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

781–790 of 983 posts

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

#781

Post by DarthGhandi »

zapnuk wrote: post #675
bofadeez wrote: post #446

Meanwhile flat earth videos are okay

Flat earthers don't have the effect that their viewers go around shooting people. Far-right content creators on the other hand enable terrorists like the Christchurch perpetrator.

I've seen dozens of instances of serious racial violence by blm activists recorded in the last few weeks and cheered on by thousands of YouTube videos demanding even more, surely that counts as "enabling terrorists"? Hate crimes units across the country are investigating racially motivated attacks spurring entirely from blm.

You won't see these people happily wanting a race war being banned though.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ksuhDS1SqUI

Some of the leaders are literally calling for whites to wiped out.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/blm-leader-says-whites-sub-hu...

https://www.nationalreview.com/2016/07/black-lives-matter-hy...

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

#782

Post by pnako »

jMyles wrote: post #113

There's a problem here that is too rarely discussed: When we do finally achieve substantial decentralized agency for ideas and media, which cannot be censored, it will be tainted in its roots by the fact that these jackasses are the people who will flock to it first. How can we build a censorship-resistant society where the most creative, peaceful, unifying ideas are the basis of our dialogue?

I have the same problem with my BBQ. I bought it to keep my food cold, but systematically it heats the food to the point where it becomes burned.

Just in case my attempt at analogy is not clear: on a free speech network you'll get free speech.

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

#784

Post by gsk22 »

nkurz wrote: post #752
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-…

He is definitely an inspiring story, but I wouldn't call him a role model. It is not the burden of each person who is a minority to befriend those who hate them, and his approach is undeniably a dangerous one.

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

#785

Post by laretluval »

fzeroracer wrote: post #682
pjc50 wrote: post #551

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not exactly .. people will come out to defend "free speech". But somehow the cause in question is nearly always far right.

I did some very small experiments on such a thing a while ago. One was an example of someone being unjustly detained in violation of their rights [1] and another was an actual example of government censorship [2]. The first one was flagged and killed immediately, the second received zero response. On HN, all of the 'free speech' stories I see always pertain to the far-right and/or incredibly vitriolic individuals get…

The discrepancy could be because Hacker News cares more about technology platforms than Alabama public TV. For an example of HN getting upset about government censorship on a technology platform, see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23223219

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

#786

Post by hi5eyes »

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…

these people and their communities advocate for genocide and normalize nazi worship

you havent been around the internet enough if youre still defending these shitheads go to bitchute and binge varg videos no one cares

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

#787

Post by tbugrara »

FiloSottile wrote: post #411
gguevaraa wrote: post #246

Christ, spez is getting hammered in the announcements. I mean seriously, he's basically saying it's alright to be discriminatory against the "majority", whatever that means. Dude doesn't even clarify what that means, just skirts around the question. Lot of people are wondering why r/BlackPeopleTwitter or r/politics haven't been banned despite blatant racism or calls to violence. People are pretty pissed at spez, to s…

Not sure if you're missing it, but yeah, reverse racism is not a thing. The concept of racism is meaningful in the historical and societal context of systemic oppression. A black person saying "all white people are bad" is not feeding into and exploiting hundreds of years of prejudice stacked against an under-privileged group. Edit: a black person in the US, different cultures are different contexts.

It's really unfortunate to see downvotes for this. The belief in reverse racism in America is pretty widespread and I imagine we'll eventually see people understand what it means to say it doesn't exist.

The rejection of reserve racism isn't a reaction based on anger like "they hurt me first and more so I can hurt them." That's not what this is about. It's about not minimizing the prejudice black people suffer from every day by comparing it to having to send a picture of your black skin to be a mod in the subreddit mentioned above.

It's about understanding that racism is NOT just an instance of prejudice against someone based on color. It's the entire fucking system and culture we have in America that oppresses black people. It's about the system of power and authority that oppresses black people. When we reserve the word racism for this it follows that it's ridiculous to believe in reverse racism. There is no system that oppresses white people in America. It does not exist.

Is it shitty to be treated differently because your skin is white? Of course. It sucks and it's your right to feel hurt by it, but don't call it racism. Prejudice yes, racism no. Why is this distinction important? Again, because the instances of racism that white people complain about simply do not compare to what black people go through. Using the same word for these things minimizes what black people go through every god damn day.

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

#788

Post by fzeroracer »

laretluval wrote: post #785
fzeroracer wrote: post #682

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did some very small experiments on such a thing a while ago. One was an example of someone being unjustly detained in violation of their rights [1] and another was an actual example of government censorship [2]. The first one was flagged and killed immediately, the second received zero response. On HN, all of the 'free speech' stories I see always pertain to the far-right and/or incredibly vitriolic individuals get…

The discrepancy could be because Hacker News cares more about technology platforms than Alabama public TV. For an example of HN getting upset about government censorship on a technology platform, see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23223219

I'm not sure that's the case. Some examples looking back on some of the most popular HN stories tend to align well with either tech platforms or issues dealing with personal rights. Such as [1] or the Snowden and Julian Assange situations [2] [3]. Or for the sake of not cherry-picking, when the Supreme Corut legalized same-sex marriage [4]. Although perhaps somewhat morbidly, the top comment seems to demonstrate one of the problems I find with HN.

With my first story I figured it would fit well with the people that tend to advocate for personal rights because it was an example of an American citizen being wrongfully detained for three weeks, but it ended up flagged because I think people tend to circle the wagon around anything tangentially related to immigration.

The second example was about a direct example of government censorship and the inconsistency of free speech advocates. Google's actions and bending to China for the sake of maintaining profitable behavior is bad, yes, but they also are not the government. The government should be held to even higher standards and yet it seems people are not willing to do so for this administration. An example of that is that people here were praising the administration's threats against Twitter as some sort of pro-freedom move.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21517722

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12494998

[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19632449

[4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9784470

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

#790

Post by BuckRogers »

Edd314159 wrote: post #5
fvdessen wrote: post #3

I haven't watched Stefan in a long time, is he now producing content in the same register as David Duke & Richard Spencer ? It did not seem to be the case a few years ago.

I used to listen to Stefan Molyneux about 10 years ago because he had some interesting views on free market economics. Now I look him up on Wikipedia and find out he's turned into a white nationalist. What the hell happened?

I gave him a chance because my cousin is one of these "anarcho-capitalism" guys (which is a contradiction, anarchy means lack of a control system or gov't, and capitalism is a power structure) and loved Molyneux. I've always been more of a fan of Richard Wolff and his project, Democracy at Work.[0]

But a less serious intellectual than Dr. Wolff (of Yale, Harvard, Stanford), Peter Joseph of the Zeitgeist Project has made Stefan look foolish.[1]

And an even less serious intellectual than Peter Joseph has caught out Stefan (me), he's one of those that says "communism kills people", but yet "guns do not kill people". If inanimate objects don't spontaneously kill people Stefan, neither do ideas. He's beneath a lightweight on his ability to think clearly.

[0]https://www.youtube.com/user/democracyatwrk

[1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaP2GJvZlWY

Post reply on HN