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

81–90 of 204 posts

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

#81

Post by anaptdemise »

dandersh wrote: post #46

This fetishization of "free speech" has to stop. These people do not respect free speech. They do not respect an open society. They do not respect freedom. They wish to destroy all of these things and they are entirely upfront about it. And yet all I've read the past few days is hand wringing about the "rights" of those who wish to destroy that of which open societies have built. At least the citizens of the early 19…

Eh, on the inverse... In this situation, GoDaddy, Google, et. al. are the technocratic equivalent to Kim Davis. While, I respect their right to decide what they "host" on their platforms, as registrars, DNS is separate. Their authorization as Registrar is only authorized by ICAAN->US->IANA->(UN/WTO/etc...). They in practice, register (i.e. recored) DNS name to entity and are bound to list said DNS name to registered entity. So while they might have a right to not physically host the bytes of data for a controversial domain, they cannot, as Registrar for the domain, not record the fact that somedomain.com -> xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx because they are only proxies for the authority to say somedomain.com -> xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx.

[edit] If the Kim Davis analogy is too loose. If the US decided to remove a book from the ISBN system. Might not have it in libraries... but there is still a gap in your number system... Sure it, is Mein Kampf today. But in today's world, it is not hard to imagine that the missing number might be the Quran...

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

#82

Post by smith_winston »

ebola1717 wrote: post #36
UnpossibleJim wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

as unfortunate as it may be, you not only have to fight against the nazis ideals, but also for their right to hold them and speak them in a public forum, like any other citizen. That's from the history books about the country's founding.

Nope. Nazi speech is banned in Germany cause they learned their lesson.

This is an ahistorical claim. The censorship laws of the German Federal Republic (1) were first imposed by the Allies during occupation and were only relaxed, in part, after the official end of the war in 1949 (2). Germany was not a fully sovereign state until 1991 (3). Implying that these laws were the result of the population deciding to impose them upon themselves after "learning" a "lesson" is, in fact, the inverse of what actually happened in that they were intended to teach the Germans a lesson as part of their subjugation.

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_Federal_Repu...

2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_Germany

3: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Final_Settlement...

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

#83

Post by smith_winston »

dandersh wrote: post #46

This fetishization of "free speech" has to stop. These people do not respect free speech. They do not respect an open society. They do not respect freedom. They wish to destroy all of these things and they are entirely upfront about it. And yet all I've read the past few days is hand wringing about the "rights" of those who wish to destroy that of which open societies have built. At least the citizens of the early 19…

>These people do not respect free speech. They do not respect freedom. They wish to destroy all of these things and they are entirely upfront about it.

Can you source these claims?

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

#84

Post by smith_winston »

dandersh wrote: post #48
mc32 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't agree more. Today it's Nazis, tomorrow it's not showing enough support for the chosen candidate. This is the one slippery slope. It's evident in PC-speech. Today's PC speech is not the PC speech from the 90s. And it's not that I don't like Pc speech. I prefer it. But I also don't want it to be the only kind of speech one can use for discussion. Try and have any good philosophical argument without breaking PC bo…

No, there is no slippery slope. This is a group that advocates an ideology that, when it was put in place, resulted in catastrophe for mankind. In other words, what they advocate is what exists at the bottom of the slope. You know, Godwin's Law and all that?

The various implementations of Marxist ideology have resulted in a far greater body count than Nazi or Fascist ideology (1) yet erstwhile young people (and their grizzly tutors) freely speak of implementing Communism and sport Communist regalia in public. By your measure, we have even more reason to no-platform such people and deprive them of their rights to speak and assemble

1: http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/20th-ce...

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

#85

Post by smith_winston »

tekromancr wrote: post #66

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 minu…

The law is clear on what constitutes illegal speech in the US(1). ISIS propaganda, to the extent it incites violence, is clearly illegal. If The Daily Stormer had engaged in speech that incited violence, they would have been shut down and imprisoned. This story is about legal but unpopular speech and if something is legal to say whether it should be allowed to be said. (And the role of large corporations effectively acting as gateways.)

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exce...

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

#86

Post by unityByFreedom »

I prefer to stand against groups that promote violence.

> CANTWELL: "a lot more people are gonna die before we're done here" [1]

I'm pretty sure the Daily Stormer said something similar. I don't need that crap in my backyard.

[1] https://youtu.be/P54sP0Nlngg?t=20m51s

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

#87

Post by [deleted] »

emmelaich wrote: post #26

There are many good quotes on freedom of speech to ponder.[1] I think my favourite is Mencken's. > The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all. A close second is Wilde's: > “I may not agree with you, but I will defe…

[deleted]

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

#88

Post by dang »

dandersh wrote: post #46

This fetishization of "free speech" has to stop. These people do not respect free speech. They do not respect an open society. They do not respect freedom. They wish to destroy all of these things and they are entirely upfront about it. And yet all I've read the past few days is hand wringing about the "rights" of those who wish to destroy that of which open societies have built. At least the citizens of the early 19…

It's an abuse of HN to use it primarily for ideological battle, which you've been doing for months now. This is destructive of what the site is for—and so is the inevitably attendant incivility—regardless of how correct your underlying points are. We ban accounts that do this, so would you please stop? A flamewar about Nazis vs. communists is a sort of reductio ad absurdum on the internet.

(No, this is not because we're secretly Nazis or communists.)

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

#89

Post by RaleyField »

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???

> as a core feature of their ideology while the others do not.

They seem to be exceptional, but if we curtail their speech that means it leaves other, undoubtedly less offensive, speech to be up for negotiation. For instance I'd be pleased to see some of your authoritarianism curtailed if it wasn't for ideals of freedom of speech.

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

#90

Post by tortasaur »

CaptSpify wrote: post #22

I'm super proud to be a member of the EFF. It's hard to keep a clear head in emotionally tense times like these. It's groups like the EFF that help everyone. If you can: https://supporters.eff.org/donate

I agree. The ACLU, on the other hand, has begun to rationalize their way out of defending white nationalists. Not exactly a very good defender of civil liberties if they start drawing ideological lines as to who they defend.

I had just started donating to them in the last week, too; I felt a bit silly canceling so soon.

Post reply on HN