Reddit Bans Far-Right Groups Altright and Alternativeright (theguardian.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: Social media site Reddit has banned two of the largest far-right "subreddits" groups it hosts, altright and alternativeright. The subreddits have been used in the organization of America's resurgent neofascist movement but the final straw for Reddit was the two groups' participation in what is known as "doxing": sharing private personal information without permission as a form of online harassment. The subreddits were specifically banned for breaking Reddit's content policy, according to a message posted by the site admins, "specifically, the proliferation of personal and confidential information." Reddit did not make it explicit which content infringed its rules, but it is believed to be attempts to dox the protestor who punched a white nationalist during a TV interview at Donald Trump's inauguration. Speaking to the Daily Beast, one Reddit moderator claimed that the ban was instead a result of its "record monthly traffic" (Reddit moderators, like the creators of individual subreddits, are all volunteers with no official relationship to the site's staff). "It's clear that Reddit banned us because we were becoming very popular and spreading inconvenient truths about who's ruining our country and robbing our children of a future," the moderator said.

Comments

Re:Rad Left

[Anonymous Coward]

If they're doxing, they will. You do realize of course that the bans were because of that and not because of their political leanings. I mean, you're a Slashdot user, so you of course read at least the story description.

LOL

[Orgasmatron]

If you think that "alt right" means "far right", you have no idea what kind of shitstorm the left is busily trying to summon by calling for assassination, coup, and terror.

Re:LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

"Alt right" doesn't mean "far right", it means increasingly-blatant racism coupled with delusions of importance, while you metaphorically fellate a bunch of billionaire fascists who manipulate your dumb ass.

Re:LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

In my opinion, followers tend to shadow the tactics used by their leaders. For alt.right, this would be Bannon, Trump, Spicer as Trump's mouthpiece. Bullying, threatening, race-discriminating/profiling, and handcuffing a 5 year old for 4 hours is all OK. This has led followers, since the election, to increased targeting of minorities, Jews (and Jewish community centers), Muslims and others as chronicled by Southern Poverty Law Center and others.

For leftist liberals, you have Barack Obama who kindly waited for hecklers during his speech, Michele Obama and her "when they go low, we go high" and Hillary Clinton, who maybe smiled too much but did not creep up behind Trump in a threatening/stalking manner during the Town Hall debate. This has led to, for example, the Women's March with about 4 arrests among 3 million marchers (around one part per million) across the country.

So yes, in short, I don't have trouble believing that the alt.right users were doxing liberals. And yes, I'm posting this anonymously.

Re:LOL

[GLMDesigns]

Yes. But people self-label and not all people who label themselves as Alt-Right are White Nationalists.

Further there are people that lump Libertarians in as Alt-Right (as in they're not establishment conservatives).

So the phrase Alt-Right is not a simple == White Nationalists.

Milo, whether you like him or not, wrote an excellent article on what Alt-Right means.

Re:LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

The difference is that the "alt-right" is not actually a political ideology.

It largely consists of 4chan anons and Twitter eggs saying outrageous things they do not necessarily fully believe in order to intentionally get a rise out of people because "fuck political correctness and fuck SJWs".

It springs from the fact that you are not allowed to question any part of the doctrines of politically correct ideology (e.g., third-wave feminism, the trans-acceptance movement) without being called a bigot by "hashtag activists" online, who may go so far as to target your real-life job just for questioning or criticizing their views. Even if you do so politely.

So if you're not even allowed to question politely, then let's just be as offensive and outrageous as we possibly can. Even if that means grossly exaggerating what we actually believe.

At its core, that's what the "alt-right" is. There are of course real bigots who have joined the movement, and there are also people who have attached their real-life names to the movement in order to make money (e.g., Milo). But at its core, the alt-right is simply a bunch of people talking shit trying to get you upset.

Re:LOL

[butchersong]

That's like trying to enforce a monopoly on "alt-country" or "alt-rock". You can't say that you're the only "alternative" to a mainstream movement.

Re:LOL

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope.

The only thing that matters is the perception held by outsiders. Outsiders aren't going to interview the thousands or millions of members who identify as being part of your group, just to see where they all individually stand. No one is sifting through members of the KKK to see if there are members with views towards blacks, jews, etc that are different than the perceived views of the group as a whole.

