A question about being "polite" in activism

[Dr. Dan]

I want to start a debate here on this topic.  For those of you who listened, Chaim was permanently turned to who he is today by the comment Meir Kahane made to him when he was an impressionable teenager.

It's a very intersting point and I would love to discuss this point of view.

1. On the one end, Kahane has a point. Sometimes you need to do something controversial for the masses to notice it and take it up as a cause. Look at our enemies how they are zealouts of evil causes and look how they have succeeded brain washing the masses.

2. However, on the other hand, this might not be the right way everytime.  The majority of people in this country are comfortable with their needs.  When they see an activist in every respect that screams and yells, let alone bomb things, they can't stand them.  The quietist people are the majority.  A polite voice will make the message heard a little bit better if done that away at first. 

[mord]

controversy always catches peoples attention after that you can become serious

[George]

I want to start a debate here on this topic.  For those of you who listened, Chaim was permanently turned to who he is today by the comment Meir Kahane made to him when he was an impressionable teenager.

It's a very intersting point and I would love to discuss this point of view.

1. On the one end, Kahane has a point. Sometimes you need to do something controversial for the masses to notice it and take it up as a cause. Look at our enemies how they are zealouts of evil causes and look how they have succeeded brain washing the masses.

2. However, on the other hand, this might not be the right way everytime.  The majority of people in this country are comfortable with their needs.  When they see an activist in every respect that screams and yells, let alone bomb things, they can't stand them.  The quietist people are the majority.  A polite voice will make the message heard a little bit better if done that away at first. 

It's not necessary to be aggressive. I agree with your second point. Most people are quiet and you must convince them with a tone they're familiar with. Look at that the Black animals for example. Their churches are like a sports arena. Their "ministers" are screaming at the top of their lungs and the savages enjoy it that way. Humans are turned off by uncivilized behavior. What Chaim did in the 1980s wasn't to convince people the bombings were right but rather make the public aware of the Soviet emigration ban and make it front page news. The lefties have succeeded not because they were zealots but because they were organized and planned every detail of taking over academia, media, and government while the conservatives were complacent.

[q_q_]

I want to start a debate here on this topic.  For those of you who listened, Chaim was permanently turned to who he is today by the comment Meir Kahane made to him when he was an impressionable teenager.

What comment ?

It's a very intersting point and I would love to discuss this point of view.
<snip> 

You still haven't mentioned the comment.

Is it, in the video Chaim did about Chanukah, and real rabbis, and the action with the marbles disrupting a soviet cultural event.

Chaim was criticised by people, and rabbi kahane said..

Don't be afraid of offending so-called polite people.

or was it..

Bury respectability before respectability buries you.

My computer is a bit busy at the moment for me to view the video you may have in mind, but here it is

The truth about chanukah


I think this is where he mentions rabbi kahane saying something that really stuck with him.. But i'm sure there were other things he said that did too.

[q_q_]

I want to start a debate here on this topic.  For those of you who listened, Chaim was permanently turned to who he is today by the comment Meir Kahane made to him when he was an impressionable teenager.

It's a very intersting point and I would love to discuss this point of view.

1. On the one end, Kahane has a point. Sometimes you need to do something controversial for the masses to notice it and take it up as a cause. Look at our enemies how they are zealouts of evil causes and look how they have succeeded brain washing the masses.

2. However, on the other hand, this might not be the right way everytime.  The majority of people in this country are comfortable with their needs.  When they see an activist in every respect that screams and yells, let alone bomb things, they can't stand them.  The quietist people are the majority.  A polite voice will make the message heard a little bit better if done that away at first. 

Consider that rabbi kahane was usually very polite. There's a time and a place.

A discussion forum or interview or book is a polite format.

But in other situations, e.g. at a rally faced with horrible arabs that were no doubt chanting death to israel , rabbi kahane would call them dogs. And that was important.

And when the JDL dealt with neo-nazis physically, they didn't deal with them politely.   And even pre physical confrontation. Look at how rabbi kahane talked to the press when interviewed in the 70s regarding a neo nazi rally, and a confrontation, he certainly got his message across, street style, inviting a confrontation, and he explained why to the press. I, having heard him alot, could see that it wasn't natural for him to talk about kicking them to the head. But that was the intention and it had good reason.  Compare that to how he eloquently spoke to the jewish community indoors, "rights? they speak of rights? what right do they have to put me into an oven"..  (he had other formats of speaking too e.g. in yeshiva, and that was only YU! where he joked about the low level in one of his speeches elsewhere "why be jewish part 2". imagine if he had spoken at Mir yeshiva, how deep he would have gone!!!!!! - Mir is one of the top yeshivot in the world. He studied there)

[Rubystars]

When speaking to political opponents publically sometimes it is best to be very polite, but there are some people who don't deserve politeness. For example it would be insulting to try to be polite to someone like an open neo nazi for example. They don't deserve politeness.

[Dr. Dan]

I want to start a debate here on this topic.  For those of you who listened, Chaim was permanently turned to who he is today by the comment Meir Kahane made to him when he was an impressionable teenager.

What comment ?

