2022-03-26

Rel Soc of Friends | posts expressing either pro-Ukrainian or pro-Russian sentiments regarding the war in Ukra... | Facebook

Religious Society of Friends | There is currently a flurry of people reporting posts and comments expressing either pro-Ukrainian or pro-Russian sentiments regarding the war in Ukra... | Facebook

There is currently a flurry of people reporting posts and comments expressing either pro-Ukrainian or pro-Russian sentiments regarding the war in Ukraine.
This group facilitates frank and free discussion on topics of interest to Friends. I am not about to censor people because they express an opinion someone else doesn’t like. I too have my opinions, but I don’t feel the need to silence anyone who doesn’t share them. Please refrain from reporting posts and comments unless they explicitly condone or glorify violence or are explicitly threatening towards you.
To make it crystal clear - neither expressing support for Russia nor expressing support for Ukraine inherently constitutes an endorsement of violence. Here are some examples:
“Russia is to blame for the war” - NOT condoning violence, do NOT report this
“Ukraine is to blame for the war” - NOT condoning violence, do NOT report this
“The Ukrainians deserve what’s happening to them” - condoning violence, please DO report this
“I hope all the invaders get shot” - condoning violence, please DO report this
18
16 comments
Like
Comment

16 comments

All comments

  • Sharon Fitzpatrick
    I am sorry you had to clarify this, but grateful that you are able.
    3
  • Elena Krumgolde
    Support for an aggressor = suppor of violence.
    Support of war criminals = support of violence.
    2
  • Ken Woerthwein
    I'm sorry, but I disagree. Pro-Ukrainian or pro-Russian comments about the war in Ukraine are not statements of equivalency. The war in Ukraine is about democracy vs authoritarianism. The early Quakers were not about seeing both sides of a debate but about listening to the inward Light of God speaking to their everyday life.
    3
    • Fred Bayer
      Author
      Admin
      Okay, but that's your opinion. My opinion happens to differ from yours, but either way, I make no claim to be an arbiter of truth. At the end of the day, I'm an undiscerned, unelected facebook admin, not an elder discerned through worship, nor even any kind of elected representative (not that the latter is how any Quaker undertaking should be run!)
      Even if we somehow managed to assemble the over six thousand members of this group for a Meeting for Worship for Business (and granted, that scale is similar to certain Yearly Meetings) to name me as an elder, that would *still* not make me the arbiter of truth - that would be more akin to being the Pope, not an elder.
      As is plainly evident from the exchanges that have taken place here about this conflict, different Friends speak to different Friends' conditions, and I am not about to prevent them. This group is called "Religious Society of Friends", not "Religious Society of pro-Ukraine Friends" or "Religious Society of pro-Russian Friends". Anyone who is unhappy with that is more than welcome to create precisely such groups; personally, I would question the need for yet more echo chambers.
      4
      • Ken Woerthwein
        Fred Bayer So from what you state, if you were the admin of the internet at the time of our Civil War, you would support the expression of opinion of both those who supported the South and those who supported the North, and if you were the admin of the internet during the time of WWII when the Nazi's of Germany invaded many countries and persecuted many different groups of people, you would support the expression of opinion of both those who supported the Nazi's and those who supported the opinions of the Allies. Is that correct? All of these instances are moral questions, not questions of violence.
      • Fred Bayer
        Author
        Admin
        Ken Woerthwein You are massively oversimplifying.
        Sure, let’s consider WW2. Friends at the time did in fact quite strongly condemn a lot of the actions of the Allies - such as the carpet-bombing of German cities, and of course not to mention the use of nuclear bombs in Japan. And indeed a lot of Friends had condemned the Treaty of Versailles, whose punitive measures ultimately created the conditions necessary for Nazism to foment.
        Acknowledging the immoral actions of the Allies, indeed even laying the blame for Nazism at the feet of the Western powers rather than the German people - neither of those things equate to an endorsement of Nazism. Likewise, blaming Ukraine and NATO for this conflict does not equate to a wholesale endorsement of everything Putin has ever done, nor of everything (or indeed necessarily anything) the Russian Army is doing.
        I can simultaneously be glad that the Red Army helped topple Hitler, and angry about the fact that they raped and murdered innocent civilians along the way. The two aren’t mutually exclusive, because the world isn’t black and white.
        2
      • Tom Smith
        Fred Bayer It is my understanding that a member of this group was dropped/blocked without comment or reason. Some questioning of a post was done.
      • Fred Bayer
        Author
        Admin
        Tom Smith Two members have recently been removed from the group for frivolous reporting. This isn’t arbitrary, it’s the standard course of action I instituted in response to an epidemic of frivolous reporting that arose well before this conflict. Viz. the following (extracted from one of the group announcements):


        • Like
        • Reply
        • 1 w
        • Edited
    • Sharon Fitzpatrick
      Ken Woerthwein I sure wish this last sentence did not require the word “early.”
  • Janet Nagel
    Fred Bayer I would go further to say that Friends have often striven to be peacemakers. Peacemaking is difficult and not all Quakers are willing to do it. Peacemaking is only possible when listening to and respecting both sides in a conflict. Condemnation of one side is automatically support for aggression from the other side and perpetuation of the conflict. We have to resist the polarizing idea that understanding is approving. Many years ago, in response to my letter, Catholic cleric Ivan Illich sent me a difficult but helpful Quaker image: "When anger swells up against a transgressor, make yourself a mental picture of that ogre. And then, ever so gently cup your hands and blow onto the coals of their heart, until something there starts to glow."
    4
    • Like
    • Reply
    • 1 w
    • Edited
  • Jean Meyer Capps
    We should be mindful that, unless we personally know the person that posted, that there are paid Russian trolls lurking on Facebook.
    2
    • Fred Bayer
      Author
      Admin
      Jean Meyer Capps Every person who requests to join this group is vetted before being admitted. Unless the Russians are specifically paying for people to convincingly imitate Quakers, I think we’re fine 😉
      4
    • Jean Meyer Capps
      Good point. Sad to know that someone would join a group like this and be unpleasant.
      • Janet Nagel
        Jean Meyer Capps It is sad to think that someone in this group would harbor suspicion and distrust of others in the group.
        2
      • Sharon Fitzpatrick
        Janet Nagel I distinctly recall there being a U.S. government informant who had joined a P&SC committee in nascent illegal U.S. occupation or Iraq.
        I don’t know why I can’t remember where….but maybe others who knew more…
        It may be that social media changed only to make it easier for those who wish to be privy to and included in these discussions/propaganda opportunities.
      • Sharon Fitzpatrick
        *during nascent
        It was in US. The Meeting was active in other social concerns. I keep thinking Texas and perhaps border witness /immigration issue was one of the reasons in hot seat…
        I know it sounds like rumor, but I am just having poor recollection.
        I was under surveillance in my home/work while active with peace groups at this time. One person who I had set up to speak at Meetinghouse on 2 occasions let me know afterwards that I was probably on a watch list because had exchanged emails with her. I was living on and managing an organic agriculture property, where a full background check had been done before I could move there. No criminal record, but the owners let me know that my landline was tapped by non-local government agency.
        When I moved out there, same thing happened to the line I had in my name and the greenhouse line had already been tagged.
        The owners were wealthy enough to have someone who could check this.
        I laughed when Theocracy Watch’s founder warned me about surveillance. I had been emailing back and forth with environmental and peace activism for a few years during an invasion my nation launched and sustained. As sad as it was, I had figured I was on watch list before anyone provided confirmation or warning.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)