231–240 of 870 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No more WWII games with nazis...god forbid someone sees a swastika /s
Even Germany allows the swastika when presented in a historical context in artistic or educational works, come on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reminds me of when Trump a while ago (before the recent George Floyd stuff) was commenting on statues being torn down, and commented something like, "next they'll go for George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, where does it end?" John Oliver did a bit on it answering "Somewhere. It ends somewhere," implying that he was an idiot, that it was a stupid comment, and everybody laughed. Now we're here and it has actually h…
Criticism of celebrating deeply flawed men with deeply flawed ideals is not , in any way, erasure. We all know about Nazism and the Holocaust despite the lack of statues of Hitler. Christians somehow know about Satan even though he’s got no statues celebrating his greatness.
Thomas Sowell, a black man, had some interesting historical perspectives on these figures in Black Rednecks and White Liberals, which is worth a read. This is just a small excerpt from a google search, and in itself can't directly address everything people are trying to erase, but it's a starter for listening to more and broadening your perspective:
https://www.aei.org/*/thomas-sowell-on-slavery-and-this-fact...
This means that somewhere on the Azure cloud there is a resnet instance that only looks for confederate flags. I am inspired to write it a haiku: poor descent machine seeking orange tradition longs for better things
Doesn't seem like that's the case according to the following quote:
> Microsoft will not automatically ban players that create designs with these controversial images; instead, the original designer will need to be reported by submitting a ticket.
This means that somewhere on the Azure cloud there is a resnet instance that only looks for confederate flags. I am inspired to write it a haiku: poor descent machine seeking orange tradition longs for better things
Orange?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, it might not violate the law. The problem with private companies trying to enforce political opinions and controlling speech on their platform is that it is pretty much the definition of McCathyism. With people losing their job over liking a tweet. I remember when the left was looking at the McCarthy period as a dark page of american history. I am appalled how quickly this went 180 degrees.
I think you might be viewing the situation at too low a resolution. Do you not see any salient differences between a Senator running an inquisition to root out political adversaries, and a social platform forbidding people from threatening other users?
Interesting that the Japanese rising sun flag is mentioned alongside the swastika and the stars and bars; the rising sun flag remains in contemporary use by the Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force.
> Interesting that the Japanese rising sun flag is mentioned alongside the swastika and the stars and bars; The stars and bars, while also a Confederate symbol, is not really a notorious hate symbol; the Confederate flags that are notorious hate symbols are the “battle flag” (flag of the Army of Northern Virginia, also used as the union of the second and third national flags; square), and the second Confederate Naval…
Confusingly, people often use "the Confederate Flag" and "the stars and bars" to refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Battle_flag_of_the_Confed...
While technically both terms refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_the_Confederate_S... (and earlier variants) many people don't know that; look how many of the results on https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=stars+and+bars and especially https://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=confederate+flag are actually the "battle flag".
Interesting that the Japanese rising sun flag is mentioned alongside the swastika and the stars and bars; the rising sun flag remains in contemporary use by the Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force.
At the risk of being controversial... I'm going to go ahead and say that Japan doesn't care about racism like America does. Japanese people are extremely racist, but you just don't know it because Japan is 99+% Japanese with But the ethnic minorities that _do_ live there live in segregated apartment complexes, etc. to prevent "mixing with the natives".
> During the 1980s, the Japanese economic situation improved and achieved stability. Many Japanese Brazilians went to Japan as contract workers due to economic and political problems in Brazil, and they were termed "Dekasegi". Working visas were offered to Brazilian Dekasegis in 1990, encouraging more immigration from Brazil.
> In 1990, the Japanese government authorized the legal entry of Japanese and their descendants until the third generation in Japan. At that time, Japan was receiving a large number of illegal immigrants from Pakistan, Bangladesh, China, and Thailand. The legislation of 1990 was intended to select immigrants who entered Japan, giving a clear preference for Japanese descendants from South America, especially Brazil.
> Because of their Japanese ancestry, the Japanese Government believed that Brazilians would be more easily integrated into Japanese society. In fact, this easy integration did not happen, since Japanese Brazilians and their children born in Japan are treated as foreigners by native Japanese.[42][43] This apparent contradiction between being and seeming causes conflicts of adaptation for the migrants and their acceptance by the natives.[44]
More can be read here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_Brazilians#The_Dekase...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'll give you my personal standard: Did they act or campaign to make things worse for their fellow man (and woman)? In other words, did they simply act in the context of their time period, as other men in their position would, or did they specifically act to curtail the rights of others. This makes it very easy for me to condemn symbols of the Confederacy, because they specifically acted to preserve slavery. If anyon…
Are you arguing that being a "grown up" means never offending other people? I'm really not trying to troll you, just not sure how to interpret your last sentence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. It’s apples and oranges. Companies should be free to regulate hate speech on their platforms. The government should not regulate speech in the public domain. The actions of private companies on private property (virtual or otherwise) are an entirely different domain than government intervention. Even if you remove the censorship angle, it can be argued that moderating hate speech is simply good business sense. Pe…
>Companies should be free to regulate hate speech on their platforms. The government should not regulate speech in the public domain. While I agree, please direct me to where I can speak "in the public domain" online.
If the hosting company takes you down, host it yourself. If ICANN takes it down, host it on Tor.
There are always ways to bypass corporate control of speech. You may have to completely forgo the benefits provided by the corporate web sites, but nothing is stopping you from making your own platform.
.svg){kind=link}