It doesn't matter if you're not a White Nationalist, if you claim to be alt-right at this point in time, you are going to be labeled as a racist (among other things, like xenophobic, homophobic, anti-intellectual, etc). Just like you'd be labeled as a racist, anti-Semitic if you joined the KKK but only wanted blacks removed from civil society. No one is going to ask you about your position on Jews. You'd be a member of the KKK, an anti-Semitic group. Therefore, you are also anti-Semitic, from the public's perspective.

No one gives two shits about your personal interpretation. You can fabricate whatever reality you want, but you can't control how others perceive you.

Re:LOL

[bugs2squash]

Better informed than Donald Trump, who gets his "facts" from whoever is on Fox when he wakes up.

Re:LOL

[amicusNYCL]

The "narrative"? There's a video where she says that some demonstrably false claims are not falsehoods, they are alternative facts. I mean, she was actually recorded saying that. I'm sure she knew that too, because it was on TV and everything. They even broadcast it. What exactly is "the narrative"? Are you trying to suggest that she didn't say that at all, like Trump would do when someone asks him about something he was recorded saying, or are you trying to suggest that she wasn't referring to the "falsehoods" that they were discussing when she used that term? Which narrative are you referring to that isn't true?

She was referring to specific claims made by Spicer, which were not true, and instead of admitting that they were not true (because, like everyone else around Trump, you never admit when you're wrong about something) she came up with the term "alternative facts" to describe the things said by Spicer. She specifically used the phrase "alternative facts" to describe this information, and it should not be necessary to point that facts do not have alternatives that are also facts. The alternatives to facts are false, they're not facts.

Re:LOL

[amicusNYCL]

Here, let me help you out with the research, scanning the first page of Google results can be difficult:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/a...

Here's one:

We know that from the platform from where the President was sworn in to 4th Street holds about 250,000 people. From 4th Street to the media tent is about another 220,000. And from the media tent to the Washington Monument another 250,000 people. All of this space was full when the President took the oath of office.

That's not true.

Here, here's another one:

Spicer said 420,000 used the D.C. Metro public transit on Jan. 20, 2017, compared with 317,000 for President Obama’s 2012 inaugural.

Not only is that not true, but both of those numbers are wrong.

Here's another one:

It was the “first time” that floor coverings were used to protect the grass on the National Mall, which had highlighted empty spots in the inaugural crowd, an effect not experienced in past inaugurations, he said.

That's not true either.

You asked for one, but there's three things he said which are demonstrably untrue. But instead of just admit that, she had to double-down and claim that they were alternative facts. If you want to re-watch that video where Conway and Todd discuss those specific statements made by Spicer then let me know so I can look that up for you too.

Re:LOL

[Rakarra]

The difference is that the "alt-right" is not actually a political ideology.

It largely consists of 4chan anons and Twitter eggs saying outrageous things they do not necessarily fully believe in order to intentionally get a rise out of people because "fuck political correctness and fuck SJWs".

The Alt-Right is a white nationalism movement, coined by Richard Spenser (the guy who got punched in a street interview recently) in 2010. He's been promoting it ever since. It certainly has roots in 4chan and 8chan, though it's always hard there to tell what is trolling and what is sincere, but it wasn't until the presidential election that the alt-right got much exposure with the selection of Steve Bannon last August to Trump's team. Bannon claims Breitbart is "the platform of the alt-right," and it's hard to dispute him on that.

Re:LOL

[CronoCloud]

Pat Buchanan was one of the peoplethe GOP's âoeSouthern Strategyâoe, which is to this day subtle racism:

In American politics, southern strategy refers to methods the Republican Party used to gain political support in the South by appealing to the racism against African Americans harbored by many southern white voters.[

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...

So yes, you did support a bigot. How could you not know? As for the Cheeto in Chief, he basically re-used Buchanan's strategy.

Re: LOL

[Grishnakh]

It's pretty simple: those people don't want to be called term X because they don't perceive themselves as being part of that group (whether it's "homosexual" or "intersex" or "transgender" or whatever), so they pick some other more obscure group they identify with (like "genderqueer", whatever that is), or make up something new I guess.

With this alt-right stuff, it's exactly the opposite. We see here people claiming to be "alt-right", but then they try to claim they're not racist or whatever other label that outsiders perceive them as.

If you're going to stand up and claim to be part of a group that has voluntary membership, then it's your own fault when you're criticized for traits that outsiders generally associate with that group. If you don't like it, and don't agree with the assessment, stop claiming to be part of that group.

