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!"
It's so hard being a Nazi now a days, for some reason everyone seems to think your a vile repugnant monster.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
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.
They'll now call everything they don't like (and want to censor) "alt-right"; they've already tried it with Gamergate.
One account suspended merely replaced the word "black" with "white" to show the double standard Twitter has with race. For instance, someone would tweet "Can't wait for white people to go extinct" and the account would replace white with black. The person using the "white" tweet was never suspended.
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.
That *would* be better PR, to remove extremist accounts.
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.
Twitter is the confetti of the internet.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
In which case, they'll be sucking hind tit. But they're not all that far from bankruptcy as things stand now.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
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
Further to your point- If home email servers are outlawed, then only outlaws will have home email servers. If home irc servers are outlawed, then only outlaws will have home irc servers. If home web servers are outlawed, then only outlaws will have home webservers.
I'm *still* waiting for Snowden to give some thoughtful, educating, and insightful commentary expanding on his words that "yes, Hillary's email server is a problem".
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.
Don't forget to remove accounts from the Far/ "Alt-Left" too. For example, the Black Lives Matter group and all their threatening vitriol they spew. Large sums of college students can be clumped into this as well since they refuse to acknowledge anyone who may have a differing opinion to their own and end up labeling them with an 'ism'. Don't forget the groups who are calling on riots a.k.a protests to occur in major cities.
Just to name a few...
Reminder, you have no constitutional right to post shit on twitter
They banned Clint Eastwoods account. Twitter Staff are the NAZIS. It doesnt matter who you vote for you should be heard. Seek the truth. Criminals like Hillary needed to be outed - Thank God for Wikileaks.
The alt-right loves rallying around their fake news.
Twitter decides that black activists calling for various felonies against "the right people" (including minors) is ok, but how dare you espouse white separatism.
Why should we care about the opinions and rebukes of people who live like that? It is precisely how you feel being rebuked about sexual morality by a pastor like Ted Haggard or Jimmy Swaggart. It's how you'd feel if Bernie Madoff self-righteously stuck his finger in your face and said "you're a fucking asshole who deserves to be shot for ripping people off."
Beat me to it. Anybody with $20/month can set up an IRC or XMPP server. There are probably cheaper options out there too, but I like the flexibility of having a Linode. I run inspircd with anope services. Works pretty well and wasn't that much of a bitch to configure. If one wants a more cloudy option, there are services like Discord that a friend's fandom group moved to after Facebook decided that she was pro-rape. My Monster Hunter group also uses Discord, and audio conference works just fine under Linux. Don't have a camera so haven't tried video under Linux.
It would be nice to see XMPP have a resurgence. IRC is great at what it does, but XMPP has multi-user chat that's similar (not as capable, though) as well as offline message storage. I think there was a protocol extension called Jingle iirc that brought video chat to XMPP.
The TwitBook model of doing things is just fundamentally broken. They want one big room that everybody has to be in to communicate. Everything is visible to everybody. Of course that's not going to work. If it were possible for everybody to get along, world peace would have been established centuries ago, and poverty and hunger would be solved problems. It's not that we don't have the tech, but that many people will never just get along. So, they've decided to go down the totalitarian route, which is perfectly within their rights. It's just... who would want to use a service where anything you say or post can get you kicked out for the flimsiest of reasons?
It's been a long time since I was interested in XMPP, mostly because it's just not something anybody uses. One capability that Discord (and TwitBook) has is posting images. Anybody know if there's anything similar for XMPP? I mean, I know you can just fire off a hyperlink, but I'm thinking something that stores the image server-side like Discord and TwitBook. I don't think that'd work well with IRC but XMPP is after all eXtensible and it seems image posting is what people want.
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 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.
I'm sorry but tolerating hate is not tolerance, it's cowardice
That's the paradox of tolerance.
http://www.geoffreylandis.com
Streisand Effect is in full play now. People I've never heard about because they have already been mainly marginalized are not FRONT PAGE of Slashdot.
