Hatebase Tries To Scan For Precursors of Genocide In Language 190
An anonymous reader writes "Hatebase, a new crowdsourced database of multilingual hate speech from The Sentinel Project, is an attempt to create a repository of words and phrases that researchers can use to detect the early stages of genocide."
hatebase? (Score:1, Funny)
Fuck that.
What? Why? (Score:2)
...don't most FPS pub servers have chatlogs?
It'd be easier to research if they did.
Re:hatebase? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Hatebase as in hate speech, as in ... (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh, calm down.
This is the same as any NLP crowd-sourcing tool; it's simply designed with a focus on correlating vocabulary with prejudicial sentiment. No one is planning to use it to pass restrictive laws. It's just useful for people who are involved in a country, but are not fluent speakers of $foo or involved in the right subcultures, to know that a certain word has now acquired a negative connotation.
Maybe those people should butt out, sure, but you're jumping the gun a bit, here. If they could force everyone to use ``political correct speeches", they wouldn't need this app in the first place.
Re:Hatebase as in hate speech, as in ... (Score:5, Interesting)
This is the same as any NLP crowd-sourcing tool; it's simply designed with a focus on correlating vocabulary with prejudicial sentiment.
In case some of you were wondering about the acronym. That becomes:
This is the same as any natural language processing crowd-sourcing tool; it's simply designed with a focus on correlating vocabulary with prejudicial sentiment.
To take the conjugation one step further it becomes:
This shit be the same shit as any goddamn shit where we get other motherfuckers to do the fucking dirty work of working out when shit-talkers, shit-talking in some other fucking language, be talking shit is a way that means that those fuckwits mean to start some shit.
Of course, sometimes you can take conjugation a bit too far.
Re: (Score:2)
"The challenge is distinguishing between low-level background noise and systematic hate speech that could be the beginning of something worse."
I wonder how it deals with locker room speech? Or, even worse, barracks speech? Probably best of all, send them to monitor prison speech.
I'm guessing that a group of moderately well behaved teamsters could set off alarms, and have the UN come running to save some race or another.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Hatebase as in hate speech, as in ... (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/swordverse.htm [answering-islam.org]
Did you know this?
Note that anyone who supports the Islamist cause against Israel is unwittingly supporting this genocidal agenda. The Israelis are not the aggressors (as the historically ignorant often believe). The Jews have been living in Palestine *continuously* for over 3000 years (the Roman expulsions were temporary, and only from Jerusalem). The modern State of Israel is trying to *defend* its citizens from the *aggression* and schemes of the 57 Muslim Majority countries in the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (although countries like Azerbaijan get on well with Israelis, and after many attempted genocides Jordan now has working relations). Anyone who thinks the Arabs are the victims simply doesn't know the genocidal agendas of Hamas and Hezbollah (hint, look for the hate speech in the Hamas Charter: http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/www.thejerusalemfund.org/carryover/documents/charter.html [thejerusalemfund.org]). When Hamas talks about "Occupied Territories" they mean killing, expelling, or enslaving all non-Muslims in *all of Israel*.
particularly http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/index.html#Attacks [thereligionofpeace.com]
Re: (Score:2)
There is no way that the US can police or get involved in every cause in the world or even every cause in the mid-east. As far as who exactly has ancestral rights to Israel it is obvious that the land was occupied well before Judaism and well before Islam were created.
As one of the ignorant outsiders it is my belief that all people must be treated equally. One set of laws must govern all people in the region. Obviously t
Re: (Score:2)
Huh?
What's the weather like on planet Stormfront? (Score:2)
Stormy I guess, heh?
I can't really be bothered to dig through all of your cognitive dissonance and other bullshit.
Though I must say that I particularly like the bit where you link texts that "prove" non-existence of islamophobia - by a columnist who can't even keep his own straw man up.
From TFA, after rattling out a tirade of anecdotal crimes committed by Muslims:
Given the abundant evidence of violent cause and fearful effect, involving a small percentage of antagonists, the general charge of Islamophobia is an ideological fabrication.
