[flagged]
Total control of information is the best way to differentiate ourselves from the Nazis?
banning holocaust denial == “total control of information”
?
Zuckerberg defends Facebook users' right to be wrong – even Holocaust deniers
11–20 of 50 posts
Re: Zuckerberg defends Facebook users' right to be wrong – even Holocaust deniers
#12Earlier quoted context omitted.
I honestly don't know why it's better to ban denial rather than trying to engage and educate. It's been very confusing to me. Could you please explain?
Probably because it's "simply" easier (said). Let's take SandyHook (and the false information that is was all faked.) It would be much easier to say "let's ban the dissemination of the idea that it was faked" than to say, let's go out there and show all those deniers and people who listen to them and show them the facts. We know it's difficult to change the minds of people who hold steadfast views like these. But the…
So you'd be in favor of he government banning "Sandyhook was faked" dissemination?
What other information should the government deem fake? And where should this Ministry of Truth be headquartered?
Re: Zuckerberg defends Facebook users' right to be wrong – even Holocaust deniers
#13The West European bans on holocaust denial must be seen in their historical context.
After WWII, there was a massive backlash against german collaborators. Everyone even slightly suspect of being pro german was at risk of being looted, tortured or killed by their furious neighbours.
Mob rule had to be replaced by lawfull governement, and this required appeasing the mob. Part of it were dishonest trials, a blind eye against some revenges. A very small price to pay was forbidding the denial of the crimes that the Nazis had done.
I am not proud of this part of our history but it was probably necessary.
However, we are a few generations further now and a lot of relevant people are dead now. Maybe the time is ready to review this rule. Discussing this stuf is especially important as we seem to remake some of the errors that led to the war
Re: Zuckerberg defends Facebook users' right to be wrong – even Holocaust deniers
#14Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably because it's "simply" easier (said). Let's take SandyHook (and the false information that is was all faked.) It would be much easier to say "let's ban the dissemination of the idea that it was faked" than to say, let's go out there and show all those deniers and people who listen to them and show them the facts. We know it's difficult to change the minds of people who hold steadfast views like these. But the…
So you'd be in favor of he government banning "Sandyhook was faked" dissemination? What other information should the government deem fake? And where should this Ministry of Truth be headquartered?
Actually that's not at all what the post you're referring to said. Quite the opposite rather.
Re: Zuckerberg defends Facebook users' right to be wrong – even Holocaust deniers
#15The West European bans on holocaust denial must be seen in their historical context. After WWII, there was a massive backlash against german collaborators. Everyone even slightly suspect of being pro german was at risk of being looted, tortured or killed by their furious neighbours. Mob rule had to be replaced by lawfull governement, and this required appeasing the mob. Part of it were dishonest trials, a blind eye a…
Actually, in most countries who do this, Holocaust Denial only became a crime in the 1980s and later: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_against_Holocaust_denial
Re: Zuckerberg defends Facebook users' right to be wrong – even Holocaust deniers
#16[flagged]
I honestly don't know why it's better to ban denial rather than trying to engage and educate. It's been very confusing to me. Could you please explain?
The entire school system is based on how bad they were, how many bad things they did and how how everyone in Germany should never repeat the same mistakes again. Ok, I'm exaggerating a bit, but that's the general idea. I think Germany was one of the only countries to actually deal, accept and discuss openly in society the atrocities they did in WWII. So it's not just banning and getting over denial.
Re: Zuckerberg defends Facebook users' right to be wrong – even Holocaust deniers
#17Re: Zuckerberg defends Facebook users' right to be wrong – even Holocaust deniers
#18How will the media and society deal with these sorts of situations if decentralised alternatives to these social media sites take off? There won’t be any one place or person or company to blame, no? Did the media write about email being used negatively when it was taking off? (That’s an honest question, I’m too young and a cursory search didn’t turn up anything interesting).
[deleted]
Re: Zuckerberg defends Facebook users' right to be wrong – even Holocaust deniers
#19[flagged]
So the German people can be guilted into paying over 80 billion dollars yet the Allies pay nothing for the war crimes of Dresden, Nagasaki and Hiroshima?
Re: Zuckerberg defends Facebook users' right to be wrong – even Holocaust deniers
#20How will the media and society deal with these sorts of situations if decentralised alternatives to these social media sites take off? There won’t be any one place or person or company to blame, no? Did the media write about email being used negatively when it was taking off? (That’s an honest question, I’m too young and a cursory search didn’t turn up anything interesting).
We'd just be back to the time where the powers that be demonized the internet for what it was: something they couldn't control or sometimes even understand.
Email is a different beast, being private communication. But Usenet is exactly what you describe, a decentralized forum. And unsuprisingly it had both the best and the worst of humanity in there.
You get one guess as to which of those two got portrayed more in the media.