Excellent work there.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Headline falsely implies that the accounts were deleted because they were alt-right or far-right, when they were deleted because they used hate speech. Not a bias in viewpoint, but a cap on hate speech.
Why are you a progressive? Seriously.
I suggest you spend some time reading history:
http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkil...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
This way there are more alternatives to Twitter and we don't see one or two giant systems owning all eyeballs.
that the right has been doing these things non-stop for 8 years, longer if include the KKK which we sorta pretend isn't a thing because the Media has been intentionally ignoring them.
The left is going a bit overboard out of fear. Very, very legitimate fear. If you have friends with life threatening medical conditions and they're not very, very well off they are going to die soon. That's not idle speculation. Their medical care came from the ACA, which is being gutted. If you're under 55 they're coming for your Medicare too. You're going to die in your 60s of something completely preventable. This is all happening. If you're not rich and not scared you're not paying attention.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
We all want a society based on a certain model. "Tolerating" anything else means that no one gets what they want.
Alternative Right.
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.
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).
or more precisely:
Winter is here for the alt-white
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
But as a 'progressive' (I always place quotes around such monikers, they are meaningless to me, I don't view the collectivists as progressive, I view them as anti-individual rights people) who is able to see this, don't you find that this was an inevitable?
USSR, Communist China, North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, etc., when did collectivist policies *not* lead to the total destruction of the individual by placing the collective above all?
Same exact inevitability is within other forms of collectivism (religions, nationalism/fascism, etc.)
Whenever you have a movement of people who are aiming to elevate the collective and thus the government over the individual you will have this outcome, when did it not happen? If there is a collectivist system today that is still not fully authoritarian/dictatorial, it is on the way there.
You can't handle the truth.
Actually, by popular vote, it appears the "left" will have won the election by several hundred thousand votes. The candidate from the "right" ends up becoming President through the Electoral College system regardless the popular vote result. But if you feel comfy with your alternate reality in your personal echo chamber, that's cool.
...this ? https://twitter.com/search?q=r...
But live chat doesn't deliver what the Alt-right want. They don't merely want to end up in corners of the Internet having racist circle jerks. Services like Twitter and Facebook offer them the ability to *disseminate* their hatred, and Twitter in particular has up until now basically turned the other way as the Alt-right have used their servers to openly and proudly harass other people.
I'd be quite happy to let this new generation of white supremacists go back to IRC and private chat. Go to Stormfront forums, go back to the echo chamber.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Popular vote is irrelevant, it's not what's written in the Constitution.
This is about Twitter trying to right the ship so it can sell itself to the highest bidder. Part of the reason its sale failed was because it couldn't bring the goons using it to spread hate under control.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
... to have their own countries.
Don't agree? Please explain why then...
You obviously believe that if non-whites are unable to FORCE themselves into white people's countries, they will have to live around their own kind, in their OWN countries (which you obviously have failed to notice they get to KEEP, while invading white people's countries), and somehow that would be just awful for them.
Why?
Not enough white people to leech off? Not enough white people to provide the 'better life' that these worthless parasites keep telling us they want (and deserve, apparently)...
You therefore obviously believe that white people make BETTER COUNTRIES than non-whites, and you sir, are therefore a 'white supremacist'...
LOL.
White people have the right to have their own countries.
So do ALL other groups of people, whether of race or of religion.
If you wish to be a white minority in a third world country, why don't you cut out the middleman and MOVE to Brazil today? Why wait another ten or twenty years for white people to become a minority in YOUR country, when obviously you want it so much? Why not MOVE to Brazil? Because Brazil is a shitty, third world country, that's why. Which is precisely what every white country on Earth is going to become when the non-whites outbreed us.
Or perhaps you can show us precisely when millions of white people took to the streets in the 1950s and demanded that we open our borders and destroy ourselves.
Not that I give a fuck about Twitter or the people they are banning. I do not.