See? There's no such thing as islamophobia as there is nothing to fear about Muslims - except in all these cases I just listed here, not trying to
Re: (Score:2)
First there's this problem of there being ONLY ONE Bosnian Muslim division
I stand corrected, there was one *Bosnian* SS division but Two *yugoslavian* SS divisions. The other being the (Muslim) Albanian Skanderbeg 21st Waffen SS division
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21st_Waffen_Mountain_Division_of_the_SS_Skanderbeg_%281st_Albanian%29
So I concede you are correct. Only one *Bosnian* Muslim SS Division - but you must concede that I'm correct that there were *two* Muslim SS Divisions (zero would have been a better number of SS divisions of any nationality, don't you think?).
I am a
Re: (Score:2)
Which part of "I can't really be bothered to dig through all of your cognitive dissonance and other bullshit." did you not understand?
I wasted some time to point out a rather glaring and easily refutable historical error.
Your other "arguments" are of no interest to me, nor am I about to waste time digging through them just to point out where else you are wrong while you keep moving goalposts, loading and begging the questions, with me giving your tirade an illusion of a civilized debate when all you're capa
Re: (Score:2)
Which part of "I can't really be bothered to dig through all of your cognitive dissonance and other bullshit." did you not understand?
Ah, you can't refute so instead you "hit n run". You make some assertion about cognitive dissonance yet provide *zero* evidence. You do provide some value in clarifying some minor points but carefully skirt around the main thesis.
If you had provided some more references I would have been pleased to follow them all - and would hope you would do the same and check the veracity of the references I'd provided. You never know, you might have actually learned something - or taught me something (if you could ind
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hcm873G94jo [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
When stuff like the following happens, as it has been for 1400 years, one does not have to be a genius to see the future for Copts in Egypt. You sneer at me, but by doing so you are aiding an abetting the following intolerance. Do you want to be an evil person?:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/04/coptic-christians-under-siege-as-muslim-mob-attacks-cairo-cathedral.html [jihadwatch.org]
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Man, this has me conflicted. A bunch of crazy Christians fighting with a bunch of crazy Muslims! I can't stand either of them. Did those Christians really have to walk in there and be annoying? And yet, those security guards and their other friends had no right to harass those Christians, annoying
Re: (Score:2)
Man, this has me conflicted. A bunch of crazy Christians fighting with a bunch of crazy Muslims! I can't stand either of them.
Yes, they are both crazy. However, in this case the Christians are right and the Muslims are wrong, as I will discuss ...
Did those Christians really have to walk in there and be annoying?
No, but they have the Constitutional First Amendment right to do so. They were not promoting hate speech, and the charges laid against them were fabricated (as they prove - which meant the cops should be dismissed for gross misconduct). Only an authoritarian would even question their right to do what they did. No one questions the right of Muslims to speak freely in their dawa efforts at
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Speaking of "stupid moron",
All of the American left, right, center, up, and down supported the use of Islam, Christianity, and religious identity in general as a weapon against the Soviets. Islam was not as uniformly hostile and violent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Hatebase as in hate speech, as in ... (Score:4, Insightful)
This is the same as any NLP crowd-sourcing tool; it's simply designed with a focus on correlating vocabulary with prejudicial sentiment. No one is planning to use it to pass restrictive laws. It's just useful for people who are involved in a country, but are not fluent speakers of $foo or involved in the right subcultures, to know that a certain word has now acquired a negative connotation.
Except that it's not going to work. Show me an NLP system that correctly distinguishes statements from quotations and references. You'd need an AI-complete system to divine the actual state of mind of the speaker. Or does the "crowdsourcing" part mean that there are going to be scores of people checking and rechecking flagged texts?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Prove it.
