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

Twitter Suspends Prominent Alt-Right Accounts

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 530 posts

Re: Twitter Suspends Prominent Alt-Right Accounts

#81

Post by marcelluspye »

leereeves wrote: post #48
xaa wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree. The first thing I thought upon reading this was: would Twitter ban an account with the following description: "dedicated to the heritage, identity, and future of people of African descent in the United States, and around the world." Undoubtedly not. The only difference, of course, is s/African/European/g. I'm a liberal, but I feel that if this election has taught us anything, it should be that suppression of "…

I feel like the left seriously damaged their ability to fight racist ideas when they abandoned the idea of equality. Now, the left calls colorblindness and "all lives matter" racist. (Remember when Martin O'Malley was destroyed for saying that?) They create advantageous standards based on race, and even exclusive positions for non-white applicants. (For example, at the BBC.) And I too doubt they would object to "dedi…

I don't think it was a case of abandoning equality, as much as it was about defering 'colorblindness' until there is actual equality. However, the people on the left espousing these ideas seem to have forgotten to tell everyone about this, and assumed the rest of society would figure out what they meant. They haven't, and I think that's where a lot of the problem is for them.

Re: Twitter Suspends Prominent Alt-Right Accounts

#82

Post by iopq »

commenting wrote: post #73
leereeves wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like the left seriously damaged their ability to fight racist ideas when they abandoned the idea of equality. Now, the left calls colorblindness and "all lives matter" racist. (Remember when Martin O'Malley was destroyed for saying that?) They create advantageous standards based on race, and even exclusive positions for non-white applicants. (For example, at the BBC.) And I too doubt they would object to "dedi…

Black Lives Matter means Black Lives Matter as well . The All Lives Matter movement, as a reaction to BLM, is essentially saying that they don't, and that the racial struggles of American Blacks are irrelevant. That is the reason why All Lives Matter is considered abusive.

> The All Lives Matter movement, as a reaction to BLM, is essentially saying that they don't

That's not what "all" means. It's turning the name of the movement by implying it means "only" Black Lives Matter. So All Lives Matter is saying that not only Black Lives Matter.

Re: Twitter Suspends Prominent Alt-Right Accounts

#83

Post by nilkn »

micaksica wrote: post #8

I'm not a fan of the "alt-right" or a lot of its subculture. I also don't find it particularly "alt", as much as it is "far" right. It is a lot of the ideas that powered the NSDAP enveloped in the language of the Internet and memes, with the targets broadened from Jewry to non-whites in general. However, I'm also not a fan of suspending these accounts for controversial views if they are not harassing people on the Tw…

The alt-right feeds off this. They want to be called racist, xenophobic, etc., because they believe that society has applied these terms too aggressively to folks who weren't actually racist or xenophobic ("the boy who called wolf"). There's a lot of anger stemming from that, which leads to behavior that's hard to understand for many people. They're not trolls, but there is an element of trolling in what they do.

Re: Twitter Suspends Prominent Alt-Right Accounts

#84

Post by pasquinelli »

haimez wrote: post #33
panic wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, the nature of Twitter makes debate unlikely to end in agreement. Twitter is just trying to improve the environment for its users so more people will join and stick around. Most people find the "ideas that powered the NSDAP" quite disgusting.

But at what COST. As a platform shaping measure, this is clearly an intentional measure to create a /specific/ different echo chamber. This is the mechanic that just created a Trump presidency.

that's assuming a lot. maybe trump won, more than anything else, because he was the republican candidate in a year that a two term democrat was sitting in the presidency.

Re: Twitter Suspends Prominent Alt-Right Accounts

#85

Post by grzm »

marcelluspye wrote: post #81
leereeves wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like the left seriously damaged their ability to fight racist ideas when they abandoned the idea of equality. Now, the left calls colorblindness and "all lives matter" racist. (Remember when Martin O'Malley was destroyed for saying that?) They create advantageous standards based on race, and even exclusive positions for non-white applicants. (For example, at the BBC.) And I too doubt they would object to "dedi…

I don't think it was a case of abandoning equality, as much as it was about defering 'colorblindness' until there is actual equality. However, the people on the left espousing these ideas seem to have forgotten to tell everyone about this, and assumed the rest of society would figure out what they meant. They haven't, and I think that's where a lot of the problem is for them.