It's a very intersting point and I would love to discuss this point of view.
<snip> 

You still haven't mentioned the comment.

Is it, in the video Chaim did about Chanukah, and real rabbis, and the action with the marbles disrupting a soviet cultural event.

Chaim was criticised by people, and rabbi kahane said..

Don't be afraid of offending so-called polite people.

or was it..

Bury respectability before respectability buries you.

My computer is a bit busy at the moment for me to view the video you may have in mind, but here it is

The truth about chanukah


I think this is where he mentions rabbi kahane saying something that really stuck with him.. But i'm sure there were other things he said that did too.

qq, when you have the opportunity, listen to today's askJTF and Chaim's answer to my question.

[Dr. Dan]

I want to start a debate here on this topic.  For those of you who listened, Chaim was permanently turned to who he is today by the comment Meir Kahane made to him when he was an impressionable teenager.

It's a very intersting point and I would love to discuss this point of view.

1. On the one end, Kahane has a point. Sometimes you need to do something controversial for the masses to notice it and take it up as a cause. Look at our enemies how they are zealouts of evil causes and look how they have succeeded brain washing the masses.

2. However, on the other hand, this might not be the right way everytime.  The majority of people in this country are comfortable with their needs.  When they see an activist in every respect that screams and yells, let alone bomb things, they can't stand them.  The quietist people are the majority.  A polite voice will make the message heard a little bit better if done that away at first. 

Consider that rabbi kahane was usually very polite. There's a time and a place.

A discussion forum or interview or book is a polite format.

But in other situations, e.g. at a rally faced with horrible arabs that were no doubt chanting death to israel , rabbi kahane would call them dogs. And that was important.

And when the JDL dealt with neo-nazis physically, they didn't deal with them politely.   And even pre physical confrontation. Look at how rabbi kahane talked to the press when interviewed in the 70s regarding a neo nazi rally, and a confrontation, he certainly got his message across, street style, inviting a confrontation, and he explained why to the press. I, having heard him alot, could see that it wasn't natural for him to talk about kicking them to the head. But that was the intention and it had good reason.  Compare that to how he eloquently spoke to the jewish community indoors, "rights? they speak of rights? what right do they have to put me into an oven"..  (he had other formats of speaking too e.g. in yeshiva, and that was only YU! where he joked about the low level in one of his speeches elsewhere "why be jewish part 2". imagine if he had spoken at Mir yeshiva, how deep he would have gone!!!!!! - Mir is one of the top yeshivot in the world. He studied there)

I agree with you on this point...when dealing with brutality, you answer with the same brutality, for example. The Muslims terrorist animals, the nazi sympathizers, the soviets...we fight fire with fire and angrily.  When it is going to save Jewish lives, absolutely..we need to be zealouts of righteous deeds.

[Zelhar]

The JDL particularly targeted the Soviets and other enemies of the Jewish people. People who attended Soviet art shows and concerts deserved to be a little disturbed, it's not like the JDL caught some random citizens and screamed and yelled to disturb their piece.

[Lewinsky Stinks, Dr. Brennan Rocks]

There is a time/place for both. If you are just randomly trying to interest/recruit/organize people at your shul/church, campus, some big event, etc., then of course you need to show common courtesy and respect. If there is a particularly offensive event taking place (like the "interfaith" dinner to honor Ahmadinejad), then more drastic, controversial measures are called for.

[q_q_]

<snip>
I agree with you on this point...when dealing with brutality, you answer with the same brutality, for example. The Muslims terrorist animals, the nazi sympathizers, the soviets...we fight fire with fire and angrily.  When it is going to save Jewish lives, absolutely..we need to be zealouts of righteous deeds.

You don't like disagreeing on things, do you?

Anyhow,

BTW, regarding the comment you refer to in your first post. I found your question on sept 21st askjtf, .. 40min in.  (It's always useful to state the time it is answered if you know it, because it is a long show and it wasn't answered that early on either)

That was the comment. The same one that was on the Truth about chanukah video I mentioned. So you didn't need to send me on a goose chase looking through an mp3 for a gem. I had heard it before and mentioned it.

this is prob correct word for word
"
Never be afraid to offend the so-called polite people, when fighting injustice.
"

BY THE WAY DAN, AND THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT.

YOU QUOTED WAY TOO MUCH IN SOME OF YOUR POSTS.

The one where you just told me to check a program, you didn't need to quote all that.  Only quote what is relevant.

Many of us including Shlomo had a long discussion about this in a thread .

Quote well and encourage others to do so (once you learn how)

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

The majority of people in this country are comfortable with their needs. 

And for that reason they won't respond to any scenario.   Whether 1. an "impolite" bombing or  2. an insignificant and inconspicuous approach that no one notices or cares about which prides itself on being polite and "nice," either way this type of person will be concerned about their own needs.   When its a choice between 1 and 2, more people will respond to 1 than to 2.   You haven't really brought a logical argument against the impolite approach.    Saying that in general people are apathetic applies to both scenarios.   Apathetic people don't respond MORE to quiet approaches.  In fact, the opposite is likely true.

[q_q_]

The majority of people in this country are comfortable with their needs. 

