741–750 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Knowing her, it wasn't. It was sarcasm. Did she know that the person she directed that comment to did not know her?
You don't have to know anyone to read that comment as satire. I suppose Facebook would also have banned Johnathan Swift for his "Modest Proposal". https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is clear discrimination Every decision is discrimination. > As if people with different shades of skin being nationalists are nicer than white nationalists. A “white nationalist” isn't “a nationalist with white skin” but “an adherent to the ideology of white nationalism”. You can be a white-skinned nationalist and not be a white nationalist. > Is it 1984 already or we still have some time? 1984 didn't feature…
White nationalists = nationalists that think that white people are better than other, but we have guys from ICGJC and other afrosupremacist groups, etc. Why not ban them all? 1984 is mentioned as a reference to the dystopian world of propaganda and Facebook / Google are quickly turning into corporate Ministry of Truth.
No, white nationalism is not “nationalism” + “white preference”. It's closer to nationalism around a concept of a white nation.
> but we have guys from ICGJC and other afrosupremacist groups, etc. Why not ban them all?
Because we don't see scores of bodies piled up motivated by the message of those groups.
At what point do such things change into a public discourse problem? Do we wait until it can be shown that companies such as Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc. influenced elections because they refused to serve information from a candidate they didn't like? If we aren't already there, it's not long before it is. What do you think would happen if these "private companies" with such deep hooks into our communication infra…
> Do we wait until it can be shown that companies such as Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc. influenced elections because they refused to serve information from a candidate they didn't like? If we aren't already there, it's not long before it is. That's an interesting question. What if Google and Facebook would secretly demote and hide articles about one political party and promote articles about another party? Theoreti…
>Our efforts to combat hate don’t stop here. As part of today’s announcement, we’ll also start connecting people who search for terms associated with white supremacy to resources focused on helping people leave behind hate groups. People searching for these terms will be directed to Life After Hate, an organization founded by former violent extremists that provides crisis intervention, education, support groups and o…
Also, By mere searching for specific terms, Facebook gladly assume your motives to be to in particular way. This seem misguided and not well thought through. Finding a book in the library about frogs, doesn't make you a frog.
You could be searching for those terms for a good reason, maybe I'm writing an essay about the spread of white nationalism and want to see how many groups exist online, or whatever.
It's very dangerous to label people and infer their intention automatically.
>Our efforts to combat hate don’t stop here. As part of today’s announcement, we’ll also start connecting people who search for terms associated with white supremacy to resources focused on helping people leave behind hate groups. People searching for these terms will be directed to Life After Hate, an organization founded by former violent extremists that provides crisis intervention, education, support groups and o…
There is no slippery slope argument when you're talking about literal Nazis. We went to war on the subject.
In principle, who could be opposed? In practice, how will this actually work out? True story. I have a friend who got a temporary ban from Facebook (I think 90 days?) for commenting on a story about a Texas billionaire paying to hunt endangered animals, "How much would it cost to hunt Texas billionaires?" That was considered a violation of their anti-bullying stance. Knowing her, it wasn't. It was sarcasm. Moving on…
This seems absurd and unreasonable once you look at it more closely. If any group of people say they want to go live apart from others (white, gay, men, linux users, whatever), I'm fine with that. I wouldn't want to live in a racial separatist region myself, but I have no problem with other people choosing to do so. Treating black nationalists as heroes (which in a historical sense they were) while making white natio…
Those identity categories are not all equivalent. Wanting to live among only "white" people is not a coherent or rational preference. It can really only be grounded in racism.
But let's say you have some group who happen to opposes certain policies/bills in regard of immigration at the moment. Some people will label them automatically as racists, which is a broad statement that cannot be proven/unproven, what do you do with that?
Where do you draw the line and who does?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To the people that say "Where does it end?" – that's pretty easy. Let's start with curbing speech that encourages harming others. Welp, there goes the Declaration of Independence.
...because nazis can't use Facebook to plan the next Christchurch? I feel like maaaaaybe there's a few steps in between the two.
Awfully easy to answer questions like this by going straight to "Nazis" or "terrorists" or "child molesters," isn't it? When a complex social problem seems that obvious and straightforward to resolve, that's when you really need to challenge your own thought processes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What do you think would happen if these "private companies" with such deep hooks into our communication infrastructure suddenly decided to remove all data associated to the Republican Party? For that matter, the Democratic Party? They wouldn't do that, because there would be justified public outcry. Luckily, as moral agents, we humans are capable of differentiating "general political party" from "white nationalists…
Are you sure? Do we even know, for sure, what "white nationalist" means? I'm white, and I favor a government that's principally oriented toward advancing this nation's interests. Am I a white nationalist?
As a non-white person living in America, this is scary to see. It's a policy targeting a specific race of people's content... How is that not racist? It will only foment more resentment and retaliatory sentiment while serving to make "certain kinds of racism" socially acceptable as long as it's the "right race" to discriminate against. Ban ethno-nationalists if you feel so inclined, not {{insertRaceHere}} nationalism…