5 ms·
It might be compatible with democracy, but it's incompatible with democratic dialog. You can't have a dialog when one side is refusing to talk.
by tomerv 13y ago
It might be compatible with democracy, but it's incompatible with democratic dialog. You can't have a dialog when one side is refusing to talk.
- Aldream 13y agoThat's what many organizations reproach Israel... All about points of view, I guess. ;-)
- Svip 13y agoThat's assuming you don't explain your reasons for refusing to talk. Hawking and others have made it quite clear why they are boycotting. And by boycotting, they are giving their dialogue more effect. If Hawking went down to Israel, told him what he thought about the whole thing with Palestine and hauled ass out of there; no one would care. 'Great, another European telling Israel they don't it. NEXT!' But this boycott is actually making people talk.
- meric 13y agoIf there's a difference between "democratic dialog" and just plain "dialog", I would have thought it'd be the former having the involvement of individuals, as it does now, rather than representatives of nation states. That would be "representative dialog". And that's why I agree saying it isn't a "democratic dialog" is all PR talk. "We object to Stephen Hawking using his authority to threaten us in an undemocratic way."
- EiZei 13y agoBy dialog do you mean getting accused of anti-semitism?