Slashdot Mirror


Twitter Reinstates White Nationalist Leader's Account (buzzfeed.com)

An anonymous reader quotes BuzzFeed: On Saturday evening, Twitter reinstated -- with verification -- the account of Richard Spencer, a leading figure of the so-called alt-right movement, and the head of the white nationalist think tank, The National Policy Institute. Spencer's account was suspended mid-November as part of a larger cull of prominent alt-right accounts... However, according to Twitter, Spencer was banned on a technicality: creating multiple accounts with overlapping uses. Twitter's multiple account policy was put in place as a safeguard to help curb dog piling and targeted harassment. [Twitter] offered to reinstate one of Spencer's accounts if he agreed to follow the company's protocols.
Vox says the move "raises the question of to what extent Twitter intends to enforce the 'hateful conduct' policy." But the suspension had also been criticized by David Frum, a senior editor at the Atlantic, who wrote that "The culture of offense-taking, platform-denying, and heckler-vetoing...lets loudmouths and thugs present themselves as heroes of free thought. They do not deserve this opportunity... today, a neo-Nazi has more right to build an arsenal of weapons and drill a militia than to speak on Twitter." But BuzzFeed points out that though the account's been reinstated, Spencer "is now tip-toeing around the company's three strike policy, which carries a permanent suspension."

7 of 470 comments (clear)

  1. "White Nationalist" is racist term by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The term "White Nationalist" is meant to evoke the term "Nazi" mixed with "KKK".

    But really it's neither of those things. A nationalist (of any skin color) simply wants government to put the interests of his nation first, above those of other nations generally.

    When put that way it doesn't sound scary (or even unreasonable) at all. A nationalist can still want to work with other countries, can still support legal immigration - it simply means they adopt the doctors credo "First do no Harm". That is why the chattering news must paint the term with a racial brush, to frighten children or the weak minded...

    Note they never call out "black nationalists" even though there are plenty of them... that would be racist after all! But it's OK to try and evoke hate for people based on color when they are white.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  2. They're invoking the KKK by rsilvergun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    because these groups have been hitting the dog whistle so hard you'd think they picked up a coaches whistle by mistake.

    And we called out Black Nationalists in the 70s. They mostly calmed the hell down and stopped being racists. The White Nationalists didn't do that when they were called out. They doubled and trippled down. Mostly because they're being used by a wealthy elite to win elections and stuff state legislatures with pro-corporate anti-worker politicians. That's what pisses me off the most about racism. It's just an excuse to give everything to the 1%.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:They're invoking the KKK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      because these groups have been hitting the dog whistle so hard

      And there you have the complete admission that there are no racists statements. The term "dog whistle" is the left's term for racism when there is no racism. They can't find it, they can't point to it, it doesn't exist, so its statements that no reasonable person would find racist but for some reason is obviously racist.

      4 years ago the DNC adopted the strategy of ignoring the white working class. I have see the strategy papers for their elections. It was all going to be about getting every possible minority that isn't white voting for them. Since that time, EVERY policy that isn't a DNC policy has been labeled "racist", see rsilvergun's comments. It worked so well for them in fact, Trump won 3 states he shouldn't have.

      Time to cool off on calling EVERYONE who disagrees with you racist. Or keep it up, there are still a few DNC seats in Congress they can lose. If the DNC platform is "vote for us or you are a racist" I fail to see how they will ever win an election again, and from your comments I see you are currently sticking with it.

  3. Re:Fuck Twitter appeasement by Rei · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just so long as he doesn't post, say, a non-explicit picture of a mother breastfeeding her child.

    --
    Sometimes I doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion.
  4. Re:Fuck Twitter appeasement by Rei · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That, and I think you can only try to feminize society so much before you'll get a reaction

    Huh?

    It's feminists who are pissed off about FB's ban on non-sexual images that (gasp!) involve a breast. Regardless of context. Things involving breast cancer are particularly frustrating. They banned a Swedish video on breast cancer awareness. They instituted a permanent ban on a tattoo artist who tattoos nipples on women who have gotten mastectomies. There's hundreds and hundreds of examples. Photographic? Artistic? Cartoony? Banned, banned, banned. Some people have taken to representing breasts and nipples as squares as a workaround.

    The thing that's most annoying about it is that they're portraying things that are distinctly not sexual as if they're sexual. A mother breastfeeding her child is not a sexual act, and it's disgusting and insulting to act like it is. A breast cancer awareness video or a survivor of breast cancer are not there for sexual titilation - they're about survival from a deadly disease. Facebook's obsession about these things is a giant insult.

    You went off on a most bizarre tangent there... what on Earth does Jenner have to do with Facebook's banning of breastfeeding / breast cancer images?

    --
    Sometimes I doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion.
  5. Re:Fuck Twitter appeasement by Daemonik · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These things, IMO, have resulted in the alt-right.

    You lack historical depth. The "alt-right" has always been here, they just used to be the norm. It's only by standing up and demanding that they be recognized, that they exist and have the same rights that the so called special interest groups have managed to push society into no longer accepting the "alt-right" viewpoint as normal. Of course, they're only "special interest groups" in that they stand up to the bigots who would pretend they don't exist. When your entire philosophy rests on treating everyone who thinks differently from yourself as a sub-human with no right to exist, being stood up to does seem extraordinary.

  6. Re:Fuck Twitter appeasement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As opposed, I presume, to the black supremacist scum of Black Lives Matter?