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

721–730 of 863 posts

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

#721

Post by a1369209993 »

ravenstine wrote: post #498
karaterobot wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not only would they disagree with you, but their strategy actually works. Leftists, "wokeness", and social justice wouldn't be the hot topics they've been if the strategy of leftists weren't effective. Is the goal of social justice movements just to be hot topics? Your statement makes it seem like success is measured by the amount of retweets or something. Clearly that can't be true, but if global fascism and ethni…

> Is the goal of social justice movements just to be hot topics? I'm not sure I understand precisely what you're getting at but, for the record, anyone reading this should understand that I am not suggesting that hot topics are the goal of social justice. In fact, I wasn't even making a value judgement of left wing causes in general, but people seem to always take the word "leftists" as a pejorative. All I'm saying i…

> I am not suggesting that hot topics are the goal of social justice.

"their strategy actually works." implies that their strategy accompishes their goals.

"Leftists, "wokeness", and social justice wouldn't be the hot topics they've been if the strategy of leftists weren't effective." impies that hot topics are what their strategy accompished.

The transitive property between "goals" == "what strategy accompished" == "hot topics" is at least pretty clearly implied there.

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

#722

Post by Pyramus »

Alupis wrote: post #656
Jarwain wrote: post #641

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this subject to survivorship bias? If, 1000 years ago some movement was censored by the "good guys", if they've done a half-competent job, would we even Know they tried censoring things in the first place? Not to mention how the "good guys" are usually just whomever manages to last/survive

How about in the last 100 years then? In the 50's-70's, the US tried it's hardest to censor/hide/destroy Marxism, it's ideals, and derivatives (Socialism) - yet it still exists today. You cannot disappear ideas by silencing the individuals that believe them. Instead of trying to hide them away, the ideas need to be exposed publicly and discussed openly. If one side truly is righteous, it will prevail through open dis…

> If one side truly is righteous, it will prevail through open discussion and logic.

Unfortunately that is not always how it works out.

In Germany in the 1930s the idea that Jews/non-Arians have conspired against Germany and should be retaliated against was discussed openly - and accepted. Obviously it was not righteous.

In several US states in the 1980s the idea that homo sapiens was created by God and creationism should replace evolution in school textbooks was discussed openly - and accepted. Was it righteous?

These are two very different examples, but both ask the same question: What do we do in the case where truly righteous ideas do not prevail?

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

#724

Post by SuoDuanDao »

_y5hn wrote: post #710
SuoDuanDao wrote: post #694

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's certainly true, if the only places where people criticise the mainstream consensus are dominated by neo-nazis, that reasonable people are less likely to criticise the mainstream consensus. The downside to that 'solution' is, sometimes reasonable people need to criticise the mainstream consensus. I recently thought of a great example: If the goal is to reduce extremism, one of the lowest-hanging fruit would be to…

So we should not expose abuse and misconduct, just because some fragile minds get upset when brown people speak up?

I raised that example to illustrate the problem with censorship as a social engineering tool, there seems to be a lack of nuance around the question.

People talk as if the question of whether to censor is identical to whether there are viewpoints that are harmful. That's the wrong question IMHO, of course some viewpoints are harmful. Harmful enough that it would be better if they weren't shared, we can all imagine some. Censorship is like torture, we shouldn't swear it off because it doesn't work, but because the benefit we gain from using it is miniscule compared to the harm received when it's used on us.

The George Floyd video is a clear case in point. How many people who were happy to see #45 removed from social media would have been dismayed if the George Floyd video had been similarly removed for the sake of public order? How much benefit did they gain from their enemy being off the platforms compared to the harm it would have done to them if the same tool had been used against them?

Society progresses in proportion to the number of uncomfortable conversations. Because they are uncomfortable, we can all be tempted by people flattering us that we don't need to have them. Therefore, it's a tool that tends to be overused. As such, it should be one that reasonable people of all tribes can agree is a sign of hypocrisy, an opportunity for grandstanding when employed by the other side and soul-searching when employed by our own.

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

#725

Post by Alupis »

hef19898 wrote: post #703
Alupis wrote: post #691

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Oh, but the Allies did make Naziism illegal You can be a Nazi in the US, UK and I'm sure pretty much anywhere in the world (except Germany) - and not go to jail, etc. So no, the Allies did not make Nazism illegal. Instead, they attempted to squash Nazism through propaganda (both domestic and foreign), and through spreading the truth about what Nazism had accomplished (Holocaust, among other atrocities). There's Hol…

With all the relevant criticism against German denazification, the policies and laws worked. Not just in Germany, but also in the other countries in Europe wih similar laws. That German laws failed to prevent genozid in other continents is to be expected, I guess.

The point was those polices were not Censorship.

I can buy Nazi paraphernalia today, read about Nazism on Wikipedia, purchase newly printed copies of Mein Kumpf, watch Hitler's speeches on Youtube, and more.

The ideals of Nazism were defeated by openly exposing, and combating them with freely available information.

Censorship would have been to pretend Nazism never happened, and banning of anything that might encroach upon "Right Think".

