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

Reddit Bans Nazi Groups and Others in Crackdown on Violent Content

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 276 posts

Re: Reddit Bans Nazi Groups and Others in Crackdown on Violent Content

#181

Post by tscs37 »

neo4sure wrote: post #157
briantakita wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's your definition of a Nazi? It's difficult to talk about a word that has a fuzzy meaning. To some elements of the the modern left (i.e. Antifa), it seems like anybody who does not agree with certain ideologies, such as "Equality" (in the Identity Politics sense; again "Equality" has a fuzzy meaning), is equated with being a Nazi. To paraphrase what I wrote above, the White Nationalist (aka "the Nazis") movement…

Why is Equality an ideology? Isn't it basic human decency?

Lots of people disagree on the exact type of equality humanity should be aiming for.

Re: Reddit Bans Nazi Groups and Others in Crackdown on Violent Content

#182

Post by tscs37 »

keepper wrote: post #27

Amazing ( well, more like sad ) that the first comments I see are "well, we can agree that nazis are bad, but this is a slippery slope, what about BLM, and antifa" Nazism - The belief ( on pseudoscience i may add )that other races ( a term that has no scientific basis ) are only worthy of extermination ( death, MDK ) BLM - The belief ( on experiences of some in society ), that Black people are not treated the same in…

>Nazism - The belief ( on pseudoscience i may add )that other races ( a term that has no scientific basis ) are only worthy of extermination ( death, MDK )

I would correct that.

Nazis didn't wholly think that. Not all races where "worthy of extermination". For example, black people in the Reich were largely ignored as a non-problem and left to their own devices and people from the Middle-East were recruited as part of the armed forces. "Honorary Aryan" is a thing they did too when someone proved to be useful (Japanese have been declared as such). Just a short history FYI.

Racism is the more correct term, believing any human inferoir based on their race, and some racists demand extermination. Nazis are a specific subgroup of racists.

Re: Reddit Bans Nazi Groups and Others in Crackdown on Violent Content

#183

Post by tscs37 »

libertyEQ wrote: post #127
spamizbad wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Black Lives Matter is very specifically an anti-violence organization. The Root has an article debunking the idea they're somehow comparable: http://www.theroot.com/for-white-people-who-compare-black-li... Nevertheless, the end of the day, privately owned websites on the Internet are not "free speech zones". Each site sets their own rules. There are numerous sites out there where Nazis are welcome (Voat, Gab, the var…

When they want to discredit BLM, pundits (e.g. Hannity) just show the video from a few years ago where there are black people chanting, "pigs in a blanket, fry'em like bacon" while marching. They play it over and over again and claim these people are all violent. Yes, it's illogical, no, they won't stop.

It really doesn't matter what your group does, it matters how the public views your group.

If your group is actually violent or not doesn't matter at all.

I think for the intents and purposes of the dicussion, when mentioning BLM it can be safely assumed people usually refer to the violent part fo the group and not the non-violent, peaceful/pacifist part of the group.

Re: Reddit Bans Nazi Groups and Others in Crackdown on Violent Content

#184

Post by _euac »

oh_sigh wrote: post #80
_euac wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has some examples: https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/53d5xb/what-is-rt... Every time I've been to that subreddit, it only takes perusing the comments for 5 minutes to find way worse stuff. From people being openly racist, to people calling for Hillary Clinton to be raped, etc. Bunch of great people, really :\

I browse T_D frequently and I have not once seen someone calling for HRC to be raped. I'm not saying it never happened but I'm curious 1) how upvoted the commment was and 2) how you've glanced at the site for 5 minutes and saw something that I missed after having browsed the site since 2015

The post was on the front page of r/t_d, so I'm assuming it was fairly upvoted, and had plenty of comments from people supporting the spirit of the message. I remember linking it somewhere else on Reddit, to show just how vile the subreddit was (it was during one of the many discussions like this that try to portray r/t_d as a "high energy subreddit for fans only!")

Re: Reddit Bans Nazi Groups and Others in Crackdown on Violent Content

#185

Post by _euac »

thescribe wrote: post #176
uoaei wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They specifically advocate for inclusion of races, and a destruction of a class system. Nowhere in this does "color" or "ethnicity" make its way into this.

So a bloody bolsheviks style revolution is ok as long as they do it inclusively?

Please point me to posts on those subreddits calling for a bloody revolution and the killing of the bourgeoisie? There's been this new meme circulating on right-wing circles that if you are not a card-carrying alt-righter then you must be - by necessity - Che Guevara's second coming. It's pretty disingenuous, and quite silly to be honest.

Re: Reddit Bans Nazi Groups and Others in Crackdown on Violent Content

#186

Post by _euac »

oh_sigh wrote: post #77
_euac wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

r/the_donald is not just about "disagreeing" it's literally the worst kind of ecochamber of conspiracy theories, veiled (and sometimes not-so-veiled) racism and constant calls to action against "the left". They are such an ecochamber that 90% of the time they speak on memes that nobody else understands (or cares to understand.)

Communities developing their own language and shared understanding is nothing new. Yes, sometimes racist things are said, but are frequently downvoted or pushed back on. Unless, of course, if you considering being, say, anti-Islam as "racist". The most common thing I see is that T_D users accept all races and immigrants, but only if they conform to western ideals(say, by not killing gay people or stoning women) and a…

Would you say being "anti-Jewish" is racist or bigoted?

