Slashdot Mirror
Twitter Suspends American Far-Right Activists' Accounts (theguardian.com)
Twitter has suspended the accounts of a number of American "alt-right" activists hours after announcing a renewed push to crack down on hate speech. From a report on The Guardian:Among the accounts removed were those of the self-described white-nationalist National Policy Institute, its magazine, Radix, and its head Richard Spencer, as well as other prominent alt-right figures including Pax Dickinson and Paul Town. Spencer, who according to anti-hate group SPLC "calls for 'peaceful ethnic cleansing' to halt the 'deconstruction' of European culture", decried the bans as "corporate Stalinism" to right-wing news outlet Daily Caller. "Twitter is trying to airbrush the alt right out of existence," Spencer said. "They're clearly afraid. They will fail!"
I've seen news articles about a lot of hate and violent threats towards Trump and others by people, but they aren't banned. Twitter really is as biased as I see in articles, even the ones posted to Slashdot.
I don't understand. It is the left that is engaging in hate speech, and even physical violence. They are rioting, advocating the assassination of the President-elect, and denouncing democracy in this country. And they are blaming others for their own faults and criminal actions. Sounds like Twitter is going after the wrong people.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
While the left openly make death threats, BLM supporters openly call for 'white genocide' and other supremacist movements like islam and zionism get a pass? They're all equally vile!
Whatever you think of alt-right (hopefully, not too well), this move by Twitter establishes itself as an arbiter of norms and values.
As a nation we value our freedom of speech. We tolerate even the likes of Westboro Church. We tolerate this because unless deplorable people have the right to speak freely, there could be no freedom of speech. It must be that absolute. Unfortunately, it was made clear that Twitter doesn't share our national values.
So, I see an echo chamber that the far right creates their OWN version of twitter, kind of like how the right created their own "news" organization.
And so begins the true divide in the country, where the fox news people feed their own echo chamber via alt-twitter, and the liberals have msnbc and twitter.
And the two sides never speak to each other.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
It's so charming to watch the Liberal Left endorse censorship without the slightest trace of irony.
You guys really DON'T get it, do you? Or do you think the various actors and their sympathies today will /forever/ agree with your personal morality?
-Styopa
As a progressive, for quite some time I watched in horror as Left turned deeply Regressive. They have no idea that censorship apparatus that they are building will be quickly turned on them.
The SPLC is nothing of the kind. They are a left-wing propaganda outlet.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
I'm sorry but tolerating hate is not tolerance, it's cowardice
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
I will not defend your right to actively attempt to make people feel unsafe using threats of violence. I will not defend your right to attempt to incite riots. I will not defend your right to shout "fire!" in a crowded building. The concept of non-protected speech exists for good reason.
While the left openly make death threats
I know, it's kind of ridiculous. I remember going to all of those liberal political rallies where you could buy shooting targets with the opponent's face on them, or hear speakers talk about "second amendment people" needing to do their thing if the opponents win. It was pretty awful. At all of those liberal rallies.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
Talk versus the left rioting. You can't see the difference?
And, what if they're not Nazi's? Alt-Right != Nazi.
What is an alt-right? He's someone that took the left-wing-identity-politics and applies the principles to European history.
Identity politics, cultural appropriation nonsense is stupid, inane and pathetic. It applies to all groups.
The Alt-Right is an unintended consequence of the modern progressive's university curriculum.
If the Alt-Right is racist then so are proponents of identity politics. Welcome to the world you created.
I, for one, think that identity politics is racist. Now if identity politics is not racist then the Alt-Right is not racist.
(This doesn't mean that there aren't Neo-Nazis and other out there. Only that the broad brush denunciation is inaccurate.
Common guys. Appreciate the nuance of it all.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
A bit of hyperbole is to be expected in the face of what's coming (hope you're health, you're about to lose pre-existing condition coverage unless you're rich enough to pay for COBRA).
Oh you mean one of the two parts of the ACA that Trump just agreed with and said he would keep on 60 minutes. I am not even a Trump supporter but the spread of misinformation and bullshit from the left at this point is absolutely horrendous. It went from sites on the right doing it to switching to the left. The man isn't even in office yet. By all means though don't let facts get in the way of your fear-mongering.
Germany has remained a pretty democratic nation since the end of the Second World War, even after the reuniting with East Germany, and it in fact makes it illegal for many kinds of Nazi and white supremacist speech to be disseminated. So the idea that censorship is the primary creator of Nazi-like regimes is absurd. I'm not defending censorship here, and I don't really even agree with Germany's stance (it made a lot more sense seventy years ago), but you're literally ignoring the most notorious aspects of Nazism and its fellow travelers in space and time. Nazism at its core was a nationalist and racist ideology that proclaimed the Aryan race to be superior and the rightful master of the other races, even to the point of taking upon itself the role of expunging ethnic groups it deemed unworthy or dangerous.