Nuance is hard in this day and age, particularly when you're limited to 140 characters.

Re: Twitter Suspends Prominent Alt-Right Accounts

#86

Post by pekk »

MichaelBurge wrote: post #29

Twitter doesn't turn a profit, do they? If they get a couple months of losing users, that could easily pop their inflated stock. I'm not sure this is a good move for them.

IF they don't turn a profit, doesn't that suggest they're doing something wrong and should change, rather than that they should conservatively refuse to change anything and hope that they will suddenly start turning a profit that way?

Re: Twitter Suspends Prominent Alt-Right Accounts

#87

Post by micaksica »

tootie wrote: post #59
micaksica wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most people find the "ideas that powered the NSDAP" quite disgusting. If we are truly building a society of tolerance, whether or not one has a visceral reaction to an idea should not stop whether or not one can discuss and debate it. I'm not a neo-Nazi, but I've talked at length with them about their views. I will give anyone a few minutes to explain what they are about, try to listen to it neutrally, and form my…

I disagree. I think there is most definitely a boundary between people with different opinions and people with opinions that are fundamentally at odds with living in a civilized society. "I don't like Goldman Sachs" is an opinion you can debate on its merits. "Kill all the Jew bankers" is not. The boundary is somewhere in between those two. I can't speak to the particular accounts banned by Twitter, but the alt right…

> I think there is most definitely a boundary between people with different opinions and people with opinions that are fundamentally at odds with living in a civilized society.

In this statement, you are unilaterally making a rule as to what ideals are OK to hold as part of "civilized society", and where the boundary is. Stating your society is more "civilized" than another is an opinion in and of itself, and arguably those who hold views opposite yours likely think your societal views also contain hints of barbarism or offend human nature.

There are multiple ethical views that humanity and even this culture have held throughout the past century alone that the predominant society has now decided are reprehensible, that other nations consider reprehensible, and then there are also views that have been considered reprehensible now widely accepted by this culture.

Personally, my beef is not with whether or not people agree or disagree with these views; the argument in this subthread is external to my original message:

I'm tired of the Valley's progressive ideology consistently espousing acceptance, free organization, and free speech when we as an industry keep taking steps that seem against it when we disagree with the information provided. It is the message of social media: people should be able to communicate and unite worldwide. If we aren't radically upholding this belief, then we need to change the mantra to be aligned to what it actually means: associate with us, our ideas, and our worldview, and we will give you a voice. If you don't, your voice on this platform will be stripped, even if you are not engaged in attacking those that disagree with you.

Re: Twitter Suspends Prominent Alt-Right Accounts

#88

Post by pekk »

striking wrote: post #50
cwilson wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd never thought of that before. Trump values his Twitter account quite a bit. What could he do if Twitter decided to suspend him as a protest? I don't think this will ever happen, but it's an interesting hypothetical.

Whatever social network he would then move to would gain many, many followers. That would be Twitter shooting itself in the foot.

There are already Breitbart, FOX News, etc. which work on this principle even without anyone being banned.

Re: Twitter Suspends Prominent Alt-Right Accounts

#89

Post by autognosis »

nostromo wrote: post #32
micaksica wrote: post #8

I'm not a fan of the "alt-right" or a lot of its subculture. I also don't find it particularly "alt", as much as it is "far" right. It is a lot of the ideas that powered the NSDAP enveloped in the language of the Internet and memes, with the targets broadened from Jewry to non-whites in general. However, I'm also not a fan of suspending these accounts for controversial views if they are not harassing people on the Tw…

I don't see "alt-right" as being so similar to "far-right" based on my limited exposure. I've watched some debates with Milo as well as Gavin Mcinnes. They are definitely not what most Americans would call "far-right" -- in that they aren't anti-gay, aren't anti-drugs, aren't socially conservative, and aren't particularly hawkish. They seem to dislike Republicans like Paul Ryan almost as much as Nancy Pelosi. Milo re…

They're all crap labels. They contain no knowledge. What confused people call "liberals" aren't so about firearms and markets. "Liberal" is from the latin word for "freedom".

SJWs are not liberal. They don't want free speech. CA is not a liberal state by looking at its taxes and firearms laws. These are authoritarian ideas.

Rectification of names... Labels and Knowledge are totally independent things.

Post reply on HN