The Times Literary Supplement: Holocaust denial and the marketplace of ideas

Anyone who wants to understand the current spate of fake news and fake history must go back some years to its most extreme modern manifestation: Holocaust denial.  An entire industry has been built to legitimize Holocaust denial.  The deniers have funded “research” “institutes”, “journals”, books, magazines, videos, websites, newsflashes – all designed to provide a patina of academic respectability to demonstrable falsehoods.  Nearly every day, I receive dozens of emails from websites with such legitimate-sounding names as “The Institute for Historical Review”, and “Legalienate” and “Reporters Notebook” that purport to disprove “the Holocaust yarn”. These include newsflashes containing “new facts” that put the “final nail in the coffin of history’s Mother of all hoaxes” – that Jews were “allegedly gassed” and cremated at Treblinka and other “death camps”. [...]

Yet, thousands of people, many with academic degrees, and some with professorial positions, persist in denying the undeniable. These professional liars were given a degree of legitimacy by Noam Chomsky, who not only championed the right of these fake historians to perpetrate their malicious lies, but who actually lent his name to the quality of the “research” that produce the lies of denial. A widely circulated petition of 1979, signed by Chomsky as well as Holocaust deniers such as Serge Thion, Arthur Butz and Mark Weber, described the notorious denier Robert Faurisson as “a respected professor” and his false history as “findings” based on “extensive historical research”, thus giving it an academic imprimatur. Chomsky has since argued that he had intended only to support Faurisson’s right to free speech and not the validity of his claims, but whatever his intentions may have been, his name on the petition helped to bolster not only Faurisson’s standing, but also that of Holocaust denial. [...]

I have no problem with courses being taught about the phenomenon of Holocaust denial – it is after all a widespread concern – just as I would have no problem with courses being taught about the phenomenon of false history, false facts and conspiracy theories. But the classroom, with its captive audience of students being graded by professors, is never an appropriate place to espouse the view that the Holocaust did not take place. By publishing his book, the psychiatry professor mentioned above placed it in the public sphere, where readers could choose whether to read it, and believe its claims, or not. The classroom, however, is not a free and open marketplace of ideas. The monopolistic professor controls what can and cannot be said in his or her closed shop. Accordingly, the classroom must have more rigorous standards of truth than the book market, or the internet. [...]

Freedom of speech and the open marketplace of ideas are not a guarantee that truth, justice or morality will prevail.  The most that can be said is that freedom of expression is less bad than its alternatives such as governmental censorship, official truth squads or shutting down the marketplace of ideas.  Like democracy itself, untrammelled freedom to express hateful and dangerous lies may be the “worst” policy – except for all the others that have been tried over time.

read the article 

The Atlantic: Selling What They Preach

The global ad firm J. Walter Thompson recently conducted research into Americans’ attitudes toward commercial brands that take stances on political issues. In a cross-generational group of respondents, 88 percent agreed with the firm’s proposition that corporations have the power to influence social change; 78 percent of them agreed that companies “should take action to address the important issues facing society.” And Millennials were particularly pro-action. As Lucie Greene, the worldwide director of the Innovation Group at JWT, summed things up to me: “In these times, actually, it’s becoming more important for brands to take a point of view.” Not just because brands have the power to effect change, but because people want them—expect them—to use it.

It’s an insight on display in ads that conclude with entreaties to “open your heart to everyone”; it’s also on display in the spate of recent commercials that have functioned as overt (if also sometimes covert) political advocacy. During the 2017 Super Bowl, Airbnb aired a spot—and an accompanying hashtag—featuring a series of different faces flashing onscreen as a background to text that read: “No matter who you are … no matter where you’re from … who you love … or who you worship … we all belong. The world is more beautiful the more you accept.” That ad aired on TV around the same time as the Budweiser commercial that celebrates immigration. And the 84 Lumber ad that (maybe?) did the same. And the Audible ad that features Zachary Quinto reading a line from Nineteen Eighty-Four: “If he were allowed contact with foreigners … the sealed world in which he lives would be broken.” [...]