Re:Hatebase as in hate speech, as in ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Here is a FTFY (aka fixed-that-for-you) example. I will now conjugate the following:
No, they do not believe in the true concept of FREE speech - their only aim is to force everyone in using political correct speeches
With the FTFY conjugation which takes ownership of all aspects of society by turning all third person plural forms into first person plural forms that quote becomes:
No, we do not believe in the true concept of FREE speech - our only aim is to force everyone in using political correct speeches (sic)
My point is that "they" are not the problem. My point is that "we" are the problem. Every last fallible one of us can be a problem or a solution. The difference is often a matter of how compassionate we are combined with how much we are able to take personal responsibility for problems. Even (maybe especially?) the problems which seem to be caused by other people.
While I may be liberal and you may be conservative, the reality is that our society is comprised of both of us and we are both liberal and conservative. We are all the things we which are. By treating the problem as "our" problem instead of "their" problem we can approach the solution with realism and healing, instead of idealism and revenge.
Of course we could, instead, go on blaming other people, but look where that has gotten us so far . . .
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
we can approach the solution with realism and healing, instead of idealism and revenge
Realism/Healing vs. Idealism/Revenge
You should write speeches for politicians. This is an excellent false dichotomy. While I'm also a liberal, I'm hesitant to label myself as such because all too often the term is used to indicate that one is a member of the PC-Police, such as yourself. If there was a Ministry of Truth you'd be a great writer for them. It's sad that the flamebait you responded to has more truth in it than your attempt to rationalize political correctness -- oh, I'm sorry, your attempt to ap
Re: (Score:2)
While I'm also a liberal, I'm hesitant to label myself as such because all too often the term is used to indicate that one is a member of the PC-Police, such as yourself.
I don't know about you, but to me, "liberal" means "a person who doesn't screw with other people's lives just because of difference of opinion". Neither the "conservatives" nor the so-called "liberals" need apply.
Re: (Score:2)
YOU are obviously ONE OF THEM!
Burn the witch!
-
Re: (Score:3)
While I may be liberal and you may be conservative..
You are not a classical liberal, which is his point.
The whole modern liberals and conservatives idea is a false dichotomy, because the former is about social liberalism via the theft of freedom while the later is about social conservatism via the theft of freedom.
When you vote for the lesser of two evils you get ever increasing evil. Both will enslave you to their agenda.
Re: (Score:2)
And when you vote for the only candidate that is not part of this "lesser of two theft-of-freedom evils" you will be called a libertarian retard here by the communo-fascist (posed as "leftist") on /.
99% of the people are power hungry. That's human nature. Anyone not acting according to this norm are considered abnormal.
Scan for precurors? (Score:2)
Ah! I bet you won't!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
So you could also scan for precursors of the next POTUS from twitter and facebook? Ah! I bet you won't!
You would find better examples and the names of haters by looking at the NDAA and those who signed it.
Mostly false positives, will be used for "hate". (Score:5, Insightful)
My expectation is that this will be used for political infighting, much like the genocide it purports to try to head off.
The "crowd" will include activists for one (or more) sides of contentious political disputes, who will feed the database with typical word choices of their enemies, in the hope of branding them as potential genocide perpetrators. The result will be a produce far more false positives than true ones (if it produces any of the latter at all).
Indeed, the very phrase "hate speech" is such a faction-specific term. It is used by the US left wing to attempt to suppress politically incorrect free speech - especially politicall speech - of those with whom they disagree.
For an example of what I'm talking about, look at the Southern Poverty Law Center's pronouncements - including especially their advice to law enforcement and the Department of Homeland Security that displaying bumper stickers supporting Ron Paul during the presidential primary, or any of a number of other pro-Constitution or Tea Party political position messages, was a sign that the driver was a terrorist.
Re:Mostly false positives, will be used for "hate" (Score:5, Insightful)
My expectation is that this will be used for political infighting, much like the genocide it purports to try to head off.
I rather think this will be used to weed out political dissent among the population.
