Live data from Hacker News

YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

theverge.com

1–10 of 983 posts

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#4
post #3

I haven't watched Stefan in a long time, is he now producing content in the same register as David Duke & Richard Spencer ? It did not seem to be the case a few years ago.

He's always been pretty awful and white-supremacist-adjacent.

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#5
post #3

I haven't watched Stefan in a long time, is he now producing content in the same register as David Duke & Richard Spencer ? It did not seem to be the case a few years ago.

I used to listen to Stefan Molyneux about 10 years ago because he had some interesting views on free market economics. Now I look him up on Wikipedia and find out he's turned into a white nationalist. What the hell happened?

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#7
You are free to speak and exercise your freedom of speech no one really disputes that. You are not, however, anywhere guaranteed or granted the liberty to a platform for your dialog. That is the problem that we are encountering today, people are thinking that there are attacks to freedom of speech and confusing that with the freedom of an establishment to defend their property from damages. I think we can all agree that art is a medium for free speech but if you graffiti private property without the permission of the owner of said property than the owner of that property has the right to remove the graffiti. Likewise the operator of a website has the same right to remove content they may consider damaging to the value of their property. The only thing that the first amendment provides you with is freedom from prosecution by the government for statements you make. It does not preserve the right to defame, demean, or slander others or their property or to damage the property in a way contrary to the desires of the owner of that property. No one is stopping you though from making your own platform to spread your own message. Although it is also the right of those you may purchase services from to terminate those services if they feel that it devalues their property. For instance if a dns provider decides that website is offensive it is their prerogative to terminate services as a private owner. Same with any content provider, isp, hosting service or social media website. No where in the law does anything grant you an unlimited ability to say anything you want in a private forum and any private forum is entitled to moderating the content on its properties. I wish people would stop conflating free speech as some sort of absolute. It is not. The only case where a platform must provide services outside of the strictest sense of an intended audience is in through US Code Titles that may be applicable by law such ADA accessibilities (these codes are of course regional and may not apply outside the region in which that service is provided).

Edit: Free speech absolutists, isn't down-voting my comment moderation? Ironic. How about just replying instead. I'm willing to engage in debate.

EditEdit: I'm trying to reply to everything as quickly as I can but HN is telling me I'm posting to fast.

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#8
post #3

I haven't watched Stefan in a long time, is he now producing content in the same register as David Duke & Richard Spencer ? It did not seem to be the case a few years ago.

Yes, I don't remember Stefan Molyneux saying anything racist. Can someone share an example?
Post reply on HN