocide will happen doesn't mean that a genocide won't happen, and even if it doesn't, there are other concerning outcomes.

Nice backtracking there.

First you claimed that "they're definitely on a direct course to full-on genocide", but now you are all "oh, we don't know for sure but maybe it could happen and even if it doesn't..."

[Proctopeo]

As I said, we should pay attention. Just because it doesn't mean a genocide will happen doesn't mean that a genocide won't happen, and even if it doesn't, there are other concerning outcomes.

Nice backtracking there.

First you claimed that "they're definitely on a direct course to full-on genocide", but now you are all "oh, we don't know for sure but maybe it could happen and even if it doesn't..."

Not a backtrack.
They are definitely on a direct course to a full-on genocide - doesn't mean they'll actually go that far.
Remember, my initial response said:

Time will tell if they actually go the full nine yards, or stop cold once food shortages start to kick in.

I never said "Genocide WILL happen in South Africa!!!" as you seem to believe. I said it's the course they've charted, but they can always back out at any time before they actually begin.

[Liriena]

Nice backtracking there.

First you claimed that "they're definitely on a direct course to full-on genocide", but now you are all "oh, we don't know for sure but maybe it could happen and even if it doesn't..."

Not a backtrack.
They are definitely on a direct course to a full-on genocide - doesn't mean they'll actually go that far.
Remember, my initial response said:

Time will tell if they actually go the full nine yards, or stop cold once food shortages start to kick in.

I never said "Genocide WILL happen in South Africa!!!" as you seem to believe. I said it's the course they've charted, but they can always back out at any time before they actually begin.

What exactly do you think is the difference between "direct course to a full-on genocide" and "genocide will happen"? Because I ain't seeing it. Not to mention the fact that how the supposed genocidal tendency is being measured is, to put it mildly, very questionable. Yes, there has been increasing violence towards white farmers in South Africa buuuuuuuuuuuuuuut it's not an isolated thing. Violence in general has increased nationwide and it doesn't look like white farmers are being disproportionately targeted, so it's a tad bit convenient to immediately point the finger at some sort of systematic attempt to exterminate white South African farmers.

Also, "food shortages"? Yeaaaaaaaah, you might want to avoid stereotyping. Zimbabwe and South Africa are not the same country, and the implication that the outcome of whatever is going on in South Africa will be the same makes it sound like you're just parroting thinly veiled prejudices. Probably not your own prejudices, but still.

[Luminesa]

Not a backtrack.
They are definitely on a direct course to a full-on genocide - doesn't mean they'll actually go that far.
Remember, my initial response said:

Time will tell if they actually go the full nine yards, or stop cold once food shortages start to kick in.

I never said "Genocide WILL happen in South Africa!!!" as you seem to believe. I said it's the course they've charted, but they can always back out at any time before they actually begin.

What exactly do you think is the difference between "direct course to a full-on genocide" and "genocide will happen"? Because I ain't seeing it. Not to mention the fact that how the supposed genocidal tendency is being measured is, to put it mildly, very questionable. Yes, there has been increasing violence towards white farmers in South Africa buuuuuuuuuuuuuuut it's not an isolated thing. Violence in general has increased nationwide and it doesn't look like white farmers are being disproportionately targeted, so it's a tad bit convenient to immediately point the finger at some sort of systematic attempt to exterminate white South African farmers.

Also, "food shortages"? Yeaaaaaaaah, you might want to avoid stereotyping. Zimbabwe and South Africa are not the same country, and the implication that the outcome of whatever is going on in South Africa will be the same makes it sound like you're just parroting thinly veiled prejudices. Probably not your own prejudices, but still.

Nope, South Africa might be facing a food shortage. In fact, it could already be there:
https://www.google.com/amp/amp.abc.net. ... le/9573886
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thesou ... frica/amp/
“Experts estimated that almost half of South Africa’s population is currently struggling to afford even the most basic foodstuffs. Those who can afford to, are stockpiling.” (From the second article.)
https://worldrelief.org/southern-africa-food-crisis/ (More of the Southern African area in general, but South Africa...is in Southern Africa.)

[Proctopeo]

Not a backtrack.
They are definitely on a direct course to a full-on genocide - doesn't mean they'll actually go that far.
Remember, my initial response said:

Time will tell if they actually go the full nine yards, or stop cold once food shortages start to kick in.

I never said "Genocide WILL happen in South Africa!!!" as you seem to believe. I said it's the course they've charted, but they can always back out at any time before they actually begin.

What exactly do you think is the difference between "direct course to a full-on genocide" and "genocide will happen"?

It should be obvious, but apparently it's not.
The difference is simple, Liri: the latter is a definite statement of the future. The former is a description of their actions in the present and what they very well might lead to in the future, given history.

Because I ain't seeing it.

Get glasses then.

Not to mention the fact that how the supposed genocidal tendency is being measured is, to put it mildly, very questionable. Yes, there has been increasing violence towards white farmers in South Africa buuuuuuuuuuuuuuut it's not an isolated thing. Violence in general has increased nationwide and it doesn't look like white farmers are being disproportionately targeted, so it's a tad bit convenient to immediately point the finger at some sort of systematic attempt to exterminate white South African farmers.

I never said one was happening already lmfao

Also, "food shortages"? Yeaaaaaaaah, you might want to avoid stereotyping. Zimbabwe and South Africa are not the same country, and the implication that the outcome of whatever is going on in South Africa will be the same makes it sound like you're just parroting thinly veiled prejudices. Probably not your own prejudices, but still.

Outside of the fact that it's already happening, doing roughly the same thing as Zimbabwe that caused the to have such a food shortage is likely to cause a food shortage in another country, especially one with certain comparable details. It turns out taking farms away from farmers and giving it to those who aren't farmers means far less food for everybody!

[Democratic Communist Federation]

Okay, to get things going in this thread again, which form of Leftism is the best?

[Dumb Ideologies]

Okay, to get things going in this thread again, which form of Leftism is the best?

Left-corporatist nationalist authoritarian democracy?

[The Liberated Territories]

Okay, to get things going in this thread again, which form of Leftism is the best?

Left-wing Market Anarchism

[Torrocca]

Okay, to get things going in this thread again, which form of Leftism is the best?

Anarcho-Communism, of course. :3

[The New California Republic]

Okay, to get things going in this thread again, which form of Leftism is the best?

Mixed-economy Socialism, like Alec Nove's "feasible Socialism".

[The National Salvation Front for Russia]

Okay, to get things going in this thread again, which form of Leftism is the best?

Toss up between Market Socialism and Soviet style economy, alternatively "State Capitalism".

[Pasong Tirad]

Okay, to get things going in this thread again, which form of Leftism is the best?

As long as it's left-libertarian, I'm all for it, really. My views are still pretty undefined, save for the left-libertarian socialist part. Whether it be a form of anarchism (save for An-Cap which really shouldn't be called anarchism) or a democratic socialist state, I'm still gonna be all for it.

[Western Vale Confederacy]

Okay, to get things going in this thread again, which form of Leftism is the best?

Left-corporatist nationalist authoritarian democracy?

why tf my peepee hard at that ideology?

[The National Salvation Front for Russia]

What is authoritarian democracy? British fascism is the only thing that comes to mind.

[The New California Republic]

What is authoritarian democracy? British fascism is the only thing that comes to mind.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-an-author ... -democracy

[The National Salvation Front for Russia]

https://www.quora.com/What-is-an-author ... -democracy

Still think that British fascism is the closest one can get to an authoritarian democracy.

[Proctopeo]

Okay, to get things going in this thread again, which form of Leftism is the best?

Libertarian social democracy is the only acceptable form of leftism.