Soon to be found on Telegram I guess. Seem to be the only growing platform that does not ban opinions. Probably because they do not need to make advertisers happy. Conclusion: Ads still ruin the internet.
YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech
461–470 of 983 posts
Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech
#462It's a purge. It won't stop with these three. The censorship will continue to get worse and be disproportionately applied to those on the right until all is left with the world. Conservatism has a place in society. I'm not endorsing any of these guys viewpoints nor am I associating them with conservatism in general, because it's a broad group of over 100 million people in the U.S. with a diverse range of opinions tha…
>Conservatism has a place in society. Literal white supremacists and nazis however, do not. Those people should be pushed so far off any platform that their only option left is to be the crazies screaming on Times Square that the end of the world is coming. These people actively contributed to fostering hatred in societies, And no, you will not fight them off with debates. The time it takes you to rebuke a single one…
Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech
#463Earlier 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.
> racist subreddits like /r/blackpeopletwitter and /r/fragilewhiteredditor. lmao give me a break
Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech
#464Christ, 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.
Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech
#465Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The problem is they are not approaching the left's extremists with the same fervor This is a false equivalence. The worst of the alt-right are far, far worse than the worst of the extreme left (antifa, maybe? Though there is no alt-left). Good riddance to them, I say. If you want to lead the KKK, and advocate for a white ethnostate, I won't lose any sleep when you can't post videos trying to convince others of the s…
>The worst of the alt-right are far, far worse than the worst of the extreme left (antifa, maybe? Though there is no alt-left). Nah, there are plenty of people advocating for explicit ethno-separatism on the far left -- just look at Louis Farrakhan and his lefty pals. They just don't have very big YouTube channels. People more-or-less naturally ignore them except when they turn out to protests to hijack an ostensibly…
Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech
#466Earlier quoted context omitted.
Communism, as a political movement, was largely extinguished in the US during the 20th century through purges and deplatforming. How many communist organizations do you see, these days? How much reach do they have, compared to the 30s? How much political power do they have, compared to the alt-right, today? Extinguishing that idea into the fringe seems to have worked rather well. As did de-nazification, post WWII. It…
I mean the Democrats tried to nominate one for president and have one in congress in New York.
Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech
#467Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand this. For all of my life I thought racism = discrimination against someone due to their race. In the same way that sexist = discrimination against someone due to their sex. Ageist = discrimination against someone due to their age. Is this not the clear cut definition anymore? At what point did it diverge?
>Is this not the clear cut definition anymore? People who want to discriminate on the basis of race and sex have contrived a definition of racism/sexism that exempts themselves. >At what point did it diverge? The 1980s apparently. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_race_theory
Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech
#468Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
Let's do a CTRL-H test: "We want our community to be largely white" seems like a reasonable founding principle. How do you feel about the statement now?
If you change the founding principle to "we want our community to be largely Russian," that would be totally fine by me.
Additionally, opposition to the "largely black" founding principle implies opposition to women-only spaces and other community groupings that are largely accepted in society.
Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech
#469Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wrote out a long response and only then starting researching Gab. So instead of my own words, here are some excerpts from their terms of service. If you don't like the counterarguments you're encountering here, you should consider that Gab feels the same way: > if you don't like what we're doing on Gab.com or simply want to manage your own experience, you can spin up your own Gab Social server that you control > We…
> If you don't like the counterarguments you're encountering here, you should consider that Gab feels the same way I am genuinely curious why you are trying to divert my initial point into a different direction here. I gave an example of gabe to illustrate that there needs to be some hard point for private companies to be responsible or adhere strictly to the legality or public. Visa isn't a small private business th…
You: Gab can't use Visa (A) for reasons, it's not reasonable to suggest that (B) a competitor be built
Gab: we can kick you off (A') for reasons, you can always spin up a Gab instance to run yourself (B')
What is the difference between A and A', and B and B'?
Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech
#470Earlier 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]
>The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralise all instruments of production in the hands of the State, i.e., of the proletariat organised as the ruling class; and to increase the total productive forces as rapidly as possible.
>Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property, and on the conditions of bourgeois production
You can't get communism without having a dictatorship or some other massively authoritarian government first (or at the very least, if you can, there's no precedent for it on the nation-state level), and autocracies, once installed, have a peculiar desire to continue being autocratic.