It’s notable, though, that morality-via-marketing is trending during a time that has also brought “fake news” and “alternative facts” and general epistemic panic to the minds of many Americans. Public faith in “the media” and its institutions is, at the moment, extremely low, in some part expressly because that media and its institutions have engaged in the kind of subtle sermonizing these ads are now engaging in. And companies, at the same time, are more powerful than ever: Facebook has more users than the most populous country in the world. Its CEO has recently been talking like a presidential contender. “It used to be that brands, by definition, tried to play it safe, or be apolitical,” JWT’s Lucie Greene told me. Now, she said, “we’re looking to brands to be some sort of port in the storm.”

read the article 

Slate: How the West Can Defend Itself From Putin’s Russia

Two years ago, when Garry Kasparov, the chess champion turned political dissident, began to warn that Vladimir Putin sought to undermine liberal democracy—not only in neighboring countries, but all over the West—he was widely written off as a crank. After Russia managed to hack the servers of the Democratic National Committee and spread fake news on an industrial scale, his warnings were finally recognized as all too prescient. But it is only over the past weeks, as journalists around the world have broken dozens of stories about Russian meddling in the democratic process, that the sheer scale of this effort has become apparent. [...]

“Russian Officials Scrambling as Plan to Delegitimize Western Democracy Moving Way Faster Than Intended,” reads a recent headline in the Onion. It’s a good joke. But the scary truth is that Russia is emboldened, not discombobulated, by its own success. Fresh off a spectacular victory in the United States, the country is now redoubling its efforts to undermine democracy from Canada to Croatia and from Greece to Sweden. [...]

Whether Putin is acting rationally, then, depends on what one is willing to count as a rational goal. If we posit that he is merely seeking to cement his rule and grow the Russian economy, his actions make little sense. But if we understand that he is trying to make Russia a major power that can instill fear in its enemies and serve as a role model to its vassals, he is masterfully playing the mediocre hand he has been dealt. [...]

Today, that sense of purpose has eroded. Most schools and universities are so focused on preparing their students for lucrative careers that they have abandoned the larger goal of forming responsible citizens. As Rep. Lee Hamilton and Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor argued nearly a decade ago, “civic education has been in steady decline over the past generation, as high-stakes testing and an emphasis on literacy and math dominate school reforms. Too many young people today do not understand how our political system works.”

read the article 

The Atlantic: Welcome, Please Remove Your Shoes

I grew up in the USSR, where tapochki—indoor slippers—were worn habitually. We changed into them when we came home, leaving the dirt of the outdoors at the entrance. We carried them to school where our fellow students stood guard at the door posted by the principal with the sole purpose of checking our bags for smenka, the change of footwear. Museums provided containers of felt mules by the entrance for visitors to don over boots before entering the halls. And we knew that when we visited a friend, we would be expected to take off our shoes and wear the slippers the host owned just for that occasion. Walking inside a home—any home—while still wearing outdoor shoes was bad form. [...]

Personal objects separating the outside and the inside can be found in European paintings as early as the 15th century. In The Arnofini Portrait (1434), Jan Van Eyck included two pairs of pattens—the wooden clogs usually worn over the indoor shoes to protect footwear from the mud and dirt of the outside. The 1514 engraving Saint Gerome in His Study, by Albrecht Durer, also features shoes that seem to indicate domestic use—a pair of mules in the foreground, stored under a bench with books and pillows. Whether they are there to suggest their purpose as outdoor-only footwear or the beginning of the practice of using mules at home we may never know. Yet just as in the Van Eyck’s work, a discarded pair of shoes—the shoes that the subject isn’t wearing at home—may be the indication of a new custom taking hold: a custom of separating footwear into indoor and outdoor.

Around this time, the conquests of the Ottoman Empire brought Eastern habits into the European continent. “[Most Ottoman people] were wearing outdoor shoes over the indoor shoes like galoshes,” explains Lale Gorunur, the curator of the Sadberk Hanim Museum in Istanbul. “But they’d never go indoors with outdoor shoes. They’d always take off the outdoor shoes at the gate of the house.” Territories under the empire’s rule seemed to adopt this habit, and slippers remain common in countries like Serbia and Hungary. [...]

Portraits of the Russian upper classes of the 18th and 19th century frequently feature subjects in either the Ottoman style mules or in thin—intended for indoor use—slipper-shoes. The same couldn’t be said for the poor. Peasants and laborers are either shown barefoot, wearing boots meant for outdoor work, or donning valenki, the traditional Russian felt boot. Perhaps because of this link between the indoor footwear and the leisure of the rich, tapochki were snubbed immediately following the 1917 Russian Revolution. Remnants of the maligned, old world had no place in the new Soviet paradigm. But the sentiment didn’t stick. Although never as extravagant or ornate as before, soon tapochki were back in most Soviet homes offering their owners comfort after a long day of building the Communist paradise.

read the article 

The Conversation: How teaching philosophy could help combat extremism

Indeed, in a world where the deliberate spreading of misinformation is commonplace, and the phrases “post-truth” and “alternative facts” appear with disturbing frequency, it is vital that schools do all they can to help young people analyse and reflect on what they hear. This should be done with clarity and precision, encouraging young people to make decisions based on rigorous arguments and examined evidence.