And think what would happen if someone made Nazism illegal? What would that mean? What about some new group that calls themselves Izan's, but shares all the same ideas of Nazism? Would that be illegal too?

You cannot ban ideas - someone else, at some point in time, will have the very same idea even if they do not know someone else had it first.

Instead, you must fight with logic and exposure - expose bad ideas for what they are, and prove them wrong with logic.

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

#726

Post by Alupis »

Pyramus wrote: post #722
Alupis wrote: post #656

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about in the last 100 years then? In the 50's-70's, the US tried it's hardest to censor/hide/destroy Marxism, it's ideals, and derivatives (Socialism) - yet it still exists today. You cannot disappear ideas by silencing the individuals that believe them. Instead of trying to hide them away, the ideas need to be exposed publicly and discussed openly. If one side truly is righteous, it will prevail through open dis…

> If one side truly is righteous, it will prevail through open discussion and logic. Unfortunately that is not always how it works out. In Germany in the 1930s the idea that Jews/non-Arians have conspired against Germany and should be retaliated against was discussed openly - and accepted. Obviously it was not righteous. In several US states in the 1980s the idea that homo sapiens was created by God and creationism s…

The righteous ideals prevailed in the end, in both examples you provided - no?

Nobody pretends Nazism never happened - that would be Censorship. Instead, you can buy, find, read about Nazism - including Mein Kumpf and more.

Creationism is not a dominating idea in the US either - nobody censored Creationism (even to this day you can find private schools that teach it!). Instead, Creationism was defeated by questioning it's teachings, and exposing it's logical flaws.

I do believe you have very eloquently proven my point. Censorship never works.

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

#727

Post by _y5hn »

SuoDuanDao wrote: post #724
_y5hn wrote: post #710

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So we should not expose abuse and misconduct, just because some fragile minds get upset when brown people speak up?

I raised that example to illustrate the problem with censorship as a social engineering tool, there seems to be a lack of nuance around the question. People talk as if the question of whether to censor is identical to whether there are viewpoints that are harmful. That's the wrong question IMHO, of course some viewpoints are harmful. Harmful enough that it would be better if they weren't shared, we can all imagine so…

Yeah, it's a good point. There is however a problem when lies and tribalism take over the agenda, rather than fairness and justice for all. The laws and rule must apply to all, so we must resist unfair special treatment (and you may see this regards to all). The very notion of sides, is false (ie. right vs left).

So bribes, threats, falsehoods, abuse need to be exposed for what it is.

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

#728

Post by hef19898 »

Alupis wrote: post #725
hef19898 wrote: post #703

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With all the relevant criticism against German denazification, the policies and laws worked. Not just in Germany, but also in the other countries in Europe wih similar laws. That German laws failed to prevent genozid in other continents is to be expected, I guess.

The point was those polices were not Censorship. I can buy Nazi paraphernalia today, read about Nazism on Wikipedia, purchase newly printed copies of Mein Kumpf, watch Hitler's speeches on Youtube, and more. The ideals of Nazism were defeated by openly exposing, and combating them with freely available information. Censorship would have been to pretend Nazism never happened, and banning of anything that might encroac…

I'm confused now. Either the German laws against hate speach are censorship, as claimed in the original linked blo pst, or they are not.

And funny enough, we Germans are usually hammered by the right for over working on our historical gilt. Especially by the German right wing.

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

#729

Post by mancerayder »

hef19898 wrote: post #705
mancerayder wrote: post #636

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to swallow the fact that any reply means downvotes in this Silicon Valley community, but: 1. Because you're not actually removing right-wing extremism (which would be nice), you're pushing people into the corner. You can't legally or morally prevent people from having extremist views among themselves, having conversations, and in an Internet age you're going to play wack-a-mole if you try to chase after things…

How exactly do we have more right wing extremists in Germany in France? Because if you apply the same poitical standards, the FN and AfD are more like center GOP.

This is a comment steeped in ignorance. But let's put aside that fact. Let's take the following logical conclusion

1. We should ban extremist views

2. The centrist GOP is extremist (since the Front National and the AfD are agreed extreme)

so obviously:

3. We should ban the GOP from Twitter and other places discussed in this thread.

^^ is anyone else seeing this?? Is anyone but me very very scared that people like this are possibly getting hired in Facebook and Twitter and Google?

Banning the GOP would be good for democracy? I've never voted GOP in my life, but the view you've espoused is extremist.

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

#730

Post by Gibbon1 »

hef19898 wrote: post #728
Alupis wrote: post #725

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point was those polices were not Censorship. I can buy Nazi paraphernalia today, read about Nazism on Wikipedia, purchase newly printed copies of Mein Kumpf, watch Hitler's speeches on Youtube, and more. The ideals of Nazism were defeated by openly exposing, and combating them with freely available information. Censorship would have been to pretend Nazism never happened, and banning of anything that might encroac…

I'm confused now. Either the German laws against hate speach are censorship, as claimed in the original linked blo pst, or they are not. And funny enough, we Germans are usually hammered by the right for over working on our historical gilt. Especially by the German right wing.

I have a saying, that which is abused gets taken away.

Which is say one should be cautious about exercising rights if you want to keep them.

Post reply on HN