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

Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 1001 posts

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#431

Post by im3w1l »

srveale wrote: post #21
Exuma wrote: post #6

What else is new, censorship is OK as long as only one side is doing it.

If the left-leaning subreddits were also promoting hate, misinformation and violence then they would be banned too. It's not favouritism, the "one side" that's being targeted is the side that's breaking the platform's rules.

They literally tried to put double standards in the rules[0]. But realized that was a little bit too blatant and backtracked after. "the rule on hate (...) does not protect all groups or all forms of identity. For example, the rule does not protect groups of people who are in the majority "

[0] https://archive.vn/OZ03o

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#432

Post by disown »

neogodless wrote: post #114

https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/896/censorship > In general, sedition is defined as trying to overthrow the government with intent and means to bring it about; the Supreme Court, however, has been divided over what constitutes intent and means. > These acts made it a federal crime to speak, write, or print criticisms of the government that were false, scandalous, or malicious. It is frightening to me tha…

> As a person of logic and reason and based on multiple sources of information that I consider reputable

Name it. What sources? Every major news source has been complaining about "election theft" for 4 years and warning about election theft in 2020.

The issue with corrupt elections has been around at least since 2000 ( Bush v Gore ).

Here is an NYU professor giving a lecture about it in 2008 ( about the bush election theft ).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPhL53ol0DE

You'll notice the exact same issues voting machines, ballots, etc discussed.

Any person of logic and reason will conclude there was election fraud. Both the democrats and republicans have had 4 years to prepare for it. But also reason and logic says that if both cheated then so be it. The national election system is designed specifically to be gamed. It's not just local voting that has problems - gerrymandering, voting suppression, etc., but the national election as well.

There is no doubt in my mind that Trump and Hillary cheated in 2016. I think the DNC's hubris underestimated Trump and that's why he won. I think this time, Trump's hubris cost him. I mean "china, china, china" gets old after a while.

Rational people understand that both sides cheated and the better cheater won. Only democratic political activists think there was no cheating and only republican political activists think we should overturn the election because of cheating. Rational people understand there was cheating and are willing to live with it because both sides cheated and the system is designed to make it impossible to prove cheating.

The ballots are lost in time, like tears in rain.

As I said in 2016, I will say it in 2020, let the better cheater win. If Trump and the GOP really wanted to win, they should have worked harder.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#433

Post by jakearmitage »

_jal wrote: post #258
jakearmitage wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it OK to silence people now?

Imagine a situation where people are credibly planning an armed assault on, say, Citibank, in public forums. Do you believe it is OK to disrupt their planning? Do you believe it becomes not-OK if the target of the domestic terror is the seat of our government?

Let me use another scenario. 1969, Brazil. Members of a revolutionary group kidnapped the US Ambassador. After that, and a few other incidents, the government used the same argument you presented to review and approve contents of newspapers, magazines, radio shows, movies and correspondence.

Do you believe it is OK to do this, in order to disrupt their planning? Do you believe it becomes not-OK if the target of domestic terror is a tyrannical government?

[1]: https://www.insidehook.com/article/history/kidnapped-why-an-...

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#434

Post by zionic »

FireBeyond wrote: post #304
rglover wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pay attention to the narrative shift: it went from "build your own platform," to now calls for removing those alternatives entirely ( https://twitter.com/slpng_giants/status/1347522919992336387 ). The end goal is total censorship.

The end goal is cessation of real and specific incitements to violence against people and property, and planning thereof. Much as you like to spin it, if there weren't notable, repeated documented cases of idiots on Parler coordinating protests and outright violence, then no-one would really give a shit. Making this out to be "the left wants to remove our ability to speak whatsoever" is not a "narrative shift", it's…

> The end goal is cessation of real and specific incitements to violence against people and property, and planning thereof.

So are we just pretending that March-September 2020 didn't happen in dozens of major cities across the US.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#435

Post by umvi »

newsbinator wrote: post #322
umvi wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not quite. More white people die by far in total , but as a percentage of the demographic more non-white people die. This is largely attributed to systemic racism, but also to poverty.

> This is largely attributed to systemic racism Citation needed

I didn't say it was 100% because of systemic racism, just largely attributed to systemic racism. If you need a citation for that, just look at BLM movement in 2020.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#436

Post by gremlinsinc »

bythckr wrote: post #315

This is not an original idea/thought that I have, but feel repeating it is vital: This whole censorship crusade that the Facebook, twitter & now reddit is on is a dangerous precedence we are setting for our society. Whatever they call it, this is censorship. Already due to AI suggesting similar contents on services like Facebook & Youtube and the design of sub-reddits on reddit, we have living inside echo chambers. A…

Question, can I go into /r/conservative on reddit and post anything I want? Or do the mods limit what can or cannot be said there? Curious your take on that? Maybe we should just end moderation altogether. I'm curious what dang would have to say about that.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#437

Post by onethought »

coldtea wrote: post #349
nucleardog wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As soon as those people take action and start murdering all the landlords, absolutely. Speech is speech, when that speech begets action then we have a problem.

So like several months of looting and burning in various cities like Portland?

Yes. People who break the law should be prosecuted, else you weaken the law.

But, burning and looting is in a different category to the Capitol stuff, I think.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#438

Post by zdragnar »

aaronbrethorst wrote: post #307
BitwiseFool wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever spent time on the leftist "tankie" / "Chapo trap house" kind of subreddits? Or the Gen Zedong groups that glorify the purge of landlords during the communist revolution in China? If we are really going to go after such people wanting to violently overthrow the government we can't be ignoring the left when they do it.

Chapo hipsters buy fixies, not AR-15s. You're not going to kidnap the Speaker of the House, or murder a Senator with a gearless bicycle.

Until they throw moltov cocktails and explosives, or set buildings on fire, or permanently blind you with a high powered laser.

Use of violent tactics is not particlarly novel on either side

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#439

Post by 2020swillbelit »

x86_64Ubuntu wrote: post #397
koolk3ychain wrote: post #297

As someone who voted for Joe Biden, I'm not surprised at all by the current response from the right, even those who aren't hell bent on supporting Trump. Silencing people doesn't make them go away or give up,it makes them double down on their beliefs (whether based on conspiracy theories or not) and continue to escalate. Good faith arguments and honest media are how we solve this problem, not by banning people we dis…

No one is obligated to deal with folks who consistently argue for their marginalization in bad faith.

Of course you're not obligated. But it's in all of our best interest to talk with them rather than suppress their voices (however crazy). Many metrics relating to quality of life for many Americans are trending in the wrong direction. We cannot afford to further decouple people from society. This isn't just for the rural working classes but also the inner city poor. People need to feel worth and have a life of meaning otherwise they can become dangerous liabilities.

Re: Reddit bans subreddit group “r/DonaldTrump”

#440

Post by young_unixer »

gbrown wrote: post #156
gfodor wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same. I've long worried lurking there was going to cause more harm than it's worth (for example, by letting me inadvertently slip into extremism) but the ability to predict what happened this week so easily and warn people about it who considered going was well worth that risk. Also I read there they are losing their SSL cert or something, so that might be how centralized, non-legal authority manages to shut them dow…

> Which, it probably goes without saying, should scare the shit out of anyone who cares about the principles of the free Internet. I worry more about Google et. al. killing the free and open internet by creating centralized walled gardens. I worry more about legislative attacks on encryption, about the overzealous use of copyright law and the sorry state of intellectual property generally. If service providers want t…

> If service providers want to deplatform centers of radicalization, I think that's ok.

The thing is: left-wing radicalization is tolerated by the platforms, but right-wing radicalization isn't.

Post reply on HN