Philosophy can give young people the skills and confidence, not only to question and challenge purported facts but also to see through the current attempts in some quarters to discredit the very notions of fact, truth and expertise.

Analysing philosophical theories of what constitutes “reality” may also help young people to better understand the nature of virtual reality – making them better prepared to negotiate social media.

There is also the fact that freedom of expression and open debate are essential components of liberal democracy. And informed and well-reasoned free speech and debate among the current and future electorate is likely to improve the health of a democracy. It is also likely to improve the quality of service provided by a democracy’s politicians and public administrators.

read the article 

Politico: Emmanuel Macron tries to survive Socialist embrace

Having the support of respected politicians is nice, unless it gives ammunition to your rivals — in this case, conservative candidate François Fillon and far-right leader Marine Le Pen. They have been relentless in depicting Macron as a younger version of François Hollande, who co-authored the president’s policies as economy minister and would pursue them if he wins. If too many ministers join and say that Macron is their man, it will play into Fillon and Le Pen’s hand. [...]

But the center-left candidate has also been reluctant to open a big tent for Socialist officials shocked or disappointed by their party’s official candidate Benoît Hamon, whose lackluster campaign on a utopian, far-left platform has been fiercely critical of Hollande’s presidency.

Macron keeps reminding interviewers and audiences that his decision to run as an independent was triggered by “strategic divergences” with Hollande on how to reform France. Macron believes the big parties — the conservative Les Républicains and the Socialist Party — have already had their opportunity. [...]

Macron has also built his campaign on the need to renew France’s political personnel and mores. His movement, En Marche, has started screening candidates for June’s parliamentary elections. Socialists who rush to his support may just be perceived as trying to save their own jobs, and Macron has made it clear that they should not expect preferential treatment when En Marche selects its candidates. “We’re not opening a bed & breakfast here,” said one of Macron’s top advisors. “This is not a recycling machine for lost Socialist careers,” said Macron’s top spokesman Benjamin Griveaux.

read the article 

America Magazine: Opposition to Óscar Romero's canonization was ‘political,’ Archbishop Paglia says

"His beatification was the result of a great struggle," said Archbishop Paglia, who was wearing Archbishop Romero’s pectoral cross during the interview. "There were many in Rome, including some cardinals, who did not want to see him beatified. They said that he had been killed for political reasons, not religious ones. I studied this question, I did a great deal of work. For example, I examined his personal archives, which comprise some 70,000 documents. What emerged was a man devoted to his people. He wanted to free them from oppression. He wanted to bring to them the compassion of Jesus." [...]

According to Archbishop Paglia, Pope Francis has been crucial in moving Romero’s canonization forward. Though the pope never met Romero, he did meet Grande and has also wanted to push forward his canonization. [...]

"For that reason, we need a cultural revolution. Human dignity means making every person, from the youngest to the oldest, from the holiest to the greatest sinner, the center of concern of the church, of politics, of the economy, of culture, of the arts and the trades. All of society is based on human dignity."

read the article 

Curbed: Snøhetta-designed tunnel for ships would be first in the world

What could possibly make a country think that spending $272 million to dig a mile-long “boat tunnel” is a good idea? For Norway, that answer is simple: dangerous waters. The Stad peninsula is one of the most dangerous coasts in the country, because it’s at the nexus of the North Sea and Norwegian Sea, and the meeting of these two waters produces consistently stormy seas. The area’s turbulent weather has claimed the lives of at least 33 people over the last seventy years.

Even the vikings apparently knew to avoid the Stad. The first proposal to avoid those treacherous waters by digging a ship tunnel was floated all the way back in 1874. But it isn’t until now that Norway appears to be moving ahead with firm construction plans.

Designed to accommodate massive cargo ships, the tunnel will be nearly 150 feet tall, 118 feet wide, and more than a mile long. Between 70 and 120 ships will be able to pass through each day. But that doesn’t mean there’s no place for beauty in its design.

read the article 

Land of Maps: Pangaea with Modern International Borders

see the map