Tech companies declare war on hate speech and conservatives are worried • Hacker News Board

Re: Tech companies declare war on hate speech and conservatives are worried

#51

Post by dragonwriter » Sat, Sep 02, 2017, 8:27 AM UTC

mambodog wrote: post #19

cgb223 wrote: post #12

One of the things that bothers me about recent censorship on hate speech is how selective, and how inconsistently it's applied, if it is to be applied at all. My grandfather escaped the Soviet Union. Stalin's regime killed all of his siblings. All of them. But yet when I check YouTube, Twitter, and so on I see lots of videos professing communisms values. Hell I've seen a pro-communist march in a city I recently moved…

Hold on. I'm not a fan of Communism, but there's a pretty clear difference. The Soviet Union was a particular implementation of Communism which chose killing. Killing is not an inherent requirement to the ideology. Contemporary proponents of Communism or Socialism usually aren't claiming that the Soviet Union's implementation was good. In Neo-Nazism the ideology itself has the elimination of other races as its goal.…

> The Soviet Union was a particular implementation of Communism which chose killing.

It was an implementation of (what it called, though there is debate in socialist circles about the validity of the claim) socialism. Communism is the end-state they claimed to wish to achieve, not the thing they implemented, even in theory.

Re: Tech companies declare war on hate speech and conservatives are worried

#52

Post by brbsix » Sat, Sep 02, 2017, 9:30 AM UTC

pdkl95 wrote: post #24

TheCowboy wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is always going to be a challenge with managing the content of any platform. It's not easy to be a moderator of different views. Arguably, Nazism tends to ring more obvious to moderators. There is more than one form of communism that has been implemented, and it's likely these videos alll aren't professing a support of Stalin's bloody reign. Communism also (usually) lacks a racial/nationalist superiority compone…

> Arguably, Nazism tends to ring more obvious to moderators. Unfortunately, white nationalist (neo-nazi) groups learned a long time ago that PR matters. The average person starts to notice anything that actually looks similar to stereotypical Nazism. The Southern Strategy with Lee Atwater's use of dog whistle terms like "forced busing" and "state's rights" as indirect codes for racism demonstrated not only is public…

From the video, some of the subtle strategies fascists use to code their ideas:

1) They deny being a fascist.

2) Euphemism (e.g. I'm a X, not a fascist or talking about purging criminals, rapists and terrorists which is actually code for purging non-white people.)

3) Pedantry. They bog you down and waste your time in a "petty terminological dispute" as they specifically detail why they are not a fascist.

I can't even go on, I feel like I listening to a guide on how to spot a witch.

Re: Tech companies declare war on hate speech and conservatives are worried

#53

Post by codedokode » Sat, Sep 02, 2017, 9:54 AM UTC

gscott wrote: post #43

notzorbo3 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And in a society adopting capitalism the Bourgeoisie must violently suppress the proletariat otherwise you're not going to be able to create that perfect society.

In the United States most people did not come here already rich and they had to trade among each other to survive. Everywhere communism touches has problems. In Britain check peoples teeth they are a nice color yellow, in Canada you can wait for months for medical care, in Russia you need to bribe the doctor to get medical care, in Venezuela you need to travel to a neighboring country to get food, in Cuba you earn $2…

Your information about Russia might be a bit outdated, there are commercial dental clinics and in public hospitals you can pay for priority reception.

Re: Tech companies declare war on hate speech and conservatives are worried

#54

Post by codedokode » Sat, Sep 02, 2017, 9:58 AM UTC

cgb223 wrote: post #12

One of the things that bothers me about recent censorship on hate speech is how selective, and how inconsistently it's applied, if it is to be applied at all. My grandfather escaped the Soviet Union. Stalin's regime killed all of his siblings. All of them. But yet when I check YouTube, Twitter, and so on I see lots of videos professing communisms values. Hell I've seen a pro-communist march in a city I recently moved…

I think Stalin did that not because he was a communist but because he was a dictator who didn't trust people and thought they were going to betray him.

And if I remember correctly labour laws are there because of communists, before people worked for 12 hours a day for a very small salary.

Re: Tech companies declare war on hate speech and conservatives are worried

#55

Post by frik » Sat, Sep 02, 2017, 9:58 AM UTC

eighthnate wrote: post #41

The war on "hate speech", just like the war on "terror" is just a cover to take away and restrict rights. Why did the media collectively declare war on "hate speech" the past few years - culminating in the absurd hit piece on pewdiepie? Isn't it strange that all the establishment news organizations WSJ, NYTimes, WaPo, etc all went on a industry-wide campaign? It had nothing to do with "hate speech". Neo-nazis, kkk, e…

Thanks, well said.

More and more sites remove comment functionality or hide comments they don't like, forced real-name policy for accounts, etc. Many sites lost any credibility these days.

Re: Tech companies declare war on hate speech and conservatives are worried

#56

Post by Iv » Sat, Sep 02, 2017, 10:21 AM UTC

idibidiart wrote: post #29

Iv wrote: post #9

I say yes. Because you probably disagree with what most people will call hate speech. Criticism of religion, criticism of some historical events, is considered by some as hate speech. Ex-muslims routinely complain that youtube censors their videos criticizing islam. Videos of brutality (that often contains legal proofs of crimes) are removed if they are used by some hate groups, even if the intent of the recorder was…

"Ex-Christians _routinely_ complain that youtube censors their videos criticizing Christianity." Has that not happened, too? Just reversing roles for the sake of argument. Curiously wondering...

