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

Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 789 posts

Re: Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt

#141

Post by orthecreedence »

bilbo0s wrote: post #108
orthecreedence wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personification makes sense to me, at least in regards to Patreon. But then you get to Youtube...a stroll through the comment section of any video makes you realize you're in the digital version of Mos Eisley. There is no brand to protect, yet they wave their censorship wand quite often, including just this last week ( https://www.businessinsider.com/r-youtube-under-pressure-for... ). It seems a lot of these videos w…

Not really worrying. Just different individuals and organizations taking different positions on different subjects. Most importantly, all of it happening on private property. I have an unpopular opinion. I believe people should be able to fly nazi and confederate flags on their private property. (Even if their private property overlooks yours.) I believe football players should be able to kneel during the national an…

> Certainly none of it is censorship.

I politely disagree. You're right in that it's not government censorship, but it is certainly cultural/corporate censorship, and my thesis is that this is a growing movement.

Yes, nothing is legally wrong here, or even morally wrong. Nobody is doing anything wrong. I do agree with you there. But zooming out and looking at the picture as a whole, I believe there is a growing tendency to silence ideas we don't like. I don't believe this movement will stop once it reaches some arbitrary boundary defined by law or private property. Yes, I am citing the slippery slope argument because I think it's actually applicable here.

The libertarian idea of "well, it's private property so it's not an issue" is an extremely simplistic way of looking at a much larger cultural phenomena that I think is a growing problem.

There may be a day when the deciding of what is acceptable or not does not stop at your private property line, so citing the first amendment and plugging your ears afterwards doesn't really work as a counterargument to what I'm saying.

Re: Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt

#142

Post by dragonwriter »

orthecreedence wrote: post #33

I'm torn about this. On the one hand, Patreon shouldn't have to do business with people they don't like. On the other hand, at what point do we accept that we have different viewpoints and live and let live? The biggest one for me in recent history was Cloudflare arbitrarily deciding to stop hosting the Daily Stormer. Sure, DS is vile, but at the point we start enforcing censorship on a whim instead of hardened polic…

> On the one hand, Patreon shouldn't have to do business with people they don't like. On the other hand, at what point do we accept that we have different viewpoints and live and let live?

Why are those different hands? I can accept that you have a different viewpoint, and that you should be free to express it and people should be free to do business with you, without myself choosing to do business with you. That is, accepting Patreon’s action here is a model of accepting different viewpoints with a live-and-let-live attitude, not an opposed alternative to it.

> To me, personally and anecdotally, this seems to be happening with increasing velocity.

It's not, it's just now sometimes biting the right-wing ideologies that historically have for decades directed private and public censorship in every institution of American life (and whose values are still codified in many systems of private and public censorship), so it actually stands out from the expected background more.

Re: Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt

#143

Post by cm2187 »

throwawaysea wrote: post #77

I don't understand why commenters in these threads keep noting that free speech only protects people from government censorship. This is a common, distracting, and empty statement. Proponents of free speech are pro free speech as a general concept and principle, beyond what protections are afforded under American law today. The idea of free speech predates the existence of the United States. Free speech is hugely val…

I'd add that I can't help being frightened by the psychology of someone eager to control other people's speech. It is a really toxic behavior in a liberal democracy.

Re: Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt

#144

Post by StavrosK »

tomp wrote: post #83
StavrosK wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, yeah, that's bad. He's not even mentioning the words, he's just using them against white people instead of black, but the way he uses them is still meant as an insult. Oops.

But it would be ok if he were black, right? After all, black people are free to use the n-word at will...

No, it's still shitty towards blacks if a black person says it, but I'm not going to get offended on their behalf in that case.

Re: Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt

#145

Post by jmull »

orthecreedence wrote: post #33

I'm torn about this. On the one hand, Patreon shouldn't have to do business with people they don't like. On the other hand, at what point do we accept that we have different viewpoints and live and let live? The biggest one for me in recent history was Cloudflare arbitrarily deciding to stop hosting the Daily Stormer. Sure, DS is vile, but at the point we start enforcing censorship on a whim instead of hardened polic…

I wouldn't be too torn about this case.

First of all, unless you're a free speech absolutist (who believes that literally nothing supercedes free speech) then recognize and accept that someone, somewhere has to draw a line across a continuum of grey.

So we're already in the morass, whether you like it or not. You're right to worry about this question:

> But then, who decides what's bad?

But in this case, it's Patreon, trying to look out for its own best business interests. It's almost ideal. Since this is their core business they are pretty strongly incentivized to be liberal about what they allow.

You can imagine some kind of net neutrality regulation, but please realize that for it to have any effect it must be enforced. So we're talking about regulators, investigators, rulings, fines, appeals, legal defenses, etc., along with the attendant politics, of course, not to mention, soon you'll have entrenched interests to bog down any reforms or improvements to the system. Maybe as a left-leaning socialist you will be happy to hear about all this but just note that it doesn't resolve the fundamental issue. In the end, there's still a mixture of policy, enforcement, process and precedent deciding what's OK and what's not. Passing a law doesn't solve this issue, it just moves it around and probably makes it more complicated.

> The societal norms are shifting to a place where there are certain topics that are not allowed to be discussed at all

I'm not sure what you're talking about here. Anyway, this case seems to be about vigorous use of the n-word and homophobic slurs, which certainly can be discussed (and, unfortunately, are well accepted and encouraged in certain circles).