Re: Reddit Bans Nazi Groups and Others in Crackdown on Violent Content

#187

Post by DashRattlesnake »

yodsanklai wrote: post #107
mschuster91 wrote: post #8

Hmm. This is going to be interesting. I mean, nearly everyone should be fine with banning Nazis. After all, they're vile and in my opinion don't deserve any place on the world except the inside of a jail cell... The problem is: where will the line be drawn? What about Black Lives Matter? The more, uh, militant parts of the Antifa movement? Militant animal rights groups (which actually are treated as domestic terroris…

> where will the line be drawn? It's a difficult question. As much as I'm for free speech and against censorship, I still have the feeling that a line has to be drawn somewhere. For instance, we can't reasonably authorize Isis propaganda on public forums, can we? Actually, now that I'm thinking about it, I suppose that calls to violence are already forbidden. I'm not familiar with US free speech laws, but I remember…

> For instance, we can't reasonably authorize Isis propaganda on public forums, can we?

I think we totally can and should. We just need to invest in the infrastructure to identify and respond to it.

Re: Reddit Bans Nazi Groups and Others in Crackdown on Violent Content

#188

Post by hsod »

KGIII wrote: post #50
cmac2992 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everybody is running into the same issue. Even voat is is banning "subreddits". Turns out managing UGC is a really hard problem. https://voat.co/v/announcements/163288

Yeah, that was a couple of years ago and a clear line in the sand. No illegal content. A good choice. Free speech doesn't include illegal content. Well, it doesn't to most rational people.

> Free speech doesn't include illegal content

Isn't that kind of begging the question? "Illegal content" is just a bunch of types of expression that the government has decided to ban.

They are all exceptions to free speech which you accept, which brings your free-speech-absolutist stance into question.

Re: Reddit Bans Nazi Groups and Others in Crackdown on Violent Content

#189

Post by KGIII »

chiefalchemist wrote: post #87
KGIII wrote: post #6

It's really, really not easy to stand up for the rights of Nazis. If you're a Nazi, you can use voat.co as they are very free speech oriented. You don't have to be a Nazi to participate, but it's a good idea to have a thick skin if you do go there. I go there and talk to the White Nationalists. They are pretty much Nazis. They know I'm not white and that I don't agree with them. They don't scare me. They are scared a…

Full disclosure: I'm a white male. With that said, I agree with you. That is, bringing these things into the light will do more good then empowering them by marginalizing them. As you've experienced, by shining your personal flashlight (so to speak), they wither in the light. Yes, what they're selling is deplorable. But if you believe that the arc of the universe bends towards justice, then letting them stand in the…

Meh, the thread is dead so I just wanted to say thanks. I am kinda passionate about certain things like liberty. I'm actually pretty moderate, just verbose.

I'm not scared. They don't scare me. They put on a tough face. I've been in places like Somalia. I've stomped all across South America. I've been all across Latin America. I've done South Africa, most of the Middle East, much of Asia, etc...

American White Nationalists marching in parades scare me exactly none. 14 year old American children copying their older brothers on Voat saddens me, not scares me. It doesn't make me very angry. Not anymore. I'm pretty desensitized to it. It mostly just makes me sad.

Seriously...

Think about it... Put yourself in a White Nationalist shoes. You don't even have any real good movies to watch. Even documentaries end with Hitler always getting his ass kicked. In every movie, you're pretty much the asshole. You're, at best, redeemed before dying or going to prison for life.

Man, a White Nationalist can't even really enjoy American History X.

I make fun of them for reading Mein Kampf. "Oh, you expect it to somehow turn out different this time?" I point out the horrible flaws in their race war logic, about how they are horrible out numbered, unpopular, and simply lack the technical expertise or the logistics to achieve even a remote victory in any meaningful numbers.

I make fun of their horrible use of statistics, inaccurate understanding of science and history, and teach them to speak better English. After all, if you're going to convert people to you're side, you're going to have to speak better English. They really aren't very crafty and it's actually kind of amusing that people think they are a serious threat to the fabric of the country.

But, I digress... I just wanted to let you know that there's no bravery. I'm not scared because there's no reason to be scared. I've really invited a few of them to my home. They have my address and a standing invitation. I'd let them visit but not like hold a Nazi rally at my house. The few I have invited are a few that I believe are able to change.

I wasn't doing anything better with my time.

Re: Reddit Bans Nazi Groups and Others in Crackdown on Violent Content

#190

Post by KGIII »

hsod wrote: post #188
KGIII wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that was a couple of years ago and a clear line in the sand. No illegal content. A good choice. Free speech doesn't include illegal content. Well, it doesn't to most rational people.

> Free speech doesn't include illegal content Isn't that kind of begging the question? "Illegal content" is just a bunch of types of expression that the government has decided to ban. They are all exceptions to free speech which you accept, which brings your free-speech-absolutist stance into question.

You assumed I was a free speech absolutist. I am not. I am not an extremist. Rights must have reasonable restrictions. They are things like libel, slander, child pornography, classified material by a person who has clearance, etc...

Those are unlawful and are reasonable restrictions with very, very few restrictions. They may be published for use in the court, whistle blowing, or otherwise outlined affirmative defenses established by law or precedent.

I am not an extremist. I am not an absolutist. The right has reasonable restrictions. The question is where those restrictions are. I think I've explained where I believe those should be, though they are scattered in a bunch of comments.

Post reply on HN