It is harder to present criticism of christianism as racists. Youtube is not anti-exmuslims, simply when you have a guy named "The Masked Arab" who has a dozen of videos explaining why islam is a violent and backward religion, that a hundred people have tagged "arab haters" it is hard for youtube to see through it.

Re: Tech companies declare war on hate speech and conservatives are worried

#57

Post by Yetanfou » Sat, Sep 02, 2017, 11:10 AM UTC

codedokode wrote: post #54

cgb223 wrote: post #12

One of the things that bothers me about recent censorship on hate speech is how selective, and how inconsistently it's applied, if it is to be applied at all. My grandfather escaped the Soviet Union. Stalin's regime killed all of his siblings. All of them. But yet when I check YouTube, Twitter, and so on I see lots of videos professing communisms values. Hell I've seen a pro-communist march in a city I recently moved…

I think Stalin did that not because he was a communist but because he was a dictator who didn't trust people and thought they were going to betray him. And if I remember correctly labour laws are there because of communists, before people worked for 12 hours a day for a very small salary.

That is a very dangerous road to travel, no pun intended: the famous German motorways were built by the nazi regime. The 'Volkswagen' - people's car - was built on request from the nazi regime.

Stalin was both a communist as well as a dictator who didn't trust people. So was Lenin, although he was more manipulative than Stalin and as such did not get the reputation for being paranoid like Stalin. Communism and national socialism and fascism (which is not the same as national socialism) are not all that different once you look past the ideological veneer. All strive for a totalitarian state, all make the individual subservient to that state, all claim to create a better world for those who are being made subservient. All have been tested in practice, none of them have delivered the promised benefits. In all cases the result was a state run by an overclass which was relatively well off compared to the subjugated masses. None of them could handle dissent.

For all three of these totalitatian ideologies - communism, national socialism and fascism - you could argue that those states which claimed to implement them never 'really' followed the doctrine to the logical and supposedly beneficial conclusion but that is a fallacy. It is the ideologies themselves which are at fault as they all try to do away with the individual 'for the good of the state' while people do see themselves as individuals first - especially in situations where the survival of the individual is at stake.

Re: Tech companies declare war on hate speech and conservatives are worried

#58

Post by phiskk » Sat, Sep 02, 2017, 11:42 AM UTC

Iv wrote: post #9

I say yes. Because you probably disagree with what most people will call hate speech. Criticism of religion, criticism of some historical events, is considered by some as hate speech. Ex-muslims routinely complain that youtube censors their videos criticizing islam. Videos of brutality (that often contains legal proofs of crimes) are removed if they are used by some hate groups, even if the intent of the recorder was…

Incorrect argument.

You can easily debate whether France should be taking military action against ISIS without claiming that ISIS is right.

This is like saying that because France has laws against gender discrimination, so you could not advocate oppressing women as a show of support for Saudi Arabia, it is now impossible to argue against going to war with the Saudis.

What the law does do is make it harder to instigate more terror attacks within France.

Re: Tech companies declare war on hate speech and conservatives are worried

#59

Post by identitarian94 » Sat, Sep 02, 2017, 12:34 PM UTC

Before Donald Trump's election—and before racist gunman Dylann Roof murdered nine black people in Charleston last year—it was easier to dismiss sites like the Daily Stormer. Yes, these were watering holes for evil ideology, but they fundamentally felt like powerless kooks. Nowadays, more people are taking words and threats from extremist groups seriously. Liberal activists have mobilized against these groups, and they've found a receptive audience among technology leaders.

It's amazing how catalyzing white racial violence against blacks is, considering that black-on-white violence dwarfs it, both in magnitude as well as proportion. 85% of interracial violent crime involving blacks and whites is black-on-white--despite blacks comprising only 13% of the population and non-Hispanic whites comprising 64%. As one example, there are roughly 19,000 black-on-white rapes a year versus at most several hundred white-on-black rapes.

You'd likely never learn that truth without these "hate sites" publishing the raw data (which I dare not link to, but the words "color" and "crime" should be enough to find it) that supposedly reputable news organizations like the NY Times and Washington Post won't publish. The mainstream media simply ignores or outright denies this reality, instead affording the rare Roofs of America wall-to-wall coverage while providing minimal ink to the comparatively common black perpetrators of racial violence against whites, like this one: http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/crime/article170340652....

Make no mistake; this push to censor hate speech is really a push to censor white speech exclusively. Militant anti-white black racists like Boyce Watkins, Tariq Nasheed, and Umar Johnson will not be silenced. Meanwhile, simply informing whites of just how disproportionately they are violently victimized by blacks will soon be sufficient grounds to banish you from the internet.

Re: Tech companies declare war on hate speech and conservatives are worried

#60

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Sep 02, 2017, 1:19 PM UTC

Yetanfou wrote: post #57

codedokode wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Stalin did that not because he was a communist but because he was a dictator who didn't trust people and thought they were going to betray him. And if I remember correctly labour laws are there because of communists, before people worked for 12 hours a day for a very small salary.

That is a very dangerous road to travel, no pun intended: the famous German motorways were built by the nazi regime. The 'Volkswagen' - people's car - was built on request from the nazi regime. Stalin was both a communist as well as a dictator who didn't trust people. So was Lenin, although he was more manipulative than Stalin and as such did not get the reputation for being paranoid like Stalin. Communism and nation…

[deleted]