But as we all know, censorship, particularly in the US, is only a *legal* problem when it is the state trying to silence people. Twitter is a private organization, and is within its rights to determine who can and cannot use its service. It has decided that white supremacists and similar far right groups will not be able to use Twitter as a platform to disseminate their views. For the more extreme groups within the Alt-right, this is a problem, because if they're basically stuck on Breitbarts and even more far right sites, well, then they lose the efficiency that a platform like Twitter can offer them. But that really is there problem.
If I was running any kind of site or hosting service, and I had customers or users using my service to promote hatred of ethnic and racial minorities or promote white supremacist ideas, I don't care if I lost their business, I'd cancel their accounts and refund any money I might owe them. I have no desire to silence them, but I don't see why I'm obligated to provide them a platform.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
I'm sorry but tolerating hate is not tolerance, it's cowardice
It doesn't matter, the USA has enshrined freedom of speech in its Constitution. Or is this freedom only good when liberal elites use it to their advantage ?
Freedom of speech doesn't mean that a particular non-government platform has to tolerate your speech on their site.
here it is explained by Randall Munroe: xkcd
(don't forget to read the mouseover text).
And to a reliable source, not some right-wing wacko conspiracy site.
The freedom to harass isn't in the Constitution. The freedom to threaten and harm others isn't in the Constitution.
Learn to love Alaska
To make a long story short, Twitter is saying, go get your own soapbox, this one is ours.
Three left gather for dinner, and the cops burst in and arrest them for rioting. Funny how when Randy Weaver has an encounter with cops, they are "jackbooted thugs" but when a peaceful protest is stormed by armed police instigating violence, it's about those "rioting thugs".
Learn to love Alaska
Mostly because of words and actions that are remarkably similar to Nazis.
For example: just about every article ever on Breitbart.
The BLM rioters and cop killers are not associated with Breitbart. The shooter at that gay club was also not associated with it either. It seems to me that actual violence is being committed by Leftwing radicals. The Nazis were after all National Socialists.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
I'm sorry but tolerating hate is not tolerance, it's cowardice
But defining hate speech is problematic. Which of these is hate speech:
1) I don't think it's right for a man to marry a man. (A stance taken by many christians)
2) I don't think it's right for a man to marry a 4 year old. (A stance taken by most westerners but still practiced in some countries)
3) I don't think it is right for a man to have sex with a another man. (An old stance that was once common and still held by many christians)
4) I don't think it's right for a black to marry a white. (An old stance that was once common but mostly rejected today)
5) I don't think I should have to help a man marrying a man celebrate his wedding by baking a cake. (A stance taken by many christians)
6) I don't think it is right to refuse to sell a cake to someone because you object to their wedding. (A stance taken by many liberals)
7) I don't think I should have to sell medicine to countries that are going to use it for lethal injection. (A stance taken by many countries in europe)
8) I don't think it is right to kill an infant. (A stance taken by most today but was once common in some cultures)
9) I don't think it is right to kill a baby just because it hasn't been born yet. (A stance still held by most christians)
There is obvious hate speech but voicing your opinion on what you feel is right or wrong and/or not wanting to participate in something that
you feel is wrong is not hate speech. The problem today is that both sides of many debates have decided that their side is morally superior
and think that the other side is immoral or unethical if they have a different opinion.
Meanwhile the far right's crazies get portrayed as mainstream
The right's crazies are mainstream, and becoming more so, as the Republicans drift further to the right. Meanwhile, the Democrats tried to steer to the center. Trump won, with Cruz as the runner-up. Sanders didn't even get nominated.
Nah, we just believe in the actual wording of the 2nd Amendment
So, when you get all signed up for a "well ordered militia", then you can ignore local requests for background checks and waiting periods because they are trying to deal with problems that completely unregulated gun ownership causes
I would say that technically all Abrahamic religions are supremacist movements. Everyone who isn't us is going hell, we're the chosen people, etc.
So you're just completely ignoring the Obama shooting targets
The Obama shooting targets are repugnant, but they are just symbolism, and constitutionally protected free speech. Comparing symbolic speech to actual rioting causing property damage and injuries, is silly.
Only in the loosest, and frankly most American of ways, but you are correct.
