So a writer on an internet publication who I’ve been having dealings with for a couple of years now, wrote something that I feel is beyond the pale into the territory of white supremacy. This article was even quoted by Rush Limbaugh on his website.
I know who he is, I know things about his past, and I know that he would collapse under the light of scrutiny.
I am not going to point out who this is pseudonymously, nor will I out him here, but I want to know what people think on this subject. I am pretty disgusted, but I also feel that perhaps the man has the right to perform as he does. In otherwords let the ideas stand on their own merit. Also, the information I have was passed on to me by more dilligent people who I consider my friends. It would also destroy an internet community that I was a part of.
Have you (whether explicitly or implicitly) agreed to maintain the anonymity of the contributers to this magazine?
What benefit to you expect to be derived from the outting of this person?
Does your asking whether its wrong indicate that you know that it is wrong? In other words, do you have a similar intuition that somehow, not outting him would be wrong? If so, why?
Is what the author wrote a direct threat to anyone? If so, it would be immoral *not * to out them, IMO. If it is just ramblings, even very offensive ramblings, I’d say let it go.
He didn’t commit a crime in the past, but was affiliated with a well known organization that is pretty widely reviled.
I didn’t enter into any covenant with the publication, I owe no allegiance. Basically it’s like if outing Cecil Adams might damage the SDMB, and I don’t want to because I like people on the SDMB for personal reasons.
It’s not that I don’t think he has the right to say what he wants, but there is a part of me that would get a little bit of devilish glee from removing his ability to say such nasty things pseudonymously.
I am leaning toward not wanting to out him. Part of me wants to, but another part of me doesn’t feel like I should.
He’s an asshole.
Though, I’ve changed my mind. I’ll post a link to the article in question. I’ve always found this guy’s articles entertaining even though I usually wildly disagree with him. The message board can be a lively place with some very interesting posters. I have decided to take a leave of absence, and another good poster did as well due to his most recent article.
While there’s little to no logical thought processes apparent in the article, I can’t say that it looks all that terrible. Maybe the guy is the ex-grand wizard of the KKK, but that I can tell, all that shows is that he’s got the ability to put together a cohesive argument of a doped up monkey.
And ultimately, any journalist who says “bitch-slaps” isn’t big time enough that it’s really worth your effort to try and bring them down.
Be happy in the knowledge that the guy is a moron.
That’s the thing, he’s not a moron. He’s got a hundred clapping little monkeys quoting esoteric theologians and nodding sagely. This article even got a shoutout from Rush Limbaugh.
I’m not sure what the issue is here. Where are you outing him from? Let’s say that John Smith is the pseudonymous author of a racist work and Bob Jones is a dentist in your hometwon and you know they’re the same person. Are you considering telling John Smith’s readers that he’s actually Bob Jones or are you considering telling Bob Jones’ patients that he’s actually John Smith? Or both?
Obama’s women? The wife he ‘chose’? Bitch slap? Using the term ‘mother’s milk’ twice? It’s all over the place, too long, and shoddy, shoddy, shoddy. Please tell me you’re not this guy’s editor – that’s who should be exposed.
He’s on this kick about modernity devouring traditional culture. It’s totally in line with the overall body of work.
I agree that some of the observations are reasonable. That’s generally why I read him, because his approach to culture was interesting even if his conclusions were often stupendously inane.
Yes Asia Times is relatively free with it’s editorial control. It is a rather interesting publication for that reason. It was created by this Thai billionaire Sondi Limthongkul (sp?) who wanted it to rival western publications. Ultimately the print version folded and the online version remained as a tax shelter. I think some of his profitable business ventures are owned under the aegis of the publication, while the rag itself loses money like a sieve. It’s contributors are largely East Asian expats. A cast of colorful characters with a wide ranging scope of opinions. Spengler happens to be one of their biggest ticket items. Overall, he professes to be attempting to bridge a gap in the name of Jewish/Christian ecumenicism, but his foray into presidential politicking has taken a turn for the worse.
As for writing the entire article, I think he switches back and forth between ribald and serious very rapidly.
I think the article is so over the top most people will understand it’s a venomous, loopy screed. However, if Rush Limbaugh is currently quoting this article it’s now, for better of worse, being imbued with some degree of authority and gravitas.
Posting on a message board or blog anonymously is one thing, but if you’re going to run with the big dogs and write newspaper articles, and people are using your docs as references the world needs to understand who you are, and where you’re coming from.
I don’t think you have any intrinsic ethical obligation to protect the guys anonymity, just because someone wants to keep something secret doesn’t mean its unethical for others to spill the beans, though as others have said, the circumstances by which you found out might obligate you (morally and possibly legally) to stay quite.
Also, I’d be cautious of spreading hearsay, if it’s something you heard through the grapevine, I think it would be unethical to spread a rumor that might hurt the guys career and end up being false. If your sure of your source, then that’s not an issue.
I’m reasonably certain I know who he is. I read an article by him published under his own name, from about the time he started writing as Spengler, it’s about the main thrust of his thesis and there are nearly direct quotes that he’s used in message board posts. So as certain as I can be about this without the man telling me himself, I am certain.
astro I looked at it that way too but I think at this point I’m not going to out him. I let him know for the first time explicitly and not through veiled innuendo on the message board that I know who he is. I will see what his response is.