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Priebus accuses Democrats of supporting infanticide
Re:Mostly false positives, will be used for "hate" (Score:4, Insightful)
I think you just proved his point. You are doing exactly that, you are using this as fodder for political infighting. You don't like it so you label it as hate speech. Does that mean we treat it the same way Europe treats it? Somebody makes an anti-Semitic comment on twitter, so France wants to put them in jail?
Anyways, yes they both do it. 10 seconds of google and I found something that tops yours: Obama makes fun of disabled people:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2009/03/president-ob-15-3/ [go.com]
You're one of those people who I commonly rail against when I say we need to stop treating the election like we're rival football teams. Quite possibly one of the ones I rail against for blind voting.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm curious what search terms you used. I just read the article you linked, and I would argue that the article is evidence *against* your point rather than for.
Firstly, it's from 4 years ago. The parent was talking about how stuff is said by republicans continually, and pointed out something from last week.
Secondly, the president reached out by phone to the head of the special olympics, profusely apologizing for the comments. Unless you can point to a more recent article where Obama, or any other Democra
Re:Mostly false positives, will be used for "hate" (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not in the US, so maybe I'm missing some context here, but...
How on earth are either of the links you've just posted examples of hate speech? The first is a line on the abortion debate that we've seen many times over the years. I'm not going to pick sides in that one; but if you approach the debate (as some people do) with the starting point that foes "life begins at conception" then abortion is infanticide. I think a lot of the lack of civility around that particular debate stems from the fact that neither side recognises just how high the stakes feel for the other side in it.
The second link is a fairly silly take on the gun control debate that somehow slides into an odd reductio ab absurdum take on the gay marriage debate. But again, incoherent though it is, is it really hate speech?
If somebody says "All members of (ethnic group x/social group y) are scum! Let's (kill them/throw them out of our country/deprive them of their property rights)" then that feels like hate speech. That's a hell of a long way from either of the examples you link to.
As a test, let's take an example from a left-wing perspective of somebody linking a (generally supported - the UK public consistently backs a tougher line on welfare in polls) Government policy to murder. In this case, it's the murder of the disabled rather than the infanticide, but I think that's still pretty emotive. So: from the UK's Guardian newspaper [guardian.co.uk]. Is that hate speech?
If you answer "yes", at least you're consistent. If your answer is no, then it looks more like you're just demonstrating totalitarian instincts to suppress speech that goes against your own values.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't want to turn this into a "Planned Parenthood is racist" discussion, because that speaks to motives and I don't think motives matter. The end result matters, and its a fucking holocaust.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Let's see, upset at SPLC? Wonder why that is... [cnn.com]
As far as designating dr
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Mostly false positives, will be used for "hate" (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah dude. Political scientists don't think like that and tend to be fairly serious minded men. If activists are putting in bogus data, its going to stick out like a sore thumb.
This seems to be more like some of the research google was doing spotting emerging trends via language use.
Go read the stuff about the 8 stage genocide model and specifically on the 'symbolization' phase. I suspect its more about looking for trends like where a population for instance stops saying "jews" and starts saying "kikes" or whatever, whith the observation that a population is heading towards the crucial dehumanization phase needed to allow people to sleep at night whilst committing genocide.
Re: (Score:2)
You need a government to commit genocide
Says who?
The only requirement is that people kill a bunch of other people based on their race/ethnic group/religion/whatever.
Having a government with policies friendly to this type of activity is certainly helpful, but is in no way a requirement for it to happen.
Re: (Score:2)
Having a government approval for genocide is a requirement for committing genocide because otherwise it will shut down your operation by force.
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently that wasn't the way the Rwandan Hutu/Tutsi genocide played out. There, the hate speech was on the radio, by radio talk show hosts. In Bosnia, it was by the various new political leaders of the new governments... but the governments were very new. Stalin's genocide of the Ukranians and Lithuanians was more like what you say.
The genocidal US "downwind" experiments, and the Tuskegee experiments, or Andrew Jackson's "trail of tears"....I'm not really aware of what went on before the events.