Pretty sure though that when a communications app starts wiping ideas they do not like out of existence, their time of relevance is passing.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
Yeah, he did, but there's a lot of "Yes he will", "No we won't" coming from the Republicans right now, and a lot of raised eyes by anyone who knows how the ACA works.
You can't get rid of the pre-existing conditions coverage without also removing the mandate, otherwise insurance prices will go sky high, leading to a death spiral and insurers going bankrupt at the end of it.
So that leaves a choice of: either the Republicans will present a bill to Trump pretty much eliminating the entire thing, or the ACA will be kept until they can figure out a way to get around the mandate.
Which do you think the Republicans will do? And do you think Trump will really refuse to sign off on abolishing the hated ACA because one aspect of the soon to be killed bill was kinda sorta popular? (Though not-popular enough to ensure people refused to vote Republcian unless they kept the whole thing, apparently?)
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
GOP makes heavy use of twitter. If the far-right is taken out, then about 3/4 of the GOP will lose their accounts. That is foolish since ppl really should know what they are up to.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
It would be nice to see XMPP have a resurgence. IRC is great at what it does, but XMPP has multi-user chat that's similar (not as capable, though) as well as offline message storage. I think there was a protocol extension called Jingle iirc that brought video chat to XMPP.
Jingle is a massive family of XMPP standards (technically, XEPs - XMPP Extension Proposals). It was, in fact, the third mechanism added to provide voice and video. SIP tunnelling over XMPP and the thing Apple added with iChat were both there first, but Google did its own thing and released Jingle.
This pretty much embodies the problems with XMPP:
I've been keeping an eye on Tox, which seems to have a better approach: they have a protocol and a reference implementation as a library, plus clients for all of the major platforms that use the library.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Interesting timing, though.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
It is relevant in declaring a landslide, however. You can't go around crowing about a public mandate when most of them voted against you.
edit Right AND LEFT Wing
Ultimate example of closing the barn door after the horse has run away.
Who did what now?
Why are you a progressive? Seriously.
Big picture stuff, like getting to Mars and so on. Self-interest and markets will take us only so far.
You can hardly claim anything when you take into account that Trump had to fight against all the media, the Democrats, *and* GoP... and still managed to get elected. Also even if HRC had won the presidency by popular vote, she'd still had been stuck with a GoP House *AND* GoP Senate. So getting the presidency & House & Senate is a clear popular mandate.
they would not be, as they would just a be a medium.
Pretty much none of what you said has any basis in fact or law.
- AT&T was broken up because it was a monopoly that was engaging in anti-competitive practices, just like Carnegie Steel. The baby bells are regulated because they operate as public utilities which grants them certain exclusive rights, like right of way for cables. Verizon owns all of the infrastructure in a given geographic area. They are regulated to ensure that they don't abuse these rights (just like your power and cable companies), part of this regulation is laws that prevent them from barring access to this infrastructure (common carrier laws). Shorter version: They aren't regulated because they offer a vital service, they are regulated because they are the only ones allowed to offer that vital service in that area.
- Taxi cab drivers can't discriminate because of Federal (and often state and local) civil rights laws. It has nothing to do with the fact they're driving on a public road. They can and did before the 60's.
- The Internet is not publicly funded. The initial research that created ArpaNet but primary government funding stopped at that point (though some public monies were used through academic investment in the infrastructure). The US Federal government has not spent a dime on building out or maintaining Internet infrastructure in decades.
If any of your statements were true then groceries would be heavily regulated because they're far more vital than any of the utility services and they are transported over public roads. But they're not, companies can charge whatever they want for them (you just don't have to pay it). And they do, in a way, discriminate because poorer people in remote areas (e.g. Alaska) have to pay more for them. They can't discriminate because of color or religion but that's because of civil rights laws (ask any African American who was alive before the 60's).
