341–350 of 1001 posts
@dang there is some clearly abusive use of flagging to silence opposing views in this thread. A sign of just how intolerant so many people have become. Please do something about it, like removing flag permissions from these users or making flagged comments remain visible. This behavior is toxic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Antifa's not an organized thing like you keep saying it is. The Proud Boys, on the other hand...
Do self-identified Antifa just spontaneously and simultaneously decide to engage in identical acts violence? Is there some remarkably prominent commie Schelling point us outsiders aren’t privy to?
The people cheering this on will not be protected when the mob comes for you. We live in a digital age. If having the wrong opinion means you can get your bank accounts and all Internet presence removed from you, it's not any different than living under a fascist government.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The mob has been coming for law enforcement and federal buildings in many major cities in America for nine months now. This mob actively organized on Twitter and other social media. Where was the outrage in June? Most of the organizations that organized this destruction still have their Twitter accounts.
Setting aside for a moment the multiple orders of magnitude difference in lethality per participant, the key distinction for me is this: what happened in the Capitol is about usurping the monopoly on violence possessed by the government. BLM is not about overthrowing the government, and has never posed a credible threat to it. Even if BLM overthrew the government, no one has been talking about mass executions. By con…
[1] https://www.chicagotribune.com/nation-world/ct-nw-capitol-po...
[2] https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/us-capitol-police-a...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I can't believe I'm actually going to go to this topic, but your argument has been made before with the Reichstag Fire [1]. Using threats of violence as a pretext for assuming more government control is a tactic as old as governments. There's a bit of false equivalence here. The fire was, on one hand, a false flag (from the very link you posted), and on the other hand, a stroke of luck. Whereas here, it was an atte…
> It's not because of everyday conservatives who feel duped. It's because of the conservatives who came together to enact violence and disrupt the democratic process. And those 75M voters are not able to receive communication from a person they voted for and want to hear speak. They can't buy things from stores that are selling ordinary, run of the mill political apparel. The servers and apps providing social media--…
And if the extremists hadn't stormed the capitol and been supported (Trump literally said "we love you.") by certain folks, those who are being inconvenienced (and yes, it's just an inconvenience) wouldn't be.
If you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.
Edit: Fixed wording of old saw.
The debate here seems like fuel for antitrust issues. A single company deciding not to do business with someone (over actions, not innate stuff like protected classes) should be fine, but when you let them get to be a backbone service, then issues surface like those discussed by everyone here. If google, for example decided to stop surfacing trump stuff in results, that could be a real issue. Not because it’s google…
Not that I would hold my breathe waiting for the Department of Justice to press charges.
But private companies do not actually have the right to coordinate takedowns of other companies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It wouldn't make any difference in this case, as it clearly has nothing to do with political affiliation anyway.
Quite. This is not a political debate. This is about enforcing TOS which explicitly ban use for criminal acts. The fact that the criminal is the President of the United States and his enablers is incidental to the principle. No one wants to ban any reasonable political views. But when a political party organises public mass violence, subversion, insurrection, murder, intimidation of public officers, the attempted ove…
But it is political. This summer saw widespread political violence, including attacks on government institutions, not to mention billions in property damage, but the mainstream reaction to that was "Show me where it says protests are supposed to be polite and peaceful"[1] with massive support for the riots from Silicon Valley companies. Kaepernick praised the violence and Dorsey gave him $3m.[2] The double standard is just sickening.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-zb58uiFjU [2] https://i.imgur.com/uM1iQ5R.jpg
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Stripe and Twitter are pretty clearly the latter. They might be the latter, but I wouldn't consider it obvious. Regarding social media, we've gotten to the point where even US Visa applications ask for social media handles (and I understand they consider it as a negative datum if you don't provide one). And we're also at the point where some companies won't provide you with respectable service unless you @ them on…
> They might be the latter, but I wouldn't consider it obvious Stripe and Twitter are not utilities. Some may want them to be. But I don’t think anyone says they currently have utility obligations under the law.
The debate here seems like fuel for antitrust issues. A single company deciding not to do business with someone (over actions, not innate stuff like protected classes) should be fine, but when you let them get to be a backbone service, then issues surface like those discussed by everyone here. If google, for example decided to stop surfacing trump stuff in results, that could be a real issue. Not because it’s google…
Stripe (and every other credit card processors) have long refused to do business with a broad amount and types of businesses. For example, Stripe themselves don't serve most travel sites. https://stripe.com/blog/why-some-businesses-arent-allowed It's a super common practice to deny some customers for basically all financial services companies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Stop downplaying a literally terrorist attack on the nation's Capitol.
It's entertaining how the left was so critical of the use of the word "terrorist" when talking about the War on Terror, but then immediately started throwing it around when it politically expedient.
