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

YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 983 posts

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#451

Post by jdkee »

archagon wrote: post #197
Acrobatic_Road wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They did not ban racist subreddits like /r/blackpeopletwitter and /r/fragilewhiteredditor. If you don't know, to post on /r/blackpeopletwitter you have to send a photo of your skin color to the moderators. They are literally racially segregating users.

> If you don't know, to post on /r/blackpeopletwitter you have to send a photo of your skin color to the moderators. I think there's a good reason for doing that, given that such a sub can almost trivially become a hate sub for mocking people on Twitter, much like fatpeoplehate. "We want our community to be largely black" seems like a reasonable founding principle.

""We want our community to be largely black" seems like a reasonable founding principle."

Freedom of association is a thing. Now, would you agree with the statement, ""We want our community to be largely white" seems like a reasonable founding principle." ?

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#452

Post by cogman10 »

FiloSottile wrote: post #411
gguevaraa wrote: post #246

Christ, spez is getting hammered in the announcements. I mean seriously, he's basically saying it's alright to be discriminatory against the "majority", whatever that means. Dude doesn't even clarify what that means, just skirts around the question. Lot of people are wondering why r/BlackPeopleTwitter or r/politics haven't been banned despite blatant racism or calls to violence. People are pretty pissed at spez, to s…

Not sure if you're missing it, but yeah, reverse racism is not a thing. The concept of racism is meaningful in the historical and societal context of systemic oppression. A black person saying "all white people are bad" is not feeding into and exploiting hundreds of years of prejudice stacked against an under-privileged group. Edit: a black person in the US, different cultures are different contexts.

A black person saying "all white people are bad" is a bad thing, but ultimately not a societal problem. The issue is the power dynamic. After years of institutional racism, institutions are racist (shocking!). That's the issue. There are far more white people in power and any one of them being racist has a much wider and more devastating effect on PoC.

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#453

Post by Inu »

kyle_martin1 wrote: post #307

This is suspicious. So much for free-speech and open debate. Just let people hear both sides and make up their own minds.

Remember when Noam Chomsky argued for allowing Holocaust deniers to lecture at universities, so that students could make their own judgement and disproof absurd theories? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faurisson_affair Guess it was a different time.

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#454

Post by tptacek »

dogma1138 wrote: post #448
tptacek wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The actual terroristic activities are illegal, and Klan members have been prosecuted (and successfully sued) for them. "Hate-mongering" isn't illegal in the US.

If the Klan would’ve been classified as a terrorist organization they would be illegal they haven’t. The Nation of Islam is also classified as a hate group by the SPLC however they aren’t banned under the same laws that protect the KKK. NOI members just like the KKK have been prosecuted in the past for many things, however outside of very limited circumstances there isn’t such thing as guilt by association in the US…

I don't believe it's the case that the USG could have suppressed the KKK by "classifying them as a terrorist organization".

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#455

Post by klyrs »

SuoDuanDao wrote: post #433
tptacek wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alex Jones lent a camera crew to Wolfgang Halbig when he travelled to Newtown, CT to harass the parents of the first graders murdered in the Sandy Hook shooting. Years and years from now those sites you're referring to will still bear the shame of not having banned him earlier.

In my opinion, while a low point even for a high-functioning schizophrenic with a talk show, that is still small potatoes compared to the journalists who repeated the 'WMD's line. And no one is calling for them to be deplatformed.

FWIW, I think that Bush II, Obama and Trump should all be tried for war crimes. Probably Clinton and Bush I, and all the veeps, but I'm not as informed about them.

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#456

Post by gambiting »

bassman9000 wrote: post #432
FiloSottile wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure if you're missing it, but yeah, reverse racism is not a thing. The concept of racism is meaningful in the historical and societal context of systemic oppression. A black person saying "all white people are bad" is not feeding into and exploiting hundreds of years of prejudice stacked against an under-privileged group. Edit: a black person in the US, different cultures are different contexts.

Is this sarcasm? Because I can give you a couple examples of well documented, savage, systemic oppression of white people. Are you one of those that thinks history begins in the US 250 years ago?

Even if it did, he's forgetting that US was incredibly racist towards the Irish, and they are as white as they come. Racism is racism, no matter who does it towards whom.

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#457

Post by __turbobrew__ »

gguevaraa wrote: post #246

Christ, spez is getting hammered in the announcements. I mean seriously, he's basically saying it's alright to be discriminatory against the "majority", whatever that means. Dude doesn't even clarify what that means, just skirts around the question. Lot of people are wondering why r/BlackPeopleTwitter or r/politics haven't been banned despite blatant racism or calls to violence. People are pretty pissed at spez, to s…

You literally have to send a picture of your black skin to the mods of r/BlackPeopleTwitter in order to be added to the country club.

Imagine a subreddit forcing people to send pictures of their white skin to the mods. People would be outraged.

The only good way to use reddit these days is to unsubscribe from all of the default subreddits and only subscribe to small subreddits dedicated to your hobbies/interests. Everything else is garbage.

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#458

Post by disposekinetics »

ohgodplsno wrote: post #440
disposekinetics wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dead is dead, it doesn't matter if it's the klan's racial hatred, or if the eye of the party has randomly decided you are the kulak today.

[flagged]

My understanding was that someone would prevent me from owning private property or acquiring capital? I've read both The Communist Manifesto, and Capital, and they both left me with the impression there was going to be a violent revolution with people like me as the target. I'd be happy to be wrong however.

Edit: I'm sorry someone is down-voting you. While I'm not sure I get it yet I want to hear your side.

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#459

Post by MockObject »

rickbutton wrote: post #426
MockObject wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does to me, too. Until I realize that some people are now defining silence as complicity with white supremacy. So let's hope that definition doesn't spread, right?

Silence -is- complicity.

So you're agreeing that anyone who is silent on racial issues should be purged from the internet?

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#460

Post by Karunamon »

chipotle_coyote wrote: post #396
naasking wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except it's apparently fine to hate the haters. Dehumanization is alive and well, even among progressives.

So we can never denounce hatred and bigotry without being hypocritical? We don't want to be hypocritical, right? So we should never denounce hatred and bigotry! Brilliant! I am super, super tired of "if you denounce bigots that makes you just as bad as them."

If you can't denounce without getting into dehumanization, you're guilty of exactly the same kind of hate that the most virulent racists in history are guilty of.

It's never okay. Not for any reason.

Post reply on HN