The difference is that Stormfront is a site that openly advocates a certain political thought. Twitter claims it is not, but its CEO is clearly still pissed that all those bribes to Hillary are wasted money now, so they crack down on speech they don't like. #KKK #ISIS #Trump2016
Don't know why the above is modded down, when they are.
Eh? The GOP couldn't lose control of the house, and the Dems winning the Senate wasn't likely, either. If he'd been running for any office other than President, which has an electoral college, he wouldn't be packing his bags to move in to the White House. It'd really be a stretch it to call 'winning on a technicality' some sort of overwhelming groundswell in support. He won fair and square but there's no landslide.
The only anti-Obama protest post-election that I ever heard of was at the University of Mississippi where they had 400 young Republicans marching around protesting the election in 2012 peacefully (but stupidly - what are you protesting, the electoral system? - no side has a monopoly on dumbness I guess). No other protests.
The rest of the data is irrelevant. The guy who got beat up in Louisiana probably did get a beatdown because of his Obama sticker, but the guy who did it has a history of being a violent offender back home in Longview, TX. As do his family members. Shall I start linking the Trump-related beating stories from the past few days? The effigy hangings, who cares, that happens every election. Property destruction - happens every day, I could speak volumes on that personally as I got my car vandalized to the tune of $2500 just this last election cycle and I have a film of some woman throwing shit on my property.
So that article is a bunch of horseshit thrown together to defend violent protests that are resulting in deaths and destruction across the country.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
Did you read the link? No? Here it comes again:
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundi...
Actual violence, rioting and attacks by right wingers, following each of Obama's elections. Don't act like "your side" can do no wrong, because that is objectively bullshit.
Eat the rich.
When you elect a candidate who has run his campaign on racism, hate speech, sexism and intolerance, that's what you get.
Eat the rich.
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.
And here comes the anti-BLM rhetoric again. Apparently standing up against police brutality against African Americans now constitutes a hate crime to the Alt-right.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
So the Alt Right is getting banned on twitter. Great!
Now what about the Alt-Left?
Like SJW's and BLM crazies? The ones that call for the murder of all men, or white people?
Because all I've seen from twitter in the past (and this newest development shows no signs of deviation from this trend) is twitter going after gamergate people and the far right. They aren't being fair, they are silencing those they disagree with under the guise of anti-harrassment.
and hello safe zones were having to actually think outside of your comfort zone is now disallowed. This is one of the reasons that Trump got into power. People are sick of being told what is right and wrong to discuss thanks to the looney left. You can't even talk about Islam or any other ideology now without being called a racist. You can be a gay, jewish conservative with a black boyfriend (Im talking Milo) and the left will call you an anti gay, sexist, racist anti semite (I shit you not). Guess what happened to Milo's twitter account, yes the left leaning loons now in control of Twitter kicked Milo of twitter for being a anti gay, racist. Seriously how obvious do you want it to be that twitter is now run by the looney left. Well the good news is thanks to the looney left and the lack of open discussion people are now leaving twitter.
That didn't just "happen" to them. They got regulated in exchange for access to a market in which they would exercise a near- or complete-monopoly.
If you want to make an argument that Twitter has a near-monoply on... um, tweeting, or that Facebook has a near-monopoly on communicating among people in general, and you are able to reasonably contend that these things are important to society then you might want to make an argument for regulation and see if you can make it fly.
Both companies use their terms of service to say "you over here can participate, but you over there can't" one way or another, and in a fairly arbitrary manner. They also restrict what you can do if they do let you use their service. And they are both pretty much the only real serious game in town for their respective functions in society. So you might have an argument. But that's the way you have to present it if you want it to even have a chance of flying. Seems to me your chances are overall better with Facebook, as they really do have a stranglehold on general interaction and friendly-to-the-general-public networking, which does indeed affect society in general in a very broad and powerful sense. Tweeting... I don't know. Maybe. I can't see it, personally. If you take my 140 characters away from me, I will just laugh at you. I think I would take being cut off from the vast majority of the people I have met over my lifetime and my extended family much more seriously. If I used Facebook and cared, which I don't, either one. :)
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Twitter, Google and Facebook are nothing more than arms of the democratic party. Now they are upset that inspite of their best efforts to rig the election they failed. And they realize they are on the way to being an irrelevant scrap in the scrapbook of history.
