201–210 of 983 posts
Soon to be found on Telegram I guess. Seem to be the only growing platform that does not ban opinions. Probably because they do not need to make advertisers happy. Conclusion: Ads still ruin the internet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The clever ones are the more dangerous ones. Plenty of people that will strike Spencer and Duke will be lulled to sleep by Molyneux but in the end the agenda is the same.
You might be right but trying to censor stuff on the Internet tends to make it bigger in the long run. For an intellectual threat like Molyneux it would better to confront head on with “logic and facts” than pretend it doesn’t exist. Or on the flip side, if something he says makes you uncomfortable but you can’t explain why it’s wrong, then you need to step up your rhetoric game. One of the most effective tropes used…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well. We had several ideological purges earlier in 20th century, and I can tell what will happen next: every netizen will be triaged by a progressive troika, and sent to rehabilitation and education camps. Internet versions (excommunication), or real life ones .
I don't mind purging ideologies that are about racial superiority. Erase that shit.
edit: I may have been wrong, it seems deplatforming might work. [0] TIL! I had often read that echo chambers exacerbated radicalization but it seems more research has yielded better data to turn over that conclusion.
edit1: it seems like radicalization is more nuanced, and different ways to handle communities based on its composition (eg. it is different to introduce someone to an ideology vs pushing a person already exposed into a more extreme view). Found this video to be informative [1].
[0]: https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/bjbp9d/do-social-media-ba...
It's a purge. It won't stop with these three. The censorship will continue to get worse and be disproportionately applied to those on the right until all is left with the world. Conservatism has a place in society. I'm not endorsing any of these guys viewpoints nor am I associating them with conservatism in general, because it's a broad group of over 100 million people in the U.S. with a diverse range of opinions tha…
It does. I've also been confidently assured by my conservative friends that conservatism is a very different politics from racism, fascism, and neo-Nazism. I would not really consider the question of whether I myself am a human being or, as Richard Spencer has posited, a "soulless golem", to be a conservative vs liberal fight.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Screaming 'racism' at people because blacks are collectively less intelligent...is insane." “You cannot run a high IQ [white] society with low IQ [non-white] people…these [non-white] immigrants are going to fail...and they're not just going to fail a little, they are going to fail hard…they're not staying on welfare because they’re lazy...they’re doing what is economically the best option for them...you are importin…
> "Screaming 'racism' at people because blacks are collectively less intelligent...is insane." Is it 'racist' to scream at people because whites have a lower distribution of fast twitch muscle fibers than blacks and thus the results and distributions of champions in sports where this is essential heavily favour blacks? Is this a comment on the "inferiority" of a specific race, or an observation of material reality? W…
I mean the action is coordinated but have the policies?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow that guy's an idiot. He actually claims the Iraq War was a failure because Iraqis have IQs in the 80s and are therefore incapable of accepting democracy. Racism aside, if you've done even a bit of reading on IQ you know it's been rising for decades if not longer. His Jeffersonian Democracy was built by people with an IQ that would be in the 80s today.
Can you point to some of that reading? Pedantically, that goes against the definition of IQ, where 100 is always average so it can't really increase over time, but your general point about people getting smarter doesn't intuitively make sense to me. Obviously we have more knowledge and resources to build on today, but I've never seen any reason to believe modern humans are smarter from birth than humans born 300 year…
I'm no expert but my impression is that it's a widely accepted finding in psychology.
The average IQ is 100 by definition and constantly adjusted, yes, but you can keep track of which way it's being adjusted.
My fairly uneducated guess would be improved nutrition and reduced disease burden are big factors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They did not ban racist subreddits like /r/blackpeopletwitter and /r/fragilewhiteredditor. If you don't know, to post on /r/blackpeopletwitter you have to send a photo of your skin color to the moderators. They are literally racially segregating users.
“While the rule on hate protects such groups, it does not protect all groups or all forms of identity. For example, the rule does not protect groups of people who are in the majority or who promote such attacks of hate.” https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/rules-reporting/acc...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a free society. If you don't like someone else's house party, build your own. thedonald.win is one such thing.
That is an increasingly cynical view to expose given that the people who decide to do that just get blacklisted by the financial elite. https://twitter.com/TheEbonyMaw/status/1277120076186112000 , https://reclaimthenet.org/gab-andrew-torba-visa-blacklisted-...