It's just like the OP said: you can't go around calling yourself a "proud KKK member" and then claim that you think Jews are great. It doesn't work that way, as the KKK is still known to be anti-Jewish (among many other things), and that's one of their big issues, not just some minor one with a lot of internal disagreement. If you take offense at being lumped in with them, then stop claiming to be part of that group. Make up your own group if you have to. Similarly, don't go around calling yourself a "communist" and then claim that you're against state or collective ownership of industry and you think private ownership and free markets are the way to go.

Re:LOL

[AthanasiusKircher]

He claimed the audience (total number of people watching) was greater. And this was, according to Akami, the largest live streamed event ever. So Spicer was correct: the audience for Trump was bigger.

That is PART of what he claimed. Here's his actual quote:

This was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period, both in-person and around the globe

And if you look at the transcript of what he actually said, that sentence was prefaced by several other sentences going into detail about the IN PERSON CROWD.** He did NOT say anything else about internet streaming or whatever other than hinting at it in "around the globe" in that sentence there. So, claiming that he was entirely or even primarily talking about internet audience is simply wrong. Yes, it may be true that more people streamed this inauguration online than ever before, but more streaming devices are also available to people than ever before in history. On the other side of things, maybe crowd numbers were muted a bit due to the rain forecast. There are all sorts of things that could have played into the numbers here.

But two things are certain: Spicer was primarily making claims about the in-person crowd in his press conference, and the in-person crowd WAS NOT the largest ever at an inauguration.

"Alternative facts" are the things the media leaves out of their reports so they can lie by omission to create a false narrative ("lol no one likes Trump") instead of a true narrative ("Trump's audience was fine and he is supported by many people.")

This is truly ironic, because you are doing precisely what you're accusing the media of here. I could just as easily say: Alternative facts are the things meta-monkey leaves out of his posts so he can lie by omission to create a false narrative ("lol Spicer was right") instead of a true narrative ("Spicer was actually wrong about the in-person crowd, but he mentioned the global audience in passing and might have been correct in terms of streaming, even if that wasn't his point at all.")

Remember, the mission of the media is to persuade with propaganda, not to inform with facts.

Remember, the mission of internet posts is to win an argument, not to inform with facts.

--- ** P.S. In case you are going to claim Spicer was talking about something else, here's an extended quotation in context of what he said, which was later defended by Conway for the "alternative facts."

Secondly, photographs of the inaugural proceedings were intentionally framed in a way, in one particular tweet, to minimize the enormous support that had gathered on the National Mall. This was the first time in our nation's history that floor coverings have been used to protect the grass on the Mall. That had the effect of highlighting any areas where people were not standing, while in years past the grass eliminated this visual. This was also the first time that fencing and magnetometers went as far back on the Mall, preventing hundreds of thousands of people from being able to access the Mall as quickly as they had in inaugurations past.

Inaccurate numbers involving crowd size were also tweeted. No one had numbers, because the National Park Service, which controls the National Mall, does not put any out. By the way, this applies to any attempts to try to count the number of protestors today in the same fashion.

We do know a few things, so let's go through the facts. We know that from the platform where the President was sworn in, to 4th Street, it holds about 250,000 people. From 4th Street to the media tent is about another 220,000. And from the media tent to the Washington Monument, another 250,000 people. All of this space was full when the President took the Oath of Office. We know that 420,000 people used the D.C. Metro public transit yesterday, which actually c

Re:LOL

[AmiMoJo]

Yep, let's kill this one here.

During his campaign, Trump promised a Muslim ban. When elected, he enacted the most practical kind of Muslim ban he could, given that there is no easy way to determine if someone is a Muslim or not.

Re:LOL

[Cederic]

Trusting wikipedia on anything is dodgy these days. Trusting it on anything political or contentious is downright fucking naive.

Doxing

[AmiMoJo]

It's the fact that the moderators failed to clamp down on it, and even encouraged posting personal data that really forced Reddit to ban the entire boards, rather than just individual users.

Re:Doxing

[amicusNYCL]

Reddit tolerates all kinds of shit, they just don't tolerate doxxing (apparently, I'm not a user). There's plenty of weird stuff on there, the alt-right isn't necessarily any worse than a lot of the other stuff. So when they get banned but other things are still there, maybe that deserves a bit of quiet introspection rather than spouting off politically.

