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

YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

751–760 of 983 posts

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#751

Post by chrisdirkis »

erichocean wrote: post #538
skinkestek wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm fairly certain he can stand for it. Also, tptacek is fairly far to the left it seems (in an American context) so it actually surprised me quite a bit that he'd write that. Based on that last observation I think most of us can agree, can't we?

> Based on that last observation I think most of us can agree, can't we? HN is in a weird place today, very similar to where the Slate Star Codex guy was a few years ago. That is, racist Whites seem to feel safe commenting here (with appropriate dog whistles and what not), but you wonder how long that can last… In the end, the SSC guy banned more and more commenters but it wasn't sufficient to save him and he ended u…

> In the end, the SSC guy banned more and more commenters but it wasn't sufficient to save him and he ended up deleting his blog [0] when the world turned its eyes to the kinds of discussions he allowed. I expect the same to happen with HN.

That's... not what happened? He's explicitly stated that he deleted his blog due to the fact that the NYT are planning on doxxing him in a story about SSC. He's fine with the story itself, and the attention garnered, but does not want his name attached to it and announced to the world via one of America's most popular newspapers due to his work as a psychiatrist. As far as I'm aware, this is not because SSC contains comments about right wing views or anything, but more due to an intent to maintain his privacy to his patients, which he believes will improve their quality of care.

If you think I'm incorrect in the above interpretation, feel free to disagree.

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#752

Post by nkurz »

geronimoe wrote: post #738

I don't think people would have a problem with this if the political public squares (YouTube, Reddit, Twitter, etc) - and that IS what they are - applied these policy changes to everyone equally. What's happened is we've already gone over the edge. Racism has been redefined to only be effectively possible by white people in the West. The intention of this change is racist in itself. Putting aside freedom of speech, w…

> I am an adherent to Daryl Davis' way of dealing with racism

For those who are unfamiliar, Davis is a black American who has directly befriended and changed the minds of a number of Ku Klux Klan members. He has a collection of their former robes that serve as trophies. In my view, he's a stunning role model.

This article describes his approach in more detail: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/03/the-aud.... If you search his name, you'll find a lot more, including a fascinating documentary: https://www.pbs.org/independentlens/films/accidental-courtes....

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#753

Post by SuoDuanDao »

klyrs wrote: post #455
SuoDuanDao wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my opinion, while a low point even for a high-functioning schizophrenic with a talk show, that is still small potatoes compared to the journalists who repeated the 'WMD's line. And no one is calling for them to be deplatformed.

FWIW, I think that Bush II, Obama and Trump should all be tried for war crimes. Probably Clinton and Bush I, and all the veeps, but I'm not as informed about them.

I'm sure we don't know the half of it.

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#754

Post by jahaja »

disposekinetics wrote: post #671
jahaja wrote: post #573

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My understanding was that someone would prevent me from owning private property or acquiring capital? You got this the other way around. Private property needs force to be upheld. The sacralization of private property is so deeply ingrained that people actually prefer the KKK to even thinking about limiting it. It's so dogmatic that it's depressing.

> You got this the other way around. Private property needs force to be upheld. I don't follow this at all, but I'm willing to listen? How does private property require any more force to uphold compared to any other possible system? Even anarchy, if you want it to stay anarchy requires force if you have defectors.

How do you imagine absentee landlords would be able to collect rent without force? Or an even more extreme example, how would the property right of the only water source in town be upheld without force? These things are far from natural, private property in the modern sense, is a social construct upheld by force.

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#755

Post by moralestapia »

cjslep wrote: post #254

When I, a white young boy, grew up in The South and saw the Klan, my father taught me to never do business with them, never enable their behavior, never let their organization rent rooms from venues I may own, and to decline all of their business even if they were paying extra to be your customer. For as long as he could remember, and his father before him, the Klan and other fringe organizations would always cry and…

>It is normal to decline the business of people you don't want to do business with.

Wait what? I would love to hear your take on this then,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masterpiece_Cakeshop_v._Colora...

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#756

Post by SuoDuanDao »

user982 wrote: post #737
skinkestek wrote: post #592

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can this be because your group of "white nationalists" is getting very big and possibly includes a good number of innocent people? Someone wrote something really interesting here somewhere a couple of days ago: every time a non-racist says something not correct enough or God forbid even wrong (e.g. on twitter), they are ejected into the other camp. Eventually the other camp's grown from a fringe phenomenon to being n…

This is a thread topic about white nationalists being banned from YouTube. It has 700+ comments, many of them in defense of the banned. Which of the banned people being defended are not actually white supremacists, but innocents caught in a too-broad dragnet?

Stephen Molyneux is a single-minded crusader against corporal punishment of children. He cites IQ and demographic statistics as evidence that the high incidents of corporal punishment among African-Americans is harmful to the population.

But untangling that ball of wax is a lot harder than calling him a racist and getting on with life isn't it?

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#757

Post by hnick »

cjslep wrote: post #254

When I, a white young boy, grew up in The South and saw the Klan, my father taught me to never do business with them, never enable their behavior, never let their organization rent rooms from venues I may own, and to decline all of their business even if they were paying extra to be your customer. For as long as he could remember, and his father before him, the Klan and other fringe organizations would always cry and…

In a small town, everyone knows everyone, so it's easier to exclude them if you want to.

It's a lot harder online when you don't know people, they show up unannounced, they hide their true intent behind plausible deniability and dog whistles, and they just come back with another account when they get sprung.

Inoculation is a good idea. I think this blog post sheds some light on how targeted, intentional, and childish, many of the tactics are and being able to notice them is important. They very much rely on people letting them scatter their pieces all over the web as you say.

https://medium.com/@DeoTasDevil/the-rhetoric-tricks-traps-an...

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#758

Post by SuoDuanDao »

user982 wrote: post #707
skinkestek wrote: post #643

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totally agree in case there should be any doubt. I prefer to call nazis "nazis". It is short and simple and we can all agree that we don't like them.

But then they reply that "whoever you think are Nazis are not Nazis" ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14034920 ).

Well, it's a fair point - if the only people who get banned are actual Nazis, everyone will get called a Nazi before too long.

Actual Nazis are rare. They were rare during WW2 and they're really rare now.

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#759

Post by fapjacks »

ausbah wrote: post #585
alexryan wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect that many genuinely kind hearted people think they are doing the right thing by silencing the speech of those whom they find repulsive but have never stopped to ask themselves “Why are the oligarchs on my side?” Project Dragonfly is alive and well and unfolding before our very eyes. This is how democracy dies.

There are plenty of mainstream figures that directly or indirectly support the desires of the far right. They pay not be as explicit as the KKK or Nazis, but definitely have real influence.

Got any examples this that don't conflate conservativism with nazism or white supremacy?

Re: YouTube bans Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, Richard Spencer for hate speech

#760

Post by sinker »

koheripbal wrote: post #633
AgentME wrote: post #571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If YouTube shows itself as an unfair judge, then let's criticize them for that when it happens. Otherwise, having a judge is much better than having no judge at all.

How do you feel about this video advocating violence? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijJu75WXLLs

I'm not advocating for any of these people. I'm saying there's going to be scenarios that require nuance to navigate, and that the rules that delineate hate speech should be very explicitly spelled out.
Post reply on HN