So I don't
Re: (Score:2)
Get lost. I find it quite offensive what our forebears did to both Jews and blacks. To continue it or other offenses in the name of anything would be obscene.
And I don't like your lol, either.
Re: (Score:3)
Almost right.
The Tea Party *wishes* that it were a terrorist org.
Congratulations on falling hook, line and sinker for the "one side is out making grandiose statements which aren't true and used for political disputes" as pointed out in the above post. While you're at it, you should really pay attention to exactly who's pushing that narrative.
Re: (Score:2)
But I'm not involved in their argument.
So you're trying to congratulate me on something that didn't happen.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
That's exactly my point--the Tea Partiers *wish* they were brave and fanatical enough to be terrorists, but they're too cowardly and self-centred either to put up, or to shut up.
I don't agree with Al-Qaeda's objectives but I can still recognise that their dedication to their cause is nothing to sneer at.
Also, while dismissing people's religious beliefs as "pychopathy" is perfectly valid in some contexts, it is not very smart at all in others.
BTW, I don't expect anyone to get the "Mindless" thing without hav
Re: (Score:3)
BTW, I don't expect anyone to get the "Mindless" thing without having studied Zen. (In 15+ years, not many have, so you're in good company.)
Sounds like you need a few more decades of it, assuming it helps at all in your situation.
the Tea Partiers *wish* they were brave and fanatical enough to be terrorists, but they're too cowardly and self-centred either to put up, or to shut up.
You're at the point where you're so divergent from reality that you're almost not even wrong. At least you still use labels that can be matched with real world things. There's no "wish" like that in the real world.
And while I understand the psychological need of political rivals to talk trash about the Tea Party movement, I don't understand at all the need to just make up wild shit. What is it about fiscal responsib
Re: (Score:2)
The combination of expected consequences of such actions and the assumption that anyone who disagrees with you about them is arguing in bad faith. The expected consequences of Tea Party policies are (in the opinion of its opponents) bad, and since they are self-obviously so (since otherwise said oppo
Re: (Score:2)
And while I understand the psychological need of political rivals to talk trash about the Tea Party movement, I don't understand at all the need to just make up wild shit. What is it about fiscal responsibility, honoring the Constitution (for those who care, a real "social contract"), and reduction in government power that brings out such "hate speech" to use the term of the day?
This is a strawman. The tea party doesn't want to honour the constitution, they just want their interpretation of it. Examples are the 1st amendment, tea partiers seem to be fine with repressing speech if they label it national security, child porn or various other talking points. 2nd amendment, tea party has no problem having a whole class of people barred from owning firearms, they just maintain the medieval concept of felon to deny basic rights rather then like in my country where a judge has to order th
Re: (Score:2)
This is a strawman. The tea party doesn't want to honour the constitution
Yep. That is a straw man. Do you have a real argument?
Re: (Score:2)
The best you can come up with are ad hominems and projection? I think we're done here. Have a nice day.
Good idea (Score:4, Insightful)
Now instead of just laws requiring data retention to prevent child pornography, we can now also use genocide prevention as an excuse. And then of course just use it to go after copyright infringers.
If you want to learn about genocide speech, go to stormfront.org, there's no need to build a new database when somebody has already created one for you.
Re:Good idea (Score:4, Insightful)
Correct, genocidal tendencies are not difficult to spot. For one thing a large segment of the population is regularly talking about killing, imprisoning or deporting a smaller segment of the population. Genocide by its nature requires the involvement of lots and lots of people, and they won't be shy about giving you their opinion. For example pre world war 2 Germany was riddled with anti-semitism, that's a hazardous situation. It's not something that appears from a vacuum nor a spontaneous event.
I'd be very wary of this initiative as another effort to water down terms which describe truly horrendous crimes by assigning them to lesser actions, like the incessant use of 'rape' by hardline misandrists.
Re:Good idea (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually stormfront.org is valuable as a huge negative data point.
