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

601–610 of 863 posts

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

#601

Post by morelisp »

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…

> I'm reminded of Daryl Davis, and the way he de-radicalized KKK members. He did it by talking to them, engaging them in speech.

1. Daryl Davis is literally the only person ever mentioned in this context. If you don't have another example, this doesn't even qualify as an anecdote anymore.

2. Over the course of multiple decades Davis has, via intense 1:1 work and personal connection and at great risk to himself, deradicalized something like 4 dozen people. Gab alone had something like 400k accounts.

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

#602

Post by Larrikin »

jimbokun wrote: post #594
eeZah7Ux wrote: post #560

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Who is making the rules?

The people who don't want hate speech on their website

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

#603

Post by jimbokun »

ralmidani wrote: post #461
T-hawk wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a major and serious point. A large part of the discourse has become slapping the "extremist" label on every dissenting argument from the other side, regardless of where the position actually is. If you ban extremist speech, then what you've done is create incentive to label everything as extremist.

I consider myself a centrist; I have been registered as an Independent since the first election in which I voted (21 years ago), and have voted for Republicans and Democrats. Politically, I try to evaluate each idea on the merits rather than which party espouses it. So at least in my case, there is no "other side" which I can mislabel as extremist.

That doesn't mean others won't label you as "extremist".

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

#604

Post by kelnos »

spaced-out wrote: post #535
betwixthewires wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a shortsighted take IMO. "Fringe" websites are growing rapidly while engagement on the big, normal websites is declining or slowing down. The problem is people want to talk about these things, and if that's what people want to talk about they're going to go where they can talk about them. This is directly addressed in the article (when we say we want to ban hate speech, what we really want to ban is hate, but…

>"Fringe" websites are growing rapidly while engagement on the big, normal websites is declining or slowing down. source?

I don't know about engagement on mainstream sites declining, but the rising popularity of sites like Parler and Gab seems undeniable. Parler's recent (attempted) deplatforming is evidence enough: you don't bother with a tiny fringe site that isn't growing or wielding any influence.

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

#605

Post by jimbokun »

pjc50 wrote: post #477
Lammy wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're still using subjective terms like "extremism" in an objective way that the people on the receiving end of that label may not agree with or appreciate.

Al-Quaeda might not appreciate being labelled as extremists, but so what? We have to call things as we see them. And build a consensus around what's core values and within the normal range of debate, and what's beyond that into dangerous, destructive, and even murderous.

Who is "we" that is determining the acceptable range of debate?

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

#607

Post by morelisp »

DC1350 wrote: post #570
eeZah7Ux wrote: post #560

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

That’s not true. Not being attracted to transgender people is enough to get banned on Reddit. I was banned from r/asktransgender for telling a girl in a relationship with a pre-transition MtF person that it doesn’t make sense to call herself a lesbian (since sexual orientation is based on sex and not gender)

It sounds more like being an asshole in a forum that's not yours is enough to get you banned from reddit.

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

#608

Post by dang »

runarberg wrote: post #494
flyingfences wrote: post #471

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't care what "a leftist" has accused another leftist of... I'm taking issue with the fact that you are saying that "discrimination against white people" is not "racial discrimination" with the implication that it's somehow better.

What!? I say that? Are you pointing to the fact that I refer to sibling comments in how the equivalence is wrong? And that is somehow me implying that “discrimination against white people somehow better”? Please, get over your self.

Please stop using HN for ideological battle. It's not what this site is for, and when a flamewar degenerates into a tedious, petty spat like this, the thread stopped being interesting a long time ago.

We ban accounts that do personal attacks, so please don't do that either.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

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

#609

Post by analog31 »

dmingod666 wrote: post #17

My reading from the outside is, the left needs to realize (I'm sure it applies to the right equally as well) that scolding people into guilt is not a viable approach to affect action or to change perceptions when you're dealing with adults. Neither does boxing people into this, that and that category do any good. Like if all you want to do is dehumanize those guys so you can happily insult / hurt them without hurting…

How politically correct does the left need to be? Especially after the "deplorables" gaffe, the left has bent over backwards to avoid appearing to be condescending towards rank and file right-wingers.

And it's ultimately hopeless. No matter how hard we try, someone on the left will scold. Oops.

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

#610

Post by AzzieElbab »

runarberg wrote: post #36
clusterfish wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the extremes, both left and right, have realized that their greatest enemy is not the other extreme, but the masses in between. A group that has the numbers, with mild views that can dilute your message with reasonable doubt, challenge certain aspects of your extreme yet be broadly acceptable to a much wider audience including those tending towards your side – that's poision for an extremist. Therefore, their…

this might be false equivalence. People far on the left (except from some nas-bols; which I’ve never encountered in the wild) call them selfs anti-facists. It is clear who their greatest enemy is. In fact far left groups (like food not bombs, etc.) often engage in social programs called mutual aid where the goal is to spread propaganda through helping the masses.

Funny, the Berlin Wall was called antifascist - Antifaschistischer Schutzwall
Post reply on HN