So now Twitter gets to decide who gets to have their 1st Amendment rights now huh? Hate speech? Oh but the "left" don't have hate speech right? Ok, yeah, whatever! That's ok Twitter is having financial difficulties anyway. I hope they go under! It will serve them right! Something else will just take it's place.... Look at MySpace. MyWho you might say - exactly.
The Truth is a Virus!!!
when he back pedaled on that. See here. Specifically this part:
But he, Vice President-elect Mike Pence and House Speaker Paul Ryan have provided some insights into how Republicans would handle the thorny issue of insuring the sick.
They would set up a two-track system: one for those who maintain continuous coverage and one for those who don't. And they would replace the subsidies with a tax credit or deduction to help people pay their premiums.
This is exactly how it was when I was a kid. Any gap in coverage and you're screwed. Tax subsidies are worthless to someone who's chronically ill. You've probably just lost your job. Best case you're on FMLA with no money coming in to pay for anything. Tax cuts don't help when there's no income to tax.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
unless he breaks with what his VP Pence and Paul Ryan are saying they're going to do then they're going to put it back to what it was when I was a kid. Any break in coverage and you're screwed. States will have a high risk pool that's either underfunded or not funded. People will die with completely treatable illnesses.
Like I always say: You can do anything to anybody with these 5 simple little words: Who's gonna pay for it?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Comment removed based on user account deletion
You're referring to Hillary "I don't feel no ways tired" Clinton? "Bring them to heel"? "Super-predators"? Trump, on the other hand, received votes from groups that the left said would never vote for him. Even college educated women voted Trump, against a woman candidate. That has to hurt.
Gov workers, celebrities, empowered teams of SJW, theocracies, monarchies, cults, ruling parties and kingdoms will add content that will keep people interested?
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Trump lies and flip-flops so much it's really impossible to know what he intends to do. A few weeks from now he might deny having ever said that, or he might stick to it. There's just no way of knowing.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Not quite. The phrase originates from a decision (Schenck v. United States) that was indeed overturned by Brandenburg v. Ohio. However, Falsely shouting 'fire' in a crowded theatre may still fall within the Imminent lawless action test that was established in the Brandenburg v. Ohio ruling.
And here comes the anti-BLM rhetoric again. Apparently standing up against police brutality against African Americans now constitutes a hate crime to the Alt-right.
When you're not doing such vigorous mental gymnastics to dismiss blatant anti-white racism, do you ever stop to contemplate the irony of protesting police brutality with mobs chanting for the death of police? No, never mind. Surely I am a racist asshole for merely pointing out any kind of double standard.
Oh boy, the Godwin's are really flying today on Slashdot.
It's okay for Twitter the bigots are compliant leftists, such as Leslie Jones, the SPLC or the BLM, but not OK for anyone else.
This is why Twitter is losing cash - they're putting ideology before everything else.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
So all you have is reductio ad administratum, or an argument only supportable by shutting everyone else up.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
It's so hard being a [black racist | leftist] now a days, for some reason everyone seems to think your a vile repugnant monster.
FTFY.
Explain why it's OK to be racist towards white people while pointing out said racism is to be purged.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Judging by the support of known bigots like the BLM and SPLC, Twitter's being supported and run by fascists.
It's easy to call it not-censorship if a government entity winks and nods while the private entity carries out the deed.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
The difference is that Twitter openly supports and defends a certain political thought from any criticism.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
I'm not a fan of either candidate.
You can be anti-Trump without being pro-Hillary.
Eat the rich.