The purpose of their project, as I understand it, is to detect when a population is in the early stages of an actual developing genocide situation. Stormfront.org is a sample of the sort of speech that occurs in a group which is grossly failing to to get anywhere. The stormfronters have all sorts of grand fantasies of what they want and believe, but at least on some level they know damn well that they don't have general public support for it. Stormfront.org's rhetoric is filled with an attitude that they are persecuted victims, the feel frustrated and powerless. I expect that is about the last thing you'd find in a genuine developing genocide situation. In a genuine genocide situation the hate speech agitators are not feeling powerless - they are feeling supported and powerful and emboldened... that they can boldly go out there without hiding their intent, without fear or shame, to seize control, to just plain engage in flagrant public violence.
The stormfronters feel like powerless victims. They may sneak around in the dark and commit pointless vandalism like spiteful children, but they are not anywhere in the same universe as a situation where people go out in broad daylight committing mass violence and inviting their police-buddies to come along with their cop-cars and heavy weapon supplies.
-
Re: (Score:2)
If it is real genocide it will be well hidden in a power structure and hard to detect. For example, a top secret biological warfare project aimed at certain ethnicity will be considered genocide, but won't be detected by these NLP mechanisms.
Re: (Score:2)
a top secret biological warfare project aimed at certain ethnicity... won't be detected by these NLP mechanisms.
Absolutely correct. Their focus is on real-world cases of countries that have had death squads roaming the streets with guns and machetes.
They are not-so-much concerned with paranoid conspiracy theories.
-
A precursor to genocide? (Score:1)
So... they will immediately run smack-dab into Godwin's Law... ... and, picoseconds later, cease to be relevant!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
How many picohitlers is that?
Precursors? (Score:2)
Precrime!
Re: (Score:1)
Precrime!
I think it's more for detecting genocide before it has official been discovered.
My guess is that it will key in on "Help, some guys just killed everyone in my village" posts from twitter.
Isn't that... (Score:2)
Thought crime (Score:4, Insightful)
Sweet. We finally reached the point where we're just looking for thought crimes.
Re: (Score:2)
someone mod the AC up
Re: (Score:2)
It's not just racial slurs, they have just random insults it seems, at least for German son of a bitch, bum, child fucker -- those are certainly not nice things to say, but what does this have to do with genocide? This is so frightfully stupid.
If you call it ethnic cleansing then it's not bad (Score:2)
It's only bad when it's called genocide.
Re: (Score:2)
If you think "ethnic cleansing" sounds good, then you probably work for Marketing.
I'll contribute (Score:5, Funny)
"Language-based classification, or symbolization, is one of a handful of quantifiable steps toward genocide.
To support Hatebase, please contribute to our database, either by adding vocabulary or by logging sightings and citations.
My submission:
Language: Beltwayspeak
Vocabulary: "senior operational leader", "enemy belligerent", "imminent threat", "organized armed groups"
Source: http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/020413_DOJ_White_Paper.pdf [msn.com]
China-Friendly (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
"Our intention with Hatebase was for the data to be used as a contextual layer on top of other monitoring datasets and infrastructure. It's essentially acting as a sort of Z-axis"
I'm not even sure he knows what he just said there.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You've actually been to China and you claim this?
Protip: You are unbelievably clueless.
"waiguolao" means literally "foreign elder" (wai out(side), foreign: guo country; lao old, aged, elder). "wailao" is also common.
It is considered an informal but fairly respectful way to address people who don't look like they're Chinese, and is generally not considered pejorative. Yes, it could be used in an insulting manner in the right context, but this is true of many words in English and other languages I speak. And
No, you're clueless (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
apparently not searching for Chinese characters
They're not even allowed. In a time when most of the web has switched over to Unicode this is an unbelievable oversight.
From the FAQ [hatebase.org]:
Why doesn't submitted vocabulary retain any accented characters?
Hatebase is a multilingual platform and accepts all UTF-8 characters (including accented characters), but "latinizes" the main vocabulary field to optimize search performance.
If you're adding a term with an accent, simply repeat the term somewhere in the "meaning" field, which isn't latinized.
