Libertarian asked:
<<Why is it that Marxists are allowed to post their allegations as a legitimate POV but if there are allegations to the contrary, they are either not allowed or they have to be worded such that they are weak?>>
The Wikipedia websites are not for posting one's opinions. They are for creating and displaying encyclopedia articles.
If Marxists, socialists, free market capitalists, Buddhists or Harry Potter fans have an opinion on something; and if ANYONE thinks this opinion is relevant to an article, then:
* they may incorporate that opinion into the article * with attribution (like "Marxists equate profit with theft")
In cases of hot controversy, it may be a good idea to discuss proposed changes in the article's talk page first, like:
* I think we should mention Singh's critique of the Muslim firebombers, and not focus so much on Bablanghadi's account of the incident. Bablanghadi is a Marxist who writes for Bombay Red Digest. (names invented for this example)
In other words, don't just add your own opinion to an article. Try to write about what really happened. If that's hard, because there are different versions of what happened, then LABEL each version as coming from a particular reporter or advocate:
* Hindus called the train incident "a typical and frighenting example of Muslim terror" * Muslims said they were "just defending themselves against Hindu aggression" * Marxist journalists called the incidents "a fine example of the dialectic in play" * Western observers like Greg Stone expressed the wish "that they would all grow up and start acting like civilized people" -- a comment which Agrani Nehru denounced as typical of "that white we-will-save-you attitude which annoys us all so much"
Try for balance and neutrality. I can help, if you want.
Ed Poor, aka Uncle Ed