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

You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

freddiedeboer.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 863 posts

Re: You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

#551

Post by hef19898 »

curiousgeorgio wrote: post #453
hef19898 wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The AfD called to shoot migrants at the EU border. They retreated to the "only one person's personal opinion" after a harsh backlash. QAnon representatives are calling for the murder of Democrats. The same group advocates for brutal treatment of migrants, restrictions of freedom of choice for women, direct violence against muslims. I don't see any of this on the left side of the political spectrum. Also, when someone…

I appreciate you proving my point about extremist outliers, the ones who don't represent the majority of either side , yet receive all the media attention (and association with whichever side is currently being vilified). > when someone in a group voices radical opinions and calls for violence it represents the groups view when said group is not distancing itself from these views When "the other side" has an interest…

On case of the AfD it is rather Mccarthy's old outfit deciding to treat his new one as a threat. The Verfassungsschutz, the German federal interior secret service, decided to watch the whole party as threat for democracy. The Verfassungsschutz was headed by a certain Mr. Maaßen who is now touting right wing conspiracies i social media. The minister responsible for the agency once prouded himself of deporting 69 Afghans on his 69s birthday. Ajd they are treating the AfD as a right wing extremist group now. Should tell you something. Or not.

Re: You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

#552

Post by AnimalMuppet »

ncallaway wrote: post #238
smsm42 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure what you mean by "fascists form of government"? Something like Italy in 1924-1945? I don't think there's any political power that advocates anything like that, and I am sure that at least 99.999% of daily use of terms "fascist" and similar ones are not directed at people who advocate appointing Il Duce and advocating government after Mussolini's example.

Well there was just an attempt by the ex president to overturn the results of an election and install himself as the president contrary to the expressed will of the people. Maybe that’s what they meant by “fascist form of government”?

Technically, that would be a coup (more specifically and auto-coup). That's bad enough. The fear is that it would lead to a dictatorship, which is worse. Whether it's fascism or not would depend on the specific policies of that illegitimately-installed government.

So, if "that's what they mean", they're mis-using the term.

Re: You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

#553

Post by kian »

AshWolfy wrote: post #450
slibhb wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a distinction to be made between disapproval and hatred. But there's plenty of both to go around. Neither of them are synonymous with intolerance.

hatred begets intolerance

While true, a source and its causal sinks are still not identical. To whit - in a large enough free society, some will choose to offer themselves up for enslavement. Since freedom begets slavery, freedom is slavery. All’s well that’s Orwell, right?

Re: You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

#554

Post by caslon »

justaman wrote: post #524
caslon wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's good about liberalism? They seem more progressive than ever; an open socialist nearly won their primary last year.

Liberalism and progressiveism are not the same thing.

> The Left seems to have given up on liberalism in persuit of victory. They are in the process of giving up on progressivism.

This is a direct quote from the post I am replying to. I know liberalism and progressiveness aren't the same thing. I am stating that they're getting more progressive, and I don't see why liberalism declining is a bad thing.

Re: You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

#555

Post by cassalian »

runarberg wrote: post #534
cassalian wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

edit: Misread the article and grabbed the first name I saw. This edit fixes the reference: "The seminar entitled 'Facing Racism' , given by Robin DiAngelo , was presented through LinkedIn Education publicly, although not free of charge. The company admitted that, in effect, it invited its workers to take the course, but they clarify that it was not mandator" I would assume that Robin DiAngelo would be on the left.

Five minutes of digging and I found out that this news article is actually just reporting on a tweet[1] by #DrKarlynB[2] which I found out is an organizational psychologists who hates critical race theory. Of her retweets she primarily retweets republicans, and the comment section of her tweets often contains pro-trump rhetoric. For all I know the slides she presents from Robin DiAngelo’s lecture were taken out of co…

The coco-cola incident made national news, I imagine there are better articles out there; I simply grabbed the first one on google - I should have sought out a better one to link to.

However, from the article, you can see several of the slides that are presented. I find it hard to believe that there's some other context than race being referred to in these slides. Do you have reason to believe that the "white" in the slides is referring to something other than race? And if not, could you provide a possible greater context that doesn't place these slides under the guise of making broad generalizations about a group of people based on their identity? I am trying to think of one myself; however, I am failing to do so.

