Wikipedia bans agenda-driven editor, but punishes the messenger too
The idea that anyone (including me and you, dear reader) is free from bias, especially when discussing politics, seems painfully obvious after reading lots of history. And yet, the claim that this or that person or organization is 'neutral' is very common.Further, the desire to create a 'neutral' 'encyclopedia' online is presumably what drives the entire Wikipedia community. I'd wish for a Wikipedia that consistently allows all viewpoints to be given an opportunity to be presented on any given topic, but I have no faith that such a thing is possible given the pervasiveness of the idea of neutrality and the interests at work to preserve that myth.