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

Facebook to ban white nationalist content

newsroom.fb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

871–880 of 1001 posts

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#871

Post by HereIGoAgain »

arp242 wrote: post #851
btilly wrote: post #663

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…

> Moving on to this policy, I'm happy to see neonazis and the KKK have a hard time. But there are people in the UK and EU who would see Brexit as being a separatist cause motivated by racial animosity. No one is confused about the difference between "I want to kill all Jews" and "I think the British economy would be better off with fewer Polish plumbers". > And remaining banned even for people who support it on econo…

>No one is confused about the difference between "I want to kill all Jews" and "I think the British economy would be better off with fewer Polish plumbers".

You clearly haven't been paying attention to modern day discourse over issues like illegal immigration and such. If you listened to some people (unironically the same people pushing for stuff like this) having an issue with illegal immigration is basically treated like a confession to guilt. And that's even ignoring some of the newer types of arguments they are making.. That merely holding an opinion that could be seen (solely determined by them) as problematic or a "whistle" (in effect anything to the right of left-of-center or non-PC) and thus a "gateway to extremism". So "hate speech" needing to be banned next.

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#872

Post by im3w1l »

aabeshou wrote: post #408
dsfyu404ed wrote: post #131

>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…

What exactly makes you uncomfortable with calling genocidal racism "Wrong(TM)", and helping people leave it? Are you also uncomfortable with them banning child porn, or is that an example of punishing wrongthink too? EDIT: I invite downvoters to tell me why they disagree?

I think you have a misunderstanding of the word "white nationalism". I'd recommend looking it up to understand what is happening here. But in short it means the belief that there is a white race and that it has a right to preserve itself and it's culture.

Genocidal racism was never allowed on facebook. After this move they will censor a lot of legitimate things.

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#873

Post by JPKab »

dragonwriter wrote: post #752
JPKab wrote: post #735

My question is this: Are they also going to ban other ethno nationalist movements? Last I checked, the Hebrew Israelites (a black nationalist and anti semitic group) are on FB. They believe that the people who currently identify as Jews are evil impostors.

And the last time there was a “Hebrew Israelite”-motivated mass killing was... when, exactly?

The man who shot the 9 cops in Dallas had a lot of their literature.

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#874

Post by ratling »

JPKab wrote: post #735

My question is this: Are they also going to ban other ethno nationalist movements? Last I checked, the Hebrew Israelites (a black nationalist and anti semitic group) are on FB. They believe that the people who currently identify as Jews are evil impostors.

The rabbit hole of whataboutism goes nowhere.

These people have been shooting up places of worship and running people over with their cars, all the while their supporters cheer them on.

They can get right the fuck out. Black Israelites start doing the same then by all means do the same to them.

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#875

Post by noobermin »

JPKab wrote: post #873
dragonwriter wrote: post #752

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the last time there was a “Hebrew Israelite”-motivated mass killing was... when, exactly?

The man who shot the 9 cops in Dallas had a lot of their literature.

That isn't true.

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#876

Post by orblivion »

joshuamorton wrote: post #860
godshatter wrote: post #804

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In principle, I am opposed. I don't think hiding unwanted dialogue is very helpful in the long run. It just makes it fester somewhere else that isn't as visible. If Facebook feels they have to do something about it, then I'd suggest just flagging it. That gives people more information that they can use how ever they see fit. There is also the thought of collateral damage, like your friend ran into. I also oppose it o…

> In principle, I am opposed. I don't think hiding unwanted dialogue is very helpful in the long run. It just makes it fester somewhere else that isn't as visible. Let's prod at this: - Should ISIS recruitment videos and propaganda be allowed (nay, encouraged) because deplatforming them will make them put their recruitment pamphlets elsewhere? Where else do they put their recruiting materials? - Should we publicly an…

What about this for an idea (and I'm not sure I love it, but it's just spitballing): We allow expression of any _ideas_, but we put a limit on _recruitment_. I.e., anybody gets to say "White people need a home country" or "the Caliphate shall reign supreme", but nobody gets to say "come to the meeting at 10th and Main 5 o'clock". That way we at least know what's on people's mind so we can engage them but we're putting a limit on helping them grow the movement (until and unless we decide they have some sort of valid point, which is part the point of letting them speak).

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#877

Post by seventytwo »

talmand wrote: post #194

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…

You listen to Tim Pool? He’s a right wing psycho that hides behind fake journalistic integrity to cherry pick stories for his target audience of white supremacists, xenophobes, and other anti-social nut jobs.

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#878

Post by seventytwo »

hcurtiss wrote: post #652
sagichmal wrote: post #608

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?

Yes. Because history demonstrates our ability to do that - not to allow factions like the KKK to triumph.

We’ve done this kind of thing before, and we’ll do it again. Facebook responding like this IS the marketplace of ideas reacting.

Re: Facebook to ban white nationalist content

#880

Post by seventytwo »

duxup wrote: post #63

I suspect there is some value in pushing such content off of large sites to reduce the surface area available for recruitment. I used to think that pushing such content off a site or forum was futile and calling it for what it is on a site had value, I'm not sure that is the case anymore. If you look on platforms like reddit and such where you have groups in subreddits calling for race wars, general hatred, and viole…

I spend most of my time on Reddit, and you’re spot on here. Deplatforming is the most effective way to fight the spread of hate. It’s literally a cancer, and it’s goinf to take the chemo therapy of stepping on the toes of free speech to protect our country and society.

Sucks, but that’s what it takes - especially when they wrap themselves up in the flag and hide behind the first amendment to spew their hate.

Post reply on HN