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

Fighting Neo-Nazis and the Future of Free Expression

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 204 posts

Re: Fighting Neo-Nazis and the Future of Free Expression

#61

Post by beebmam »

lovich wrote: post #53
ebola1717 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know what a false equivalency is? They banned a site that no one, even the site runners, would argue isn't explicitly about white nationalism. If anyone bans the likes of Breitbart or InfoWars, then maybe we can start this slippery slope conversation, but until then it's completely disingenuous.

The problem is that whatever group is considered evil can change day to day. Right now 99% of people, myself included, can agree that supremacists or neo nazis are bad people and output evil ideas. However, it wasn't too long ago that the majority of people were against gays getting married, or even different races getting married. When we set up precedent or infrastructure to harm a group outside of the rule of law…

Fairly certain that anyone that advocates and supports death camps for Jews is evil. There's no justification IN ANY ERA for this.

Re: Fighting Neo-Nazis and the Future of Free Expression

#62

Post by dandersh »

mc32 wrote: post #58
dandersh wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This post is wrong on so many levels. Those ideologies did not have the hatred and violence at their core that Nazism did. That's why there is no "Godwins Law" when it comes to Marxism. That's my point: This is the most reviled philosophy that currently exists, and people are complaining about "free speech" when previously they would shriek "Godwins Law" whenever comparisons are made. That's how far we've fallen. Say…

Are you kidding? Have you not read up on what they did during the Great Leap Forward? Innocent people, their own people, were pulled out of their dwellings charges made up on the spot and killed in the squares. What Stalin did in Ukraine was pretty much pure hate for them. Yes, I object because your cause will be coopted to further a specific ideology at the expense of all others.

I did. I also read up on the use of racial slavery and genocide of native Americans as the basis of Americas rise to power.

Unlike you though I am able to understand that one of them(Nazism) has racial superiority and oppression as a core feature of their ideology while the others do not.

Again, there is no "Godwins Law" for Marxism/American Capitalism. I wonder why that is???

Re: Fighting Neo-Nazis and the Future of Free Expression

#63

Post by mc32 »

dandersh wrote: post #62
mc32 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you kidding? Have you not read up on what they did during the Great Leap Forward? Innocent people, their own people, were pulled out of their dwellings charges made up on the spot and killed in the squares. What Stalin did in Ukraine was pretty much pure hate for them. Yes, I object because your cause will be coopted to further a specific ideology at the expense of all others.

I did. I also read up on the use of racial slavery and genocide of native Americans as the basis of Americas rise to power. Unlike you though I am able to understand that one of them(Nazism) has racial superiority and oppression as a core feature of their ideology while the others do not. Again, there is no "Godwins Law" for Marxism/American Capitalism. I wonder why that is???

They probably do in places which suffered from it (Ukraine).

America was not the first or last European colony. Mexico was a colony, Brazil was a colony with even worse racism -bad things happened and continue to happen everywhere. Slave trade continues in the middle east. Today. Read up on what Latin American colonies did to the native populations. It's not different. They didn't have confederates.

I don't see how any of that should subjugate free speech.

Murderers have free speech --I'll wager more than a few victim's families wish they did not. I believe they should still have that right.

Should we go to Japan and also try to shut down the speech of those still in support of the imperial campaign in China, one of the most atrocious incidents of all of WWii?

Re: Fighting Neo-Nazis and the Future of Free Expression

#64

Post by mixedCase »

dandersh wrote: post #57
mixedCase wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> These people do not respect free speech. You're right, they don't. Are you suggesting you do? And since we're talking about nazis and historical references, allow me to bring up four relevant words about something we've learned about their murderous regime and their abuse of power: "First they came for..."

You do realize it was THE NAZIS that "first they came for..." right? You are literally using the oppression that this group levied on other people as a defense for their views. I didn't realize I was on 4chan or Reddit. Are people seriously this detached from history? I respect free speech. I don't respect absolutist speech. Unfortunately many people (including, apparently yourself) are unable to tell the difference.

EDIT: Here was an anger-fueled answer about not stooping as low as nazis and how the erosion of free speech has a snowball effect.

There's irony in defending peace with anger, so I've deleted it.

So I'll just remind anyone reading this: Life is short. Enjoy and defend the freedoms you have now while you can; for the road to hell is paved with good intentions and we never know when it could be our turn to become the marginalized.

Re: Fighting Neo-Nazis and the Future of Free Expression

#65

Post by duncan_bayne »

Pfhreak wrote: post #35
duncan_bayne wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is already happening. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/24/safe-spaces-un...

Your comment is fairly sparse, but I'm reading that you feel 'safe spaces' are equivalent to Google/GoDaddy/etc. shutting down neo-nazi websites that actively encourage violence against a class of people?

