Talk:Demonization

Needs description of religious demonization, particularly Hebrews and Christians denouncing pagan deities.


 * Got that added now. This is just a start though. We need more people working on this article.

Demonizing the demonizers
Real good article, but the tone seems to demonize the demonizers!! I would start out by saying that all human beings have both good and evil characteristics, while demons are just evil. Also, the need to demonize is shown in warfare where you must make your enemy evil in order to happily kill him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.166.85.226 (talk) 22:59, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Sigh, just sigh. Apart from "good" and "evil" being completely subjective, if you blame someone for incorrectly intentionally blaming someone it does not make that accusation incorrect. They are in fact to blame for their false blaming of another. Stating someone is demonizing someone is NOT demonizing them, if it is true it is a statement of fact, an accusation on fact.

There is no NEED to demonize in warfare. In fact that is usually, as history shows us, an excuse because justification is lacking. You do not need to demonize an enemy in order to go to war with them, want to go to war with them, increase morale for war against them, kill your enemy, be motivated to kill your enemy or even to justify any of that. 124.182.143.128 (talk) 09:28, 14 February 2009 (UTC) Harlequin

Arguably?
"Arguably, Jews have historically been the subject of demonization more than any other group." Arguably? This is clearly an editorial comment and has no citation. While many in western cultures may see evidence of this, I'm sure that muslims would feel that they have been the result of demonization as well. In addition, the number of Jews that died in the Nazi holocaust is dwarfed by the systematic persecution, marginalization, and slaughter of indigenous peoples of the Americas and Africa. The Nazi holocaust is also dwarfed by the actions of the Japanese during WWII where tens of millions of Asians were killed.

The author of these comments seems to have a bias that is firmly rooted in western culture. Vargob 12:48, 25 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Part of the horror of the Holocaust was the specific targeting of an "ethnic" group for extinction. The Japanese Empire's killings were not calculated to destroy any particular group, but rather simply to establish their total control over the conquered people(s); not the same thing. -- Orange Mike 15:52, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I see. So homosexuals would be in fact be the "most historically demonized group". In fact, they were specifically targeted by the Nazis. Good try with such biased idiocy though, perhaps you can try and bring it up on an article that ISNT in wikipedia. 124.182.143.128 (talk) 09:31, 14 February 2009 (UTC) Harlequin


 * Did you have a point? It must be clouded by your personal remarks about Orange Mike's intelligence. Perhaps you could explain yourself a bit more clearly and this can be a discussion instead of a bout of name calling. If not, kindly keep your opinions to yourself. PhoenixofMT (talk) 02:57, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Buddha and Vishnu
"for instance, some strains of Hinduism considered the Buddha an incarnation of Vishnu sent to deceive people."

Undoing this statement due to uncited POV.Nambo (talk) 11:50, 30 January 2008 (UTC)


 * The proper response to this is to demand a citation, not to remove the material entirely. I will restore it with a "cite needed" tag. -- Orange Mike  |  Talk  14:30, 30 January 2008 (UTC)


 * No you are completely wrong here. See what Jimbo himself has stated
 * "I can NOT emphasize this enough. There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative 'I heard it somewhere' pseudo information is to be tagged with a 'needs a cite' tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced. This is true of all information, but it is particularly true of negative information about living persons."
 * Anyways, a fringe view should not be given undue weight in the article. Hinduism != polytheism, and a view that is uncommon should not be given credence over the established view, of a large section worshipping the Buddha as an avatar. Baka man  17:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Furthermore I dont actually see the real link to the surrounding text of the "other religions" section. It seems out of place, and not really meeting the standards of "demonization". Buddha was an indian man, who became an Indian deity. He is not foreign at all. Baka man  17:48, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't see how stating that there was a belief that the Buddha had taught incorrect doctrine necessary is relevant to demonization. Relata refero (talk) 18:05, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Merge suggestion: Folk devil into Demonization
"Folk devil" is the subject demonization; hence in modern usage the subjects are the same. - Altenmann >t 18:24, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Agreed, makes sense to me. Smartse (talk) 23:19, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Disagree: the Modern Usage section is one line long. It should link to this page instead. Paul S (talk) 01:11, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * ...by "this page" I mean the Folk Devil page. Paul S (talk) 01:14, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Origin of demons
Demons are the disembodied spirits of the fallen Watchers, nephilim, and gerbers (Annunaki). (Genesis 6:4, Daniel 4:17; Matthew 28:4) In the Book of Enoch I (Ethiopic), chapters 15 and 16, the bodies of the Watchers return to the earth, and their souls are condemned to wander the earth and contend with man. They are demons because of thier wickedness. The Watchers represent all the gods of the Levante pantheon and the "gods that came down." (Legends of the Jews) Zecharia Sitchin refers to them as the Nibiruans that came to earth to harvest gold and created mankind for worker slaves.(Sitchin, The Lost Book of Enki, 2002) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.59.175.28 (talk) 12:43, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Added Demonization to categories Abrahamic Religions and Religious Persecution
Added to Category: Religious persecution because I feel that demonization is a very negative thing, as it breed religious bigotry, fearmongering and intolerance, and is a brilliant example of the Abrahamic religions believing they can do whatever they want to the native beliefs of the world, even outright eliminate them. I honestly don't see why the belief that all religions except for one (usually Christianity or Islam) are false and demonic by nature isn't considered by the public to be as bad as a racist saying all other races are inferior and deserve to be wiped out. So, consider this page edited. - Anonymous, 2:30 PM, 24 June 2012
 * Also added to Category: Abrahamic religions because they are the ones most guilty of this atrocity. - Anonymous, 2:30 PM, 24 June 2012

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Demonization. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080203192324/http://www.srcf.ucam.org/cuhcs/info.faq.php to http://www.srcf.ucam.org/cuhcs/info.faq.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080103105058/http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Baphomet to http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Baphomet

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:09, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Expand demonization in politics section
Demonizatiin is endemic in politics. Nazis on the Jews, Communists on capitalists and vice versa, Trump demonising immigrants, etc. Also the article Demonizing the enemy should be merged into this one. Crawiki (talk) 13:15, 1 December 2018 (UTC)