It's clear that Reddit banned us because we were becoming very popular and spreading inconvenient truths

They spelled "incorrect" wrong.

Re:Doxing

[Dread_ed]

The kind of 'common sense' that leads to violent riots at Berkley? Sorry, but I'm not overlooking human rights, decency, and free speech and I am not supporting fascism in any form, or from any political construct in the US.

As far as I am concerned, anyone who is partisan in America these days is a fool. Your "party" and your "ideology" are nothing more than focus-group-honed brain candy. The narratives they push are engineered to keep you emotionally off balance, stressed, and at the throats of your fellow Americans. Angry sheep are still sheep, no matter how "justified" and "right" you feel you are.

I swear to god its like watching 50 million Soros finger puppets fight 50 million Bannon finger puppets. Not a one of you have a single idea of your own. You just get the info pumped straight up your asses, completely bypassing your brain.

Re:Doxing

[Camel Pilot]

All the riots do were draw attention to Milo and increase his books sale. They would have been smart to just ignore him... which is really what these narcissists fear more.

Re: Doxing

[amicusNYCL]

I wouldn't say it's "just as likely". What he did was wrote code to automatically change references to himself, to the moderator. Because everyone kept calling him a pedophile while they were discussing how it's likely that a child sex ring was being run out of a pizza parlor. Having code that trolls the users by changing things so that they're calling their own moderator a pedophile instead of the guy in charge of Reddit is completely different than fabricating an entire campaign of trying to dox some guy who hit some other guy in order to get an entire group of people banned. It's not "just as likely". That's a false equivalence if I've ever seen one. I realize that people like to try and call out "false flag" whenever something happens, but I don't think this is the flag you're looking for.

Re:Doxing

[Anonymous Coward]

You call it a Muslim ban, yet:
- It doesn't encompass all Muslims but merely 7 countries.
- Those 7 countries are precisely the ones Obama listed as a risk to the USA.
- Obama banned travel from Iraq for 6 months to reconfigure the vetting and security system because overhauling a system requires a temporary stop,
    while Trump extended Obama's own system on Obama's 7 listed countries and is doing the same presently.

Did you even know of these details? I'm guessing not.
Were you present to call it a "Muslim ban" and throw shit at Obama when he did this? I'm guessing not.
Do you go online and research and validate the words of people, instead of blindly believing them just because they sound righteous or emotionally good?
I'm guessing not, because if you did, you wouldn't be calling it a "Muslim" ban, and you certainly wouldn't spew so much hypocrisy in a post for validation points.

Re:Doxing

[deadwill69]

"The government's taking "extreme action"? Who's been shot? "with total disregard for the law"? Really?"

at least eight women and seven children, ages 3 to 13, had been killed
https://theintercept.com/2017/...

Her father had been killed years ago. This was uncalled for by any stretch of the imagination. She , as well as her father were both American citizens. While I'm not saying he didn't need to be dealt with, (which should have been through a court of law) this was just uncalled for.

And before you call me a bleeding heart liberal, I'm retired usmc with 23 years and 3 combat deployments.

There is only one thing I hate more than fascists

[lucaiaco]

And it is fascists anti-fascists. Because not only they are fascists, but they are also a semantic contradiction.

Don't take me wrong, the ban is perfectly justified, but it's always right-wing fascists who get punished. This guy had no right to punch whoever it was in the face, and this is not an isolated case. Even moderate trump supporters get constantly beaten up with no consequences. A young college girl got pepper sprayed while giving an interview at UC, and several innocent bystanders were beaten up by the anti-fascist crowd, which was destroying everything b/c they didn't like a speaker the Republican student association had invited. These people are dividing the country, and creating a climate of tension and violence way more than the alt-right.

The media coverage is ridiculous, and focus instead on actual fake stories of people who are pretending to be assaulted by Trump supporters, a claim, as far as I know, always unfounded. End of rant. Good luck America.

Re:They'll Go Underground

[Zaelath]

Propaganda doesn't work well shared in secret.

Re:They'll Go Underground

[MightyMartian]

That's fine. Let them go to Stormfront. You have a right to your views and to discuss them with likeminded people. Major online portals have no obligation to help you.

If the White Supremacists are pushed back to their web forums which the rest of the world doesn't have to view, that's fine by me. I don't want to shut Stormfront down, I just don't want the sites I visit turning into Stormfront colonies.

