you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 11 points 3 weeks ago (25 children)

Careful op, Wikipedia is essentially Divine Scripture to western liberals.

  • source
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 weeks ago (24 children)

    That's silly - it's very much the work of humans with all the challenges that entails. However I find the Wikipedia projects aims of providing a globally accessible, multi language encyclopedia a pretty inspiring example of what global communities can achieve.

    You can write it off if you want. There are a number of alternative projects that attempt similar things with their own approaches and political philosophies. Although none so far have achieved anywhere near the coverage that Wikipedia has.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 2 weeks ago (9 children)

    That’s silly - it’s very much the work of humans with all the challenges that entails.

    Those humans specifically being, pro-western-imperialist white males.. Any other voices or viewpoints are silenced.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [+] -12 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (8 children)

    The irony of posting a link to prolewiki which very much doesn't attempt a NPOV.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 2 weeks ago* (1 child)

    You can't stay neutral on a moving train, and there's no such thing as neutrality in a world based on class struggle and class divisions.

    Prolewiki is openly a pro-worker site, and wikipedia claims neutrality but in the practice is pro capitalist-imperialist. One is open and honest about its bias, the other is not.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 2 weeks ago

    Prolewiki is openly a pro-worker site, and wikipedia claims neutrality but in the practice is pro capitalist-imperialist. One is open and honest about its bias, the other is not.

    Yes, something should be pro-labor class

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 2 weeks ago

    The irony of not understanding that objectivity is not possible when describing events, while being subjective in your critique yourself.
    Prolewiki is precisely as biased as Wikipedia, it just admits it, which is preferable since it is easier to be aware of your bias if you actually take it into account.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 2 weeks ago*

    There is no such thing as a neutral point of view, if you have a brain capable of holding a point of view then you have a body that biases you towards your own survival, comfort and social connections.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 2 weeks ago* (6 children)

    It’s very much the work of humans with all the challenges that entails. However

    However liberals will disregard the idea that Wikipedia isn't an unattenuated connection to pure truth out of hand. That's why I call it scripture; the idea that it has pervasive biases and inaccuracies is rejected without consideration; anything it states has considered true without possibility of question, even if the source Wikipedia is using would never be believed if it wasn't getting laundered through Wikipedia.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 2 weeks ago* (5 children)

    You seem to be painting with a very broad brush there. I've never considered Wikipedia to be free of these problems, I doubt there is any reference work that is completely objectively true.

    But it tries to be better one edit at a time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

    I'm generalising. You may not be guilty of this, but your average western liberal is. See, for example, other comments in this thread.

    But it tries to be better one edit at a time.

    You're attaching a spiritual quality to an inanimate thing. Wikipedia doesn't "try" to be anything.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    fine, replace "it" with "the community" if the impersonal subject confuses you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

    That’s silly - it’s very much the work of humans with all the challenges that entails. However I find the Wikipedia projects aims of providing a globally accessible, multi language encyclopedia a pretty inspiring example of what global communities can achieve.

    didn't usaid used to have a similar motto only for it to be revealed less than 2 years ago that it was little more than a propaganda manufacturing enabler when trump gutted it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    People are still using the USAID closure as a point to Trump killing a lot of poor people around the world due to lack of access to medicine and food. The organization seemed to do both, being a psyop campaign while providing some material benefit to the communities they were in since providing aid is really good at winning hearts and minds.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 2 weeks ago

    compare the amount of money spent on skullduggery compared to the amount spent on on aid to learn where the organization's priorities lie. and be careful not to get suckered into how much they officially spend on aid since most of skullduggery is officially categorized as aid.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -7 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)
  • [–] 12 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    there are other organizations out there that will use everything you give them to help instead of turning most of it into pro-us-empire regime control.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -9 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    Sure - but the point of usaid was being funded by the US government which has(had?) deeper pockets that your average NGO. Other nation states give more as a portion of GDP but there has been a lot of back sliding. Both China and Russia's foreign aid budgets are tiny both in absolute and relative to GDP terms. Only a few of the Nordics manage to exceed the UN guide of 0.7% of GDP.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment