Fear, Threats and Intimidation

Anyone who knows their SXM political history will know that there exists a cloud of fear over the people when it comes to being involved in politics and government. Standing up against or criticizing government or powerful figures used to get you spat at or forced to leave the island, you suffered for it. Very little has changed, the same is true today.

We live in a society where people have been discouraged from participating in government and speaking their minds, where it is so much easier and healthier to keep your head down and focus on your own life and problems. There are so many good, intelligent and capable people out there I know who are even afraid to post an anonymous comment here. It's a very sad state of affairs.

The internet and blogs such as this one have opened up an avenue for ordinary people to speak freely, to express criticism, opinions, arguments and share ideas and knowledge without that fear. Unfortunately there are those who would seek to bring that fear here, discourage and even threaten those who's opinions they disagree with, or feel hurt by.

Leopold James - Advice to Bloggers.
[More....]

It's ironic really because yesterday I posted a comment to Hady's Manifesto Blog about laying off poking at Leopold and this morning I find a new 'missive' from him directed at Bloggers on SMM News that I really can't ignore and as temporary chief spokesperson for SXM feel I must respond to.

Before I do though, let me first bring some attention to a couple of stories that have been given a great deal and attention these past few weeks in the US. The first is the growing rise of extremist fringe elements in the US, right wing radicals, racists and nuts feeling their violence and hatred is justified and even condoned by people like Bill O'Reilly, Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Hannity who hype, mislead and distort reality to jive with their scary alternate version.

There is a big debate right now in the US media and blogging world about how much these people, 'news' (sic) presenters and personalities are contributing to the rise of right wing extremism. And when a Government report commissioned by Bush came out a few months ago warning of a rise in right wing extremism and terrorism these same people cried out against it and called it biased and nonsense.

Crooks and Liars follows this story quite well.

The point is that by stoking and bolstering extreme views or appearing to sympathize with them is allowing those people to think those views are acceptable and understandable. The same goes for sympathizing with the faux outrage those people express when someone points out the flaws or criticizes those views. And quite often when an extremist's 'reality' is challenged, they respond with personal attacks, false information, hate, threats and physical violence.

This is why we have moderating guidelines here at SXM PE, to maintain a level of discourse and the exchange of view points out of the muck.

• We don't permit content or comments that advocate, promote or threaten revenge, violence or aggression towards others.

• We don't permit content or comments that are personal attacks against other users, nor do we permit people to make unfounded statements on others character. This does not mean you need to prove something, just that if you are going to make accusations or express an opinion about someone then you are expected to explain your reason why you do so. We expect users to maintain an attitude of respect for other users views, even if you don't agree with them.

• Sarcasm, satire and humor are all welcomed and permitted and anyone who comes online and writes, be it in a blog or a comment, needs to grow a thick skin. Your ideas and opinions will likely be challenged, you might end up making a fool of yourself, you may make mistakes with how you say things and there are people out there who will jump at the chance to distort them.

• You are free to express disagreement and to explain why in comments or by writing your own blog, and you should be thinking that your end goal isn't to change or convince the other person you are right and they are wrong, but to convince readers that your argument is more convincing.

The general rule is that it is the content of what is said and the information presented that is important here. We have no interest in who is behind an alias or anonymous comment and we respect their wish for privacy, their reasons are their own. In St. Maarten those reasons could be fear that they(and their family) will suffer consequences, when it comes to getting licenses, permits or other government services and assistance. It is documented fact that politicians and department heads play games with those they have personal or ideological disagreements with, and respectively they facilitate and smooth things over with their buddies.

It might be the fear of losing clients and business or even their job, it might cause fall out and discord with family members and friends.

But most of all I think, and this is for anyone who fails to understand why people might choose anonymity and thinks that revealing and exposing identities is some funny little game or joke to fool around with. It could be fear that extremist supporters of people or projects that get written about will come knocking on their door late at night and 'take care of them'.

Now you tell me Mr. Leopold James, and this blog is addressed to you in response to your letter on SMN News today, what about this don't you understand? You who all the time write about on about the weakness of justice and police and the corruption and lawlessness?

How about an example? Want to know why I use an alias??

Well, I have written about many environmental and development issues, Dawn Beach, Indigo Bay, Aquarius, Cupecoy to name a few, and by the way, just about all I have written about over the years has been proven to be true. Long before Delano screwed himself up, I was writing about the mess at VROM, with permits being given without real review, about people building without them.

I have also written about historical issues, Emilio Wilson Estate being the main one, but I have also written about other things like the Great Sale Pond and the planned Ring Road.

Now, with all these issues there is big money involved and that can make people emotional and protective of their interests. Do you think I want a couple of Heavy Equipment operators or thugs hired by an upset developer knocking on my door at night?? Or do you think I want some nut with extremist views and hate looking for me because they have the impression I am racist, or anti SXM'er, an impression supported by a few unfounded and guessed comments and opinions of other nutters?

And now, lets bring up that second story, because it's all about blogging and anonymity and something you and many others need to read up on and understand. It involves the recent 'outing' of a blogger called 'Publius' by National Review Online blogger Ed Whelan. Below are a few more links that are highly recommended for people who don't understand the desire for or respect for anonymity and for all bloggers and potential bloggers too.

Blogger Anonymity and Outing

The Outing of a Blogger: The Fear of Being Found Out

The Outing of a Blogger: Social Transparency or Violation?

The Outing of a Blogger: Is it Legal to Reveal a Blogger?

And please take note of the difference between anonymity and pseudonyms. My pseudonym is Local Hero, taken from a movie where a one guy stood up against the destruction and environmental rape and destruction of his home village by an oil company. Do I consider myself a Local Hero? No, not really, nor do I wish to be considered one, but I do know that I do a fair bit more than most when it comes to fighting against the rape and destruction of St. Maarten. My pseudonym has a reputation, I can't think of anything I have written or said on here that I would not be willing to defend or face criticism over.

It should be fairly obvious to even the dullest mind that my writings have upset some people, some of whom might think nothing of 'teaching a lesson' to me, perhaps run me down in the street and claim it was an accident, who knows how far these fringe and wacky extremists, or money interests, will go?

So, reading your letter again for the 4th time Mr. James, let me formulate my response to you thus.

1. First of all, grow some skin.

It's fairly obvious that you don't like your ideas and views challenged or criticized, nor do you like being made fun of, who does? Some consider you xenophobic, some consider you intolerant and even racist, your campaigning against foreigners of all nationalities in favor of creating a 1st class citizenry of 'indigenous people' is well known and clear.

Funny thing is Mr. James, most of those people agree with you on many things, for instance about BESS and a transitional period to restructure, reform and establish a secure, open, accountable government. We also see that corrupt local politicians have sold the island and people out, and by people I mean all those who are citizens and have their lives and future here and who call it HOME. My perception from your writings is that 'people' means those who can trace back heritage x many generations and can prove blood lines.

While I sympathize with you about this as I also think the development on the island has not served the people, the world has moved on, you can't turn back time. You claim to want to promote unity, yet at the same time you want to separate and create divisions, which is it Mr. James?

And what exactly are we to make of your letter?

Your first paragraph reveals exactly what I started this blog with, that people are afraid to express opinions and get involved with political issues and debates. They wouldn't even sign petitions against the Dolphinarium because they were afraid X Commissioner would read it and take note. And the funny thing is, THEY DO! Politicians do read through names on petitions, or newspaper letters, and they do take notes!

You second paragraph begins well until you say 'vile things', from there is gets very dark, sinister and threatening. It's no secret that you have been offended by what some have had to say about you, your letters, your views, so in that respect your letter comes across as personal, from someone who has revenge in mind, intolerance for critics and a very thin skin. Are you offended if I call you and your views dangerous and explain my reasons why? Do you feel like 'outing me' because of it?

Those who toy with the idea of 'outing' bloggers who choose to retain privacy for a variety of reasons and use a pseudonym in revenge, because they feel offended or don't like criticism, or made to look or feel silly, are to be reviled and condemned. Even those that threaten to do so, knowing full well how serious the consequences to that person will be are lacking in intellectual skills and moral integrity. I don't necessarily believe in Hell myself, being Agnostic, but if there is one then these people will surely be securing a reservation.

You letter Mr. James, stinks of threats, I'm not going to say if this is your intention because I'm not really sure. Maybe you are just predicting what might happen, but in doing so you give seem to me to be giving indirect justification to those who hold extreme and violent tendencies to act them out. Sort of like homophobic zealots who shoulder a great deal of responsibility for the assault on Dick Jefferson and Ryan Smith with their intolerance and hate speech towards gay people.

A word of caution to you Mr James, for your soul, reputation and your conscience. Playing games with peoples lives because your ego can't take critics and making threats in order to silence them is despicable and downright shameful. As I have said, there is a place reserved for such people.

Local Hero