Re:Censor all white-nationalist hate speech now

[MightyMartian]

You mean the guy who fabricated tweets about Leslie Jones to try to make her look like a racist. Yes, he doesn't care about skin color at all.

Re:Reddit = a bunch of cowardly idiots.

[MightyMartian]

Oh bullshit. If the white supremacists can't post on major websites, they don't get stronger. They get weaker, because the successes they've had in the last few years largely come from the fact that they've been able to hijack places like Twitter and Facebook. If they're stuck on their IP address accessed web forums or on places like Stormfront, they end up becoming what they were before, a circle jerk of racists.

Re:Why yes, let's ban them

[AmiMoJo]

Reddit is in it for the money. Hosting far right extremists isn't good for business.

Reddit NAZIs? I HATE Reddit NAZIs!

[Anonymous Coward]

Where's Elwood Blues when we need him?

Re: Rad Left

[Anonymous Coward]

If you start publishing personal details it is.

Stop being fucking stupid.

Banned for Doxxing

[jxander]

The groups were banned for doxxing political opponents. That is, sharing personal information (name, phone number, home address, etc.) This behaviour is explicitly against the Reddit terms of service.

The political leanings of the groups are unrelated to the ban (unless you assume a correlation between "alt-right" mentality and disregard for the established rules of a privately owned website)

Banning for "inconvenient truths" is still OK.

[DRJlaw]

"It's clear that Reddit banned us because we were becoming very popular and spreading inconvenient truths about who's ruining our country and robbing our children of a future," the moderator said.

Whatever. You're still banned,and whining about secret 'persecutorial' motivations won't do anything to change that.

Stormfront will probably host you and not bat an eye. Why do you feel so deprived? If you wanted to stay on Reddit you could simply have stamped out the doxing problem and, you know, followed Reddit's 'pretextual' rules.

Inconvenient truths?

[DontBeAMoran]

Here's the real inconvenient truth: the people in power only have one thing in common and it's money.

And they're doing all they can so that you idiots fight amongst yourselves instead of seeing that the rich are the real problem.

Re: Reddit = a bunch of cowardly idiots.

[ooloorie]

Given that people like Bannon and papers like Breitbart have been denounced as white supremacists and anti Semitic, it's obvious that the term has lost all meaning. Frankly, I don't care anymore whether people call me a racist or white supremacist; it's about as ridiculous as calling me a zoophile or cannibal.

Banning these people from Reddit only means that progressives will be even more out of touch with mainstream America than they already are. That kind of ignorance doesn't hurt Republicans, it hurts Democrats and progressives. You can't effectively advocate your point of view from a position of ignorance, or by demonizing the people you want to persuade.

Learn to listen, people, or keep losing.

Re:willful ignorance

[Verdatum]

If you went to /r/altright as an admitted liberal, they would ban you ASAP. And reddit admins were OK with that, and I'm very begrudgingly ok with that too. But the point is they had no interest in engaging in discussion with anyone who disagreed.

Make it fair

[s.petry]

Sure, "White Supremacists" can be blocked from Reddit, but what about the leftist nutjobs who believe that you should destroy other people's property and physically assault people with a different political viewpoint? I don't look at reddit as a rule, but I'd be willing to bet that extremist left wing groups exist on reddit and will not receive the same treatment as the "alt-right". That is true with Facebook and Twitter, so I assume it true on Reddit. Feel free to prove me wrong on that, I'll be happy to read about Reddit banning left wing nut jobs.

Frankly, if I had to look at who is worse right now I'd say it's the extremist progressive leftists who see no issues using violence against people simply because they have a different political view. In the last couple years, I have seen no valid reports of white supremacists out beating people. We have seen dozens of faked claims, and many of those have resulted in charges, but the "Right" has not been rioting and beating anyone. I have seen countless instances of leftists doing just that, and worse. Last night you have a young lady being interviewed on ABC punched in the face and pepper sprayed by one of these "oppressed" liberals. You have another pulled out of a car and beaten for no reason.

When you have a Government not prosecuting, or even arresting people, who are terrorizing people and preventing their free speech you will end up with a whole lot of violence from the other side. Hence you have a Trump supporter shooting an agitator at a separate rally after protesters started throwing bricks and rocks at people supporting the speaker showed up to counter protest.