Why doesn't Hatebase accept non-UTF8 characters?
At present, Hatebase is architected to display UTF-8 characters only -- basically, the extended Latin alphabet, including accented characters. Further extending Hatebase to logographic character sets is certainly on our roadmap, but may not happen anytime soon unless we hear from our users that it's strongly desired.
So according to them Chinese characters cannot be encoded in UTF-8? And entries in non-Latin alphabets are excluded from a multilingual database? These people don't know what they're doing.
Re: (Score:2)
heh. (Score:3)
I read that as "hatebook".
Where you 'enemy' people instead of 'friend' them...
Statistical power? (Score:3)
This sounds a bit off to me. Statistical NLP needs large amounts of data. How many data points do they have that can reliably be labelled "precursor of genocide" vs "no precursor of genocide"? There haven't been that many genocides, is it? And as the article says: "hate speech isn't in short supply"...
"The 8 stages of Genocide" (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately they focus mainly on religious and ethnic hatred, which doesn't really account for some of the biggest genocides of the 20th century like in Pol Pot's Cambodia, Stalin's USSR and Mao's China, They do mention Pol Pot a couple of times, for the "blue ribbon" symbolism and the "Denial" stage, but miss the root of the problem. Their view is shallow at best, IMO.
It is fashionable to focus almost exclusively on race, religion and nationalism, but ironically, the biggest killings in the past century came from ideologies aiming to unite mankind beyond those "hate" barriers.
"Genocide Watch" would have probably missed those "early stages" of Communism...
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately they focus mainly on religious and ethnic hatred, which doesn't really account for some of the biggest genocides of the 20th century like in Pol Pot's Cambodia, Stalin's USSR and Mao's China, They do mention Pol Pot a couple of times, for the "blue ribbon" symbolism and the "Denial" stage, but miss the root of the problem. Their view is shallow at best, IMO.
But is there anything wrong with the overall categorization? I think a better example would be the conquests of the Mongols (and similar brutal wars, during the fall of the Western Roman Empire). They had many of the characteristics like dehumanization, but they didn't bother with symobolization,or organization. In situations where it was ordered, the Horde moved in and just killed everyone. No need to make plans for genocide when you have an extremely competent and obedient army ready to carry out your ev
Re: (Score:2)
Wait a second. Are you claiming that Stalin and Mao's genocides were unintended consequences?
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly wrong. There is a solid case that Stalin shipped all the livestock and seed away from the affected area before the famine started. It was political and engineered to kill people.
The evidence is not quite so clear in Mao's case that the famine was engineered.
In both cases food was given to those in favor and withheld from the 'counter revolutionaries'.
no data for big data (Score:5, Insightful)
The basis for this appears to be pure speculation. There is no actual data (big or otherwise) showing the validity of the assumptions on which this is based.
New ammunition for political correct do-gooders? (Score:4, Insightful)
Recursion in one easy step: (Score:3)
Eradicate ALL those with precursors for perpetrating Genocide!
Genoside? (Score:2)
How to (Score:3, Interesting)
Ha, only 729 ethnic or national slurs?
Come on, even I could do better than that :-)
The programming seems interesting too: non ascii characters in the Search box will break the site.
In that case... (Score:2)
Abstraction and meanings attached.. (Score:1)
Ever hear of double speak or triple speak?
Any career politician will know it well. Well enough to avoid hate speech while committing genocide.
How many Iraqi Citizens where victims of "Collateral damage" and what speak was attached to the top command of that happening?
Hate speech data base? Its called "The other dictionary" when you realize abstract words can have meanings attached not in the standard dictionaries
So anyway (Score:3)
This is a very complex way (Score:2)
I didn't know (Score:2)
That we had already established beyond any reasonable doubt that hateful language was a predictor of genocide?
or.... (Score:2)
Hate speech causes genocide! (Score:2)
Yep, clearly hate speech causes genocide.
Re: (Score:3)