Here's a more bland article on the incident: https://www.fox5dc.com/news/coca-cola-staff-told-in-online-t...

Re: You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

#556

Post by leereeves »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #515
leereeves wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The establishment isn't what it once was. Obama turned out to be an establishment President (with bailouts, not prosecutions, for the architects of the housing bubble and crash) but he ran as an anti-establishment candidate. Then, despite obviously being part of the establishment, Hillary tried to do the same, arguing that she as a woman she clearly wasn't part of the establishment ("Sen. Sanders is the only person w…

This is strongly undercut by "the DNC (i.e. the establishment) united behind Biden" who is currently POTUS instead of Bernie or Trump.

But facing enormous pressure from a younger generation that seems to be far to the left of Biden and was not happy with either Biden or Harris, but voted against Trump rather than for Biden.

And even with all Trump's failings as a person, it was a close election between the unpopular populist and the likeable establishment compromise. Is that evidence of establishment strength?

Re: You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

#557

Post by caslon »

chmod600 wrote: post #507
caslon wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's good about liberalism? They seem more progressive than ever; an open socialist nearly won their primary last year.

Socialism, liberalism, and progressivism are all different ideas. Leftism tries to combine these ideas into a coherent political ideology. Liberalism (the part about individual rights) is a check on the abuses of socialism, and progressivism is supposed to make it all work (experts in control making good decisions). I'm not a Leftist, but I can acknowledge that it's a coherent ideology. When you take Leftism and take…

I know that liberalism and progressiveness are different things. Liberalism isn't tied to progressiveness, but progressiveness is inherently tied to economic justice. Socialism is certainly a progressive stance.

Liberalism can be dropped with no real loss.

What's wrong with Cuba? It seems like it's doing pretty well; it has more or less the longest-lasting government in South America, largely because it dropped liberalism.

Re: You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

#559

Post by eplanit »

morpheos137 wrote: post #289
clusterfish wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're the same racists on the left and the right extremes. It's just, we had decades of wars and (justified) propaganda that thoroughly discredited fascism and their style of racism so it's easy to see how the right extremes is bad. What the extreme left is doing on the other hand is a more modern variation of racism and totalitarianism. It's ostensibly driven by noble concepts like social justice but in reality de…

Ever try listening to NPR in recent years? It is really approaching the point of self parody. I would say that at least 80% of NPR "stories" have an explicitly stated racial angle and probably greater than 90% have a gender or race angle. It is literally almost the only thing NPR commentary and analysis segments talk about these days. Yes racism is bad. No it is not reasonable that every single segment is about how s…

Thank you for noting this, as I have found NPR to now be unbearable. I listened to it for over 30 years, and for the longest time it was one of my main sources. Now, like you say, they're like self-parody -- but not funny.

Clearly, they've chosen to see the world, and therefore report _every_ story, through a narrow set of prisms: race, ethnicity, gender [identity], sexual orientation, and class. I still tune in to them from time to time to check, and now I play a game: how long before I hear a reference to one of the above perspectives. In general, it's less than 2 minutes, and often less than 1. It's as though they're beating a drum, or like a mantra.

I hope that quality journalism returns someday.

Re: You can't censor away extremism or any other problem

#560

Post by eeZah7Ux »

bleah1000 wrote: post #530
ralmidani wrote: post #351

You can't censor it away completely, but you can help the redeemable extremists __know__ they're indulging in extremism by forcing them to go to fringe websites rather than allow them to stay on Twitter and Facebook as if nothing is wrong. As for the "deplorables" who know what they're doing and will never question it or feel any remorse, we should not be giving them a megaphone. sources[0]: I was susceptible to extr…

This is just a few people explaining how they de-radicalized. Now imagine the opposite, someone with some slightly bad opinion suddenly finds themselves shut out of the main platforms because of hate speech rules. They now become more radicalized. Due to the number of people constantly being suspended/banned I think there is a greater chance that these people will become radicalized, than someone will realize they ha…

> some slightly bad opinion suddenly finds themselves shut out of the main platforms because of hate speech rules

A "slightly bad opinion" has to be more than "slightly bad" to break hate speech rules.

If you feel a platform is overzealous in enforcing hate speech rules, don't use it. Or maybe ask yourself some questions before moving out.

EDIT: the rain of downvotes is telling as usual.

Post reply on HN