And for that reason they won't respond to any scenario.   Whether 1. an "impolite" bombing or  2. an insignificant and inconspicuous approach that no one notices or cares about which prides itself on being polite and "nice," either way this type of person will be concerned about their own needs.   When its a choice between 1 and 2, more people will respond to 1 than to 2.   You haven't really brought a logical argument against the impolite approach.    Saying that in general people are apathetic applies to both scenarios.   Apathetic people don't respond MORE to quiet approaches.  In fact, the opposite is likely true.

The idea isn't to get people to respond or not to get people to response.

The JDL actions of disrupting cultural events were not to get a reaction out of the cultural event people or out of the so-called polite people. It was for the media people.

The JDL actions against neo-nazis was an obvious reason. The purpose wasn't to offend so-called polite people.

Rabbi Kahane was always fitting his speeches to his audience.
I loved the one he gave to the group of kids of varying age from 10-16. He was very very straight , sincere,  (as usual) , and he was not childish like a kid. What I loved was he used no rhetoric.   His audience was more mature than most..   

I know you know this.  And all these things are very obvious to one that has seen rabbi kahane videos. Or followed kahanist stories and thinking.

So I don't really see much merit to the discussion as it has been introduced.

And, Dr Dan,  to echo KahaneBT a bit, I don't see any logical arguments here from you.

I don't know what you're trying to discuss here. What possible depths of philosophy you hope to uncover that aren't already well known to you and all of us with the capability to string sentences together.


 

[Masha]

There are 2 ways to win over people:

1) if they suddenly hear a new idea from a lot of different people;

2) if you are the only one they are going to hear a new idea from, then break it to them by tiny increments. Make small holes in their world picture and let them live with it a while.

[Dr. Dan]

The majority of people in this country are comfortable with their needs. 

And for that reason they won't respond to any scenario.   Whether 1. an "impolite" bombing or  2. an insignificant and inconspicuous approach that no one notices or cares about which prides itself on being polite and "nice," either way this type of person will be concerned about their own needs.   When its a choice between 1 and 2, more people will respond to 1 than to 2.   You haven't really brought a logical argument against the impolite approach.    Saying that in general people are apathetic applies to both scenarios.   Apathetic people don't respond MORE to quiet approaches.  In fact, the opposite is likely true.

The idea isn't to get people to respond or not to get people to response.

The JDL actions of disrupting cultural events were not to get a reaction out of the cultural event people or out of the so-called polite people. It was for the media people.

The JDL actions against neo-nazis was an obvious reason. The purpose wasn't to offend so-called polite people.

Rabbi Kahane was always fitting his speeches to his audience.
I loved the one he gave to the group of kids of varying age from 10-16. He was very very straight , sincere,  (as usual) , and he was not childish like a kid. What I loved was he used no rhetoric.   His audience was more mature than most..   

I know you know this.  And all these things are very obvious to one that has seen rabbi kahane videos. Or followed kahanist stories and thinking.

So I don't really see much merit to the discussion as it has been introduced.

And, Dr Dan,  to echo KahaneBT a bit, I don't see any logical arguments here from you.

I don't know what you're trying to discuss here. What possible depths of philosophy you hope to uncover that aren't already well known to you and all of us with the capability to string sentences together.


 

It's hard for me to come up with a logical arguement on this subject when I agree with Chaim...

Most people who responded to this post earlier said a few things that made sense...There is a time to be polite..but there are other times to fight hard.  That's the answer I needed.

[q_q_]

DAN

Did you understand what I said about snipping, about only quoting what is necessary.

? ? ? ?

[Dr. Dan]

DAN

Did you understand what I said about snipping, about only quoting what is necessary.

? ? ? ?

maybe i don't want to snip anything....

[q_q_]

DAN

Did you understand what I said about snipping, about only quoting what is necessary.

? ? ? ?

maybe i don't want to snip anything....

Read this thread.
You see Shlomo explain what a problem it is when people quote a whole post when it's unnecessary.

http://jtf.org/forum_english/index.php/topic,26445.0.html

Try to understand it
If you have any questions about what it means, then don't bother Shlomo about it. Ask me.


Hopefully, when you understand it, you will be able to instruct others as to the correct approach.

[Dr. Dan]

DAN

Did you understand what I said about snipping, about only quoting what is necessary.

? ? ? ?

maybe i don't want to snip anything....

Read this thread.
You see Shlomo explain what a problem it is when people quote a whole post when it's unnecessary.

http://jtf.org/forum_english/index.php/topic,26445.0.html

Try to understand it
If you have any questions about what it means, then don't bother Shlomo about it. Ask me.


Hopefully, when you understand it, you will be able to instruct others as to the correct approach.

   once again...we each had a vote..mine was, I don't care....SO there..I don't care...

[q_q_]

You failed to understand..


The vote was whether Shlomo was to disable quoting so that layers are not quoted.

The reason why Shlomo even considered that was because people were quoting unnecessarily and threads were getting far longer than they should.

This issue, of quoting whole posts unnecessarily was not up for a vote. 

Shlomo has rightly spoken against it.