Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Symbol Neo-Nazis Use to Target Jews Online

mic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 94 posts

Re: A Symbol Neo-Nazis Use to Target Jews Online

#71

Post by DanBC »

michaelbuddy wrote: post #69
DanBC wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might want to re-read your dictionary. Violence has included non-physical force for very many years, very much longer than the Internet has been in existence. http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/youthviolence/definiti... > Interpersonal violence is defined as "the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against another person or against a group or community that results in or has a hig…

Threats that might seem credible are a far cry from saying bad things about someone, to them or to someone else.

You don't seem to understand that threats of violence are what we're talking about. Do you really not understand that saying you're going to rape someone is a threat of violence?

The article says:

> Other Jewish writers have faced more serious attacks: death threats, anti-Semitic cartoons, images of concentration camp ovens and executed Jews, threatening emails, even home phone calls.

> Michael received [...] Trolls threatened him: "'When the time comes, the Jews are going to be in trouble, lined up,'" Michael recalls. "That kind of tone. Random shit by people thinking it's funny Jews were being targeted."

Re: A Symbol Neo-Nazis Use to Target Jews Online

#72

Post by chillacy »

michaelbuddy wrote: post #68
gotchange wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's Twitter's responsibility out of their commitment to the welfare of community. Abuse and harassment should not be tolerated in any community to guarantee healthy atmosphere and smooth exchange of information and constructive communication for all participants. Let's make this point loud and clear, there's a huge difference between criticizing Israel, Netanyahu, or even Zionism but attacking Jews solely for being…

So what's the difference between hate speech and clever razzing on people? Not really anything actually. Criticizing somebody for being the stereotype isn't a bad thing in a culture necessarily either. People familiar with one another can criticize each other using the exact same words, but then a stranger pops in and it's time to light torches and throw him over a cliff. This is all bad news. A general platform for…

> People familiar with one another can criticize each other using the exact same words, but then a stranger pops in and it's time to light torches and throw him over a cliff

I somehow doubt the guy who sent the auschwitz pictures was doing so in playful jest, hoping to make the recipient laugh. You can say mean things to a stranger with a smile or with anger, and that hints at very different intentions. Basic social cues.

Re: A Symbol Neo-Nazis Use to Target Jews Online

#73

Post by chillacy »

zem wrote: post #34
personjerry wrote: post #5

Please excuse my naïveté, and I do not share the opinions of the neo-nazis, but isn't it part of free speech to able to use these symbols and to be prejudiced? Edit: My follow-up question: Why then is it Twitter's responsibility to censor such speech?

if twitter clamps down on this, it creates an unwelcoming place for the neonazis. if it does not, it creates an unwelcoming place for their targets. twitter has to pick one; doing nothing is not a neutral action.

I can't imagine the neonazi crowd is large or profitable compared to everyone else.

Re: A Symbol Neo-Nazis Use to Target Jews Online

#74

Post by JimLaheyMD »

DanBC wrote: post #64
JimLaheyMD wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Internet messages are violence now?

You might want to re-read your dictionary. Violence has included non-physical force for very many years, very much longer than the Internet has been in existence. http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/youthviolence/definiti... > Interpersonal violence is defined as "the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against another person or against a group or community that results in or has a hig…

Neither of those are the dictionary though, the definition on Merriam Webster says it's

>behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.

Oxford and dictionary.com have similar definitions

Both of your definitions seem to me like cherry picked overly broad legal definitions especially since they are both from legal sites and not dictionaries and one is on a page titled "Youth Violence"

Re: A Symbol Neo-Nazis Use to Target Jews Online

#75

Post by Criticism123 »

_audakel wrote: post #37
personjerry wrote: post #5

Please excuse my naïveté, and I do not share the opinions of the neo-nazis, but isn't it part of free speech to able to use these symbols and to be prejudiced? Edit: My follow-up question: Why then is it Twitter's responsibility to censor such speech?

One of the things I love abt HN is the difference of opinions. You can have a post that tells you all the great things abt A, then in the comments you hear why A is bad, but also there is C. It is sad that internet trolls exist, but at the same time the internet is amazing bc trolls exist, or that they can exist. The ability for everyone to communicate freely brings out the best in humanity, but also the worst. The s…

>HN has diversity of opinions

Keep telling yourself that, HN is an echo chamber. Diversity of opinion is shunned. Anything that does not fit the SJW narrative will be down voted to death like this very comment.

Re: A Symbol Neo-Nazis Use to Target Jews Online

#77

Post by michaelbuddy »

DanBC wrote: post #71
michaelbuddy wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Threats that might seem credible are a far cry from saying bad things about someone, to them or to someone else.

You don't seem to understand that threats of violence are what we're talking about. Do you really not understand that saying you're going to rape someone is a threat of violence? The article says: > Other Jewish writers have faced more serious attacks: death threats, anti-Semitic cartoons, images of concentration camp ovens and executed Jews, threatening emails, even home phone calls. > Michael received [...] Trolls…

you've certainly mentioned some strong examples. However, it's not the same as real violence.

think of these two statements, jokes whatever you want to call it.

"what do you call a hundred thousand lawyers at the bottom of the ocean? A good start" A joke we've all heard.

Now, same joke 'What do you call a hundred thousand Jews at the bottom of the ocean? A good start.

Now which one is hate speech? Both? None? Should history be the only basis for whether jokes are permitted or not? What about who delivers it and why?

I'm not asking you to really answer me here, but it's worth thinking about. And I think platforms banning language simply will get it wrong. Human mods will get it wrong, computer mods will get it wrong.

Again, I'm going to go to the platforms where speech is allowed because of the nuance of humor, of conversation. And especially where personal experience is valid even when it appears biased or hateful.

Re: A Symbol Neo-Nazis Use to Target Jews Online

#78

Post by michaelbuddy »

chillacy wrote: post #72
michaelbuddy wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what's the difference between hate speech and clever razzing on people? Not really anything actually. Criticizing somebody for being the stereotype isn't a bad thing in a culture necessarily either. People familiar with one another can criticize each other using the exact same words, but then a stranger pops in and it's time to light torches and throw him over a cliff. This is all bad news. A general platform for…

> People familiar with one another can criticize each other using the exact same words, but then a stranger pops in and it's time to light torches and throw him over a cliff I somehow doubt the guy who sent the auschwitz pictures was doing so in playful jest, hoping to make the recipient laugh. You can say mean things to a stranger with a smile or with anger, and that hints at very different intentions. Basic social…

It's funny you should mention a photo example. Because I've actually seen many times where a terrible photo was used as humor, and it was funny. Dark humor doesn't mean hate speech. All the examples there, I can think of moments where it can work in a context of humor, depending on the delivery, the sender. The culture of the people doing the sharing. All things.

Re: A Symbol Neo-Nazis Use to Target Jews Online

#80

Post by yoshuaw »

JimLaheyMD wrote: post #53
yoshuaw wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you hold one user accountable for drawing attention to a user who is now receiving messages from third parties Inciting violence against a person makes you responsible for the violence that follows; let's not pretend this is something different - it's not.

Internet messages are violence now?

Threatening a person, and marking them as the target for a mob harms someone. Harming people is violence
Post reply on HN