The effect of sustained identity politics has driven a generation into a new kind of "white" identity, running against the course of individualisation of at least the last 50 years. In addition to the usual categorization of racial, sexual, and ethic groups, identity politics ranks groups by (lack of) privilege, and as far a this goes, "white" people who have the "most privilege" are constantly criticised -- and at this point it is fair to say -- demonized by the so called "social justice warriors" who comprise the loudest part of academia, and the greater part of the mainstream media.
It's an insane situation which has been allowed to develop, but effectively identity politics has re-divided Americans by race and in particular appears to be provoking a reactionary response from the "white" population. It's worth noting that historically, this group was not so encompassing, and modern day "whites" were once rigidly socially stratified into separate racial and ethnic categories within the USA and other countries. It doesn't appear that identity politics has applied these historical norms, and so the class they have in effect created, or provoked into being created or in the process of creation, is arguably a much broader one than a European or world historian would recognise.
I don't know whose bright idea it was to, in effect, "meme" a new kind of "white" mega-race into existence, but it's something profoundly unsettling to see forming in slow motion in response to the endless, overbearing, pontification from the media and academia on matters of race. I think that Dr. King would first be saddened, then appalled, and finally terrified by the new reality that identity politics has wrought on America. There doesn't seem to be any end in sight, and the media is just making things worse.
What ever happened to the ideal of egalitarianism?
"The Left" is rioting? I guess I can be considered part of "the left" on certain issues, so why am I not rioting?
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
You're very good at only picking and choosing articles that back up your prejudices.
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundi...
Eat the rich.
The key difference with the alt-right is that they are not being systematically oppressed. They claim they are, but then elect a guy like Trump and prove themselves wrong.
That makes the alt-right attractive to degenerates like pick up artists, men's rights activists and other far right groups that want to go back to some idealised version of the 1950s.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Did you tell that to those that assumed Trump would lose and threatened to start a Civil War when Trump lost?
Learn to love Alaska
Your link doesn't relate. It cites one incident with one individual and some various minor events like church fires. Meanwhile, you look to the west coast where mobs of people are marching down the street smashing every window on every shopfront they can find, destroying vehicles, attacking passers-by. They don't compare. They are not at all alike. A church fire is not a riot. One individual assaulted by another in an isolated setting is not a riot. Worse, if the right were truly as violent and revolutionary as many suggest, there would have been mass shootings during riots the likes of which the country hasn't seen since the civil war. That didn't happen, not even remotely close. Some people carried some protest signs suggesting it, but it was protest. Unlike now, with mass destruction of property and violent assaults perpetrated by the angry mobs of protesters.
When will those lies being told stop being supported. The left, the right, have no relevance beyond camouflage. You have corrupt corporatists and con artists, pretending to be left or right, when they only support themselves, neither left nor right, totally self centred and myopically greedy.
The problem with the political left and political right, is they allow those corrupt individuals to hide amongst them because of the few pretty words they wish to hear and then they ignore all the ugly words (note how those ugly words sound the same from those seeking to hide whether they pretend to be from the left of the right.)
When will people accept, that those who spread hate, whether they pretend to be left or right, have only two things to say, 'all about me' and 'I want more', pretty much, me, me, me, more, more, more and then in the typical lying sales fashion, a few empty compliments and you are ready to be screwed.
In the most stupid fashion imaginable those on the actual left and right go onto support, the corrupt corporatists and con artists, by claiming those they know do not represent the left or the right, as being left or right and thus sell them to the less informed members of the left and right. Stop doing that, do not serve their purpose. When the clearly do not support expected Liberal Progressive ideals or real actual conservative ideals, then do not call them left or right, call them lying bastards who seek to corrupt the left and the right to serve their own purposes (the left and the right should strive to work together to clear themselves of corrupt from within, betrayers should never be protected but be prosecuted in full display to everyone to prove the honesty of the remainder, the more the expose and prosecute the more honest they are).
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
The problem is the double standard because the media is in the tank for particular ideologies. If the media was doing their job with basic research, no one would care. People would be calling out the instigators. But that's not the case. The media is right there if some pro-nationalist group(not white nationalist), person snaps and punches anyone and it degenerates into a brawl. But if some left wing group like antifa jumps the same group, or attacks a group of KKK members(like in california). The media is right there blaming those KKK members, or nationalists for those people "losing control" and attacking.
The media is corrupt, the people who follow the same ideology are in charge of the largest social media platforms in the world. They go after only one type of ideology instead of applying it equally. It's not hard to be unbiased, apply things evenly. But it requires that the people can and know how to put their ideologies on a hanger. It's a learned skill. But that's not happening, it's the same reason why there was such a backlash against democrats in the US. And against Merkel in Germany, the rise of actual fascists in Greece. And why Brexit happened.
Om, nomnomnom...