Also, keep in mind: moving the line of what is acceptable (whether to something more liberal or more conservative) doesn't change the situation at all. There are people who will test the line, wherever you draw it. In fact, for many, that's the point. They get attention (in their own circles) by testing the line and it's not bad to sometimes get banned as a result.

Re: Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt

#146

Post by Lkjhmnbv »

zimpenfish wrote: post #119
harimau777 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I see it, a functional democracy requires tolerance of unpopular opinions not just by the government but also by society at large. I don't agree with these sorts of statements, but I believe that censoring them is harmful to society.

> a functional democracy requires tolerance of unpopular opinions not just by the government but also by society at large If you insert "some" before "unpopular", I'm with you. If you require "all" before "unpopular", then no, I disagree - e.g. people who believe "LGBTQ people should be done away" with, well, that's an "unpopular opinion" that should not be tolerated and, in fact, should be made anathema for anyone t…

So we should do away with them?

Your comment is illogical.

Re: Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt

#147

Post by PhasmaFelis »

darkpuma wrote: post #100
fucking_tragedy wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> arguing with and insulting nazis. He wasn't arguing with white supremacists because he fundamentally disagreed with them. It was infighting between factions. He disagreed with a particular faction's behavior and words. He was arguing with them because they, using his words, were acting like "white n-words"[1]: > “ I just can’t be bothered with people who chose to treat me like this. It’s really annoying. Like, I —…

I'm aware of what he said. He also said: ‘I was being anti-Nazi,’ I can't get into his brain and determine if he actually opposes genocide or secretly supports it, but from what I've seen thus far it seems he carelessly uses offensive racially charged language but takes exception with those who advocate for genocide. Just so we're clear, I don't like this guy. I dislike a lot of people who fall well short of being na…

I'm aware of what he said. He also said: ‘I was being anti-Nazi,’

If someone constantly spouts Nazi talking points while insisting they're not a Nazi, you need to consider the possibility that they're lying to you.

And it's awfully dangerous to claim that you can't compare someone to the Nazis until and unless they publicly call for large-scale genocide. Modern racists know they can't get away with openly flying the swastika right now. The Nazis themselves started off talking about patriotism, jobs, defense. By the time a fascist group has secured enough power to start calling for open genocide, it's too late. You need to learn the lessons of history enough to recognize those dog-whistles.

Re: Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt

#148

Post by smallnamespace »

zamalek wrote: post #120
orthecreedence wrote: post #33

I'm torn about this. On the one hand, Patreon shouldn't have to do business with people they don't like. On the other hand, at what point do we accept that we have different viewpoints and live and let live? The biggest one for me in recent history was Cloudflare arbitrarily deciding to stop hosting the Daily Stormer. Sure, DS is vile, but at the point we start enforcing censorship on a whim instead of hardened polic…

> On the other hand, at what point do we accept that we have different viewpoints and live and let live? The government, soapboxes, homes and places of business that are happy to have them. Freedom of Speech is not the right to be heard. If people don't like what you have to say, or how you are saying it, they are free to walk away. If you don't like what someone is doing in your place of business, you can also throw…

> If people don't like what you have to say, or how you are saying it, they are free to walk away.

Yes, but it's funny that we're now deliberating conflating 'people' with 'private corporations', a conflation that folks on the left vociferously condemned when it came to Citizens United.

I think we should look at ourselves a bit more carefully in the mirror - are private corporations supposed to be held to a higher standard or not? Especially when they have de facto monopolistic control over platforms that everyone uses.

For example, it's all very well to say that Google is a private corporation free to censor you if it wishes, until you're a content creator that is de facto knocked off the air because of Content ID, without any of the due process that copyright law actually demands.

Put in another context, should we get rid of net neutrality because Comcast ought to have the right to decide what content goes over its pipes?

Re: Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt

#149

Post by Lkjhmnbv »

lancesells wrote: post #96
ng12 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what happens when Patreon, Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, Reddit, Twitch and PayPal all work together to create collective censorship? Is your speech being limited if you're functionally blocked from the meaningfully accessible parts of the internet? Yes, these are all private companies. In fact someone already tried to create an alternative Patreon (called Hatreon, iirc) that was shut down by Visa. Allowing censors…

No, your speech is still safe even if Comcast cuts off your service. The internet does not equal freedom of speech. Just because the barrier of entry to Twitter or Facebook is considerably easier than appearing on CNN they are companies that can have rules regarding who they allow on. If people are being arrested for what they are saying then that's censorship and something to be worried about.

You should read up on fascism and what that means.

Re: Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Revolt

#150

Post by iguy »

smelendez wrote: post #129
rabidrat wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bell Telephone was a peer-to-peer communications infrastructure, not a publishing platform. To the extent that it did provide a medium for publication (the phonebook), they absolutely had standards for what could be published. Were those standards arbitrary? Was the Jewish Defamation League allowed to have their business listed, or advertise?

There were also some restrictions on lines used for broadcasting purposes, where you could dial in to hear a recorded message. This was used by mostly right wing commentators from the '60s-'80s and sometimes derided as "dial-a-hate." The lines had to announce the subscriber's name and the recordings could be required to be taken down if found defamatory. When 900 numbers with paid recordings, like messages from celeb…

This is true, but these were side services. The core service of having a phone number was, I think, universal the way having a street address is. I mean not so much legally as in popular imagination. Like you can write fan letters to serial killers on death row, if you wish, and nobody is scandalised that the USPS will deliver your letter like any other.
Post reply on HN