People need to pay close attention to the rhetoric being used by the left right now. Sadly, the useful idiots really can't see the irony and hypocrisy in shutting down other people's free speech by committing physical violence while carrying signs and chanting slogans claiming the other side is fascist. They are claiming that words are violence, and a teacher who is an advocate for violent protests claimed that words from someone raped her. I wish I was joking, but both of those are factual. The claims that words are somehow causing physical harm is being used to justify violence against anyone not agreeing with (or bending over for) the leftists.

Trying times we are in right now, and in places like California I envision it getting worse before it gets better.

Re:Make it fair

[Xyrus]

Sure, "White Supremacists" can be blocked from Reddit, but what about the leftist nutjobs who believe that you should destroy other people's property and physically assault people with a different political viewpoint?

I've seen crazies, but attributing them to any political affiliation (except for those espousing actual violence) is pretty damn stupid, don't you think? This is the same type of thinking that groups all Muslims into suicide bombing America hating crazies. Should I lump together all Christians as violent terrorist extremists because of Timothy McVeigh and all those whackos who bomb clinics and send death threats to doctors who perform abortions?

I don't look at reddit as a rule, but I'd be willing to bet that extremist left wing groups exist on reddit and will not receive the same treatment as the "alt-right". That is true with Facebook and Twitter, so I assume it true on Reddit. Feel free to prove me wrong on that, I'll be happy to read about Reddit banning left wing nut jobs.

No, the onus is on you to provide evidence that there are forums full of violent threats and doxing coming from supposed leftist groups. If YOU have evidence, then YOU can submit it and get them banned. Enough of the liberal media "legenpresse" conspiracy bullshit.

Frankly, if I had to look at who is worse right now I'd say it's the extremist progressive leftists who see no issues using violence against people simply because they have a different political view. In the last couple years, I have seen no valid reports of white supremacists out beating people.

What do watch? Fox news? Is Breitbart you man source of info? Hate crimes, including against African Americans, are quite regular fair. It's just not enough to make headlines. Well, that is, until someone dies or actually looks at the statistics.

We have seen dozens of faked claims, and many of those have resulted in charges, but the "Right" has not been rioting and beating anyone.

Alternative facts in an alternative reality.

I have seen countless instances of leftists doing just that, and worse. Last night you have a young lady being interviewed on ABC punched in the face and pepper sprayed by one of these "oppressed" liberals. You have another pulled out of a car and beaten for no reason.

You're right of course. Liberals are way to soft. They stop with just beatings and pepper spray. The alt-right just kills people. Much more efficient, and then you don't have to worry about them voting either. For example, like that old white guy that shot and killed a teenage African American kid. Or the alt-crazy who massacred a black church.

Crazy people are just that. Trying to attribute their behavior to a political motive is just stupid.

When you have a Government not prosecuting, or even arresting people, who are terrorizing people and preventing their free speech you will end up with a whole lot of violence from the other side. Hence you have a Trump supporter shooting an agitator at a separate rally after protesters started throwing bricks and rocks at people supporting the speaker showed up to counter protest.

Goebells would have loved you. Which political party just recently told the press to shut up and froze out a major news network? Which political party is trying to implement the Ministry of Truth to prevent information the administration doesn't like from reaching the public? Which administration has fostered conspiracy theories, exaggerations, threatened to lock up political rivals, and has flat out lied repeatedly to the public?

People need to pay close attention to the rhetoric being used by the left right now. Sadly, the useful idiots really can't see the irony and hypocrisy in shutting down other people's free speech by committing physical violence while carrying signs and chanting slogans claiming th

Re:Make it fair

[DogDude]

In the last couple years, I have seen no valid reports of white supremacists out beating people

Oh, you silly, mis-informed little boy. What planet do you live on?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/14/...

Re:There is only one thing I hate more than fascis

[Zak3056]

You are so concerned about some hateful shit of a girl getting pepper sprayed... where were you when peaceful protesters on college campuses were getting hosed down with pepper spray by an agent of the state for a simple sit in?

Some of us are appalled by both events. That's the problem here, and what people on "the left" keep missing: there are plenty of us out here who aren't racists, who aren't misogynist, who think Trump is a disaster-in-waiting, but who are frankly sick and tired of the political climate where we're called misogynist racists because we simply disagree with your "progressive" politics.

You lost the election because of people like us. Instead of taking the lesson to heart, you've doubled down on it.