[flagged]
oh jfc - mods, get in here! at least do as good a job as Facebook.
Removing Holocaust Denial Content
281–290 of 823 posts
Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content
#282> Following a year of consultation with external experts, we recently banned anti-Semitic stereotypes about the collective power of Jews that often depicts them running the world or its major institutions.
Given that Zuckerberg is Jewish and by extension 'Facebook is run by Jews', you can see how White Nationalists will frame this.
Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content
#283Earlier quoted context omitted.
To me that seems like three very different positions to be bucketed together?
I tried to point this out on Twitter a few weeks ago when this survey came out, and I basically became an holocaust denier...
Based on the downvote of the post, I can see why that happened to you. I simply copied a section from the article.
Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content
#284Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This heavy-handedness isn't an encroachment on free speech Maybe this is necessary and good, but of course it's an "encroachment on free speech". That's literally what is is. We can obfuscate this by replacing the words "encroachment on free speech" with "heavy-handedness" to get the sentence above. But really what is says if we remove the obfuscation is: > This encroachment on free speech isn't an encroachment on…
Not really. Freedom of speech as defined in the constitution: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Internet speech is not the same as freedom of speech. Facebook is a private platfor…
This is silly. Of course Facebook's censorship is censorship. It is true that they are not bound by the first amendment in the same way in which Congress (and via incorporation the states) are bound, but freedom of speech is a concept which exists independent of the first amendment guarantee to its enjoyment.
Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content
#285Earlier quoted context omitted.
In that case, it wasn't just the total numbers, but also his views on: - Hitler's preeemtive strike against Russia (total Nazi-revesionist BS) - Russia overstating the numbers in their reports on Auschwitz (which goes into the HD direction, as this is a common first step in getting people to believe HD theories).
I don't think your second claim is correct. As far as I understand he believed the Soviet numbers are the most accurate, not that they were overstated.
There you go: "He criticised the evidence for the accepted number of about 6 million victims, claiming that it was a propaganda figure of the Soviet leadership for which there were no evidence.[7]" from the above wikipedia article. Again, the whole line of argumentation matters, in which case he is misusing numbers from some sources to discredit other to come to a different total number.
If you are going to challenge a global research concesnus in any field, you better have a stringent, logical reason for doing so. If, on the other hand, you are bascially pulling numbers out of nowhere, misquote other out of context, all while writting the other stuff he did, you are on shacky ground.
Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content
#286Admirable move. I think Facebook (and all its properties), Twitter, and other hyper-connected social networks must show a healthy level of intolerance towards groups and ideologies that are beyond reason and recall, especially when those said groups are overtly and unmistakably intolerant themselves. This heavy-handedness isn't an encroachment on free speech but a necessary impediment to keep the spirit of free speec…
> This heavy-handedness isn't an encroachment on free speech but a necessary impediment to keep the spirit of free speech and free society intact, one where the tolerant voices aren't drained out by the relentlessness and irrationality of the intolerant. What is tolerance? You can't tolerate something if you agree with it. Tolerance means putting up with things with which you disagree. This is an encroachment on free…
>What is tolerance? You can't tolerate something if you agree with it. Tolerance means putting up with things with which you disagree.
That's an easy one. Tolerance is putting up with things other people do, except when those other people are being intolerant. You can make a comfortable place for intolerant groups, or for the people they target, but not both. Better to remove the intolerance.
Removing holocaust denial is an easy win here. It will be more interesting to see if Facebook chooses to remove less obviously bad content.
Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content
#287Earlier quoted context omitted.
To me a wholesale ban on a religion, whose practitioners vary wildly seems like a completely different thing. Holocaust denial is pretty specific in comparison.
What % of a religion would need to be, say, anti-gay, before we deem the whole thing problematic and ban it from facebook? The more I investigate "where to draw the line", the more I'm convinced we aren't capable of doing so in a just fashion.
I feel like any given region's propensity to say not like a particular sexual orientation is dramatically different from say holocaust denial that is straight up rooted in antisemitism.
Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content
#288Earlier quoted context omitted.
You think there's some kind of debate or question around the existence of the Holocaust?
He didn't say that. This is dishonest bullying.
Please, do clarify what they meant then.
As I see it, they suggested that removing content denying the Holocaust was telling someone what opinions to have on the matter. The Holocaust is not a matter of opinion, it is a fact.
Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content
#289OK, but when are they gonna remove communist-propaganda content? Communism is not even mentioned in their Hate Speech Policy and believe it killed a lot more people than even fascism (90 million vs 10 million). Today this hateful ideology is spreading completely unchecked in Social Media. https://www.facebook.com/communitystandards/hate_speech As a Communism-survivor I feel very strongly about it.
Uh I think the difference is all that killing done by communists were done by despots but not core to the ideology. Here someone goes again, doing the fascists' propaganda work for them. All-powerful and ever the victim.
The killing was done by our friends and neighbors who joined the state apparatus, you know. It is core to the ideology which promotes class "struggle".
Oh, and I abhor fascism too.
Re: Removing Holocaust Denial Content
#290Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think your second claim is correct. As far as I understand he believed the Soviet numbers are the most accurate, not that they were overstated.
There you go: "He criticised the evidence for the accepted number of about 6 million victims, claiming that it was a propaganda figure of the Soviet leadership for which there were no evidence.[7]" from the above wikipedia article. Again, the whole line of argumentation matters, in which case he is misusing numbers from some sources to discredit other to come to a different total number. If you are going to challenge…
It also says a few sentences later "He came to the conclusion that the Soviet commission examining the concentration camp Auschwitz (which did not find any of the German paperwork) had made the best estimate the number of victims."
Edit: I also want to clarify (again) that I'm not arguing that he is correct. I am arguing that he is labeled a denialist for his claim about the number of Jews killed, despite his believing that a large number of Jews were killed in concentration camps.