I'm reading that you feel like constructing and attacking a straw-man version of my position ;)

The thrust of the Guardian article was that freedom of speech is no longer valued at Universities in the UK, or at least, to no-where near the level it was value in the past.

Specifically, the practices that people are advocating to use against Neo-NAZIs are, right now, being used in Universities in the UK and elsewhere to shut down political dissent.

That's what I meant by 'this is already happening'.

Re: Fighting Neo-Nazis and the Future of Free Expression

#66

Post by tekromancr »

I really don't understand the resistance here. I have heard no arguments against no-platforming isis propaganda. Youtube, twitter, facebook all have a policy of removing such content. I don't really have a problem with white supremacists also being no-platformed. These are private entities, deciding for themselves that they refuse to be party to such content. Let the dipshits buy their own damn servers.

Now, the minute either group is harassed or arrested by the government over things is when it becomes a problem. That is actual censorship, and should be resisted.

Re: Fighting Neo-Nazis and the Future of Free Expression

#67

Post by dingaling »

dandersh wrote: post #57
mixedCase wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> These people do not respect free speech. You're right, they don't. Are you suggesting you do? And since we're talking about nazis and historical references, allow me to bring up four relevant words about something we've learned about their murderous regime and their abuse of power: "First they came for..."

You do realize it was THE NAZIS that "first they came for..." right? You are literally using the oppression that this group levied on other people as a defense for their views. I didn't realize I was on 4chan or Reddit. Are people seriously this detached from history? I respect free speech. I don't respect absolutist speech. Unfortunately many people (including, apparently yourself) are unable to tell the difference.

> I respect free speech. I don't respect absolutist speech.

Then don't call it free speech.

The animals in the zoo are of course permitted to roam free! It would be inhumane otherwise. All they have to do is remain within the confines of their enclosures otherwise they will be shot.

Re: Fighting Neo-Nazis and the Future of Free Expression

#68

Post by e9 »

liberte82 wrote: post #59
e9 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We all know Nazi are bad, no one in their right mind will deny it. But the way they are currently handled through violence and censorship is not right and downright illegal. You are feeding their anger instead of squashing their ideas. We are American citizens and should respect each others right for free speech and engage in civil debate over ideas we disagree. If we resolve to silencing and violence without debate…

Nazis don't have ideas. They will jump from truth to lies as it suits them to win an argument. They do not live in the world of civil debate. Think of them as trolls from before trolls were a thing. They are not an ideology, they are a hate movement. Silencing them does not make their hate grow, they are already fundamentally about hate. They are a passion, not an ideology. Tell me what is the tax policy of a fascist…

so do you recommend banning all hate movements? As article points out "Those on the left face calls to characterize the Black Lives Matter movement as a hate group." Where do you draw the line?

Re: Fighting Neo-Nazis and the Future of Free Expression

#69

Post by [deleted] »

mixedCase wrote: post #64
dandersh wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do realize it was THE NAZIS that "first they came for..." right? You are literally using the oppression that this group levied on other people as a defense for their views. I didn't realize I was on 4chan or Reddit. Are people seriously this detached from history? I respect free speech. I don't respect absolutist speech. Unfortunately many people (including, apparently yourself) are unable to tell the difference.

EDIT: Here was an anger-fueled answer about not stooping as low as nazis and how the erosion of free speech has a snowball effect. There's irony in defending peace with anger, so I've deleted it. So I'll just remind anyone reading this: Life is short. Enjoy and defend the freedoms you have now while you can; for the road to hell is paved with good intentions and we never know when it could be our turn to become the m…

[deleted]

Re: Fighting Neo-Nazis and the Future of Free Expression

#70

Post by liberte82 »

dingaling wrote: post #67
dandersh wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do realize it was THE NAZIS that "first they came for..." right? You are literally using the oppression that this group levied on other people as a defense for their views. I didn't realize I was on 4chan or Reddit. Are people seriously this detached from history? I respect free speech. I don't respect absolutist speech. Unfortunately many people (including, apparently yourself) are unable to tell the difference.

> I respect free speech. I don't respect absolutist speech. Then don't call it free speech. The animals in the zoo are of course permitted to roam free! It would be inhumane otherwise. All they have to do is remain within the confines of their enclosures otherwise they will be shot.

Many countries have free speech but they ban speech that is hateful and calls for persecution of minorities. These are reasonable limits to live together in a peaceful, tolerant society. Free speech is not an edict from God. It is a liberal idea with the intent of creating an open society. An open society is not one that advocates for the killing of minorities. Other free countries have done this to little fanfare and are overall more peaceful as a result. Look at what they have done in other places and don't just assume that what America is doing is superior.
Post reply on HN