I absolutely agree with you on this even though I find myself disagreeing with a lot of things you say. My original point still stands that this person was engaging in fear-mongering with no real facts to back it up. If the US wants to fix the issues that caused Donald Trump to be elected then the first steps are better quality and more productive communication between people (even online).
And without the way the electoral college works Clinton would have won. What's the point of your observation? "If things weren't the way they are there would have been a different outcome." Very astute.
Europe, for example? Most Western European countries have more collectivist policies than the US, and they seem to have individuals still.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Its almost as if you came sooo close to grasping the concept of freedom of speech and protection thereof... then you lost it.
/gasp/ paying for it themselves.
Groceries ARE regulated. Ever hear of the FDA... the FOOD and drug admin? Hmm?
Freedom of speech is a civil right. It was just so damn important it was added directly to the constitution.
You are wrong on cab companies. They are regulated because they are using public roads and thus CAN be regulated under the interstate commerce clause.
Most of the Internet is built upon public funds. The US alone gave billions (and still does) to ISP to build the internet... that is what makes what Google and GoogleFibre so radical as they are
In the general election, we had a choice between two candidates. Yes, there are third parties and such, but voting for them accomplishes nothing in our system. So if you're against him, you're for her. That is unless you're like half the rioters and decided not to vote at all.
As I said: those who are collectivists and not fully authoritarian yet are on their way there (or they are on their way to the opposite, Scandinavian countries are moving in the correct direction, slowly away from collectivism). I am not talking about a moment in time, I am talking about tendencies and eventual inevitable outcomes.
You can't handle the truth.
A church fire is a minor event???
Oh! Just church fires? Well, I'm glad that falls under the category of "who gives a shit."
I hope you know also that according to the police, the protesters and the rioters are separate groups of people. They have seen this sort of thing with the G8 and G20 summits, the WTO summit protests, and a few other mass-crowd protests. anarchists unaffiliated with the protesters come, covered to hide their identity, and there aren't enough police to actually catch them. They use the protesters as cover, like the terrorists in Benghazi did, and they violently attack protesters who try to interfere.
In other words, you're citing a near-religious belief that countries go only one way. You say that Scandinavia is moving a little away from collectivism; if they can do that, then they can stay more or less where they are now indefinitely, varying both ways over the years.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
A country can be moving either one way or another (if the people realise they are going the wrong way). Countries that are collectivist and moving towards more collectivism slide towards authoritarianism.
You can't handle the truth.
That is precisely the mindset people need to break out of.
Eat the rich.
http://www.snopes.com/anti-tru...
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/nb...
http://www.alternet.org/electi...
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the...
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/1...
https://www.rt.com/viral/36431...
http://occupydemocrats.com/201...
http://www.nytimes.com/video/u...
http://mashable.com/2016/03/12...
http://edition.cnn.com/videos/...
https://thinkprogress.org/sher...
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fb...
Don't act as if this is some one-sided thing. Please.
Look at the vile hatred that was spewed from one side in particular.
Eat the rich.
No, it's not. Our system doesn't support having parties with significantly overlapping mission statements. If you have three equally popular conservative leaning parties and one somewhat popular left leaning party then the left leaning wins even though there were more people voting for the conservative leaning ones. That doesn't work. We would have to change how we do voting in order to escape this, and that's a tall order for a divided nation.
I live in the US.
On the one hand, I am against hate speech.
On the other hand, I am for freedom of speech.
Does fighting hate speech warrant a limitation to one's freedom of speech? No, it does not.
Fortunately, this is Twitter, not the US Government. While free speech is in the first amendment, there is nothing that I know of in the US Constitution or derivitvie laws that says that a social media business has to allow free speech on its platform. Blocking someone from Twitter does not block them from speaking out in other ways: verbally, self-publish their own web site or book, etc...
Also, while there is freedom of speech, there is not freedom from the social consequences of speech.
You need to begin supporting coalition governments, rather than just Winner Takes All.
I know it's a tall order, but it's necessary for a functioning democracy.
Eat the rich.