Slashdot Mirror
Twitter Bans, Removes Verified Status of White Supremacists (thedailybeast.com)
After updating the rules of its verification program on Wednesday, Twitter has begun banning and removing verified check marks from white supremacist accounts. For example, white supremacists Richard Spencer and Charlottesville "Unite The Right" protest creator Jason Kessler had their verified statuses revoked today. The Daily Beast reports: The verified check mark was meant to denote "that an account of public interest is authentic," the company said in a series of tweets on Wednesday, but that "verification has long been perceived as an endorsement." "This perception became worse when we opened up verification for public submissions and verified people who we in no way endorse," a company spokesperson tweeted. Users can now lose their blue checkmarks for "inciting or engaging in harassment of others," "promoting hate and/or violence against, or directly attacking or threatening other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or disease," supporting people who promote those ideas, and a slew of other reasons.
I guess the internet is going to end up split with left wingers having their own little nest and the right wingers theirs. Pretty much how the media worked out and now it'll be on to other things. We'll have right wing stores and left wing stores. The only thing that bothered me is I never thought that in the divorce the liberals would get the NFL.
Oh bullshit. The Antifa openly call for genocide, but that's okay because you ignorantly think it's a white culture they want to exterminate.
I'll make it easy for you: When people self-identify as "white nationalists" they are racists. By definition.
Long before a(t least a) bunch of racists started labeling themselves 'white nationalists', there were many 'black nationalist' self-labelers, and it seems like they weren't called racist (as much at least). I myself am not a 'nationalist' of any sort, I believe in human rights that should be protected and fought for around the world. Though the radial importance of locality, despite the internet factor, still means that it is most logical to deal with your vaguely near neighbors socially before worrying more about people on the other side of the globe.
It seems understandable to me that there are many self-identifying 'nationalists' that don't consider themselves 'supremecists', because they believe that the(ir) world would be better with all the groups of nationalists forming nations. I guess the non-nationalists like myself become a nation in some kind of venn-diagram mathematical proof. But whatever. The point is that the jump from nationalist to racist supremecist does not seem necessarily implied to me. I also presume their are many trolls spread throughout that enjoy stirring up angered emotions. Not to mention leveraging the tactic for other political aims. Or perhaps you are correct in your nationalist->racist (!nationalist->supremecist) view if you define preferring to live near others of your race as racist (even if you might not equate that desire with believing that your or any race is actually 'superior' in any way).
Take for instance the famously tragic situation in California's prison systems. A few years ago a federal court had an order in place that some significant percentage of the prisoners must go free by a certain date if the overcrowding problem was not solved. Some may find such a news story shocking. The shocking part was that the california prison system *had an OFFICIAL policy of racial segregation*. They claimed, plausibly, that they needed to do this to best provide for the security of the inmates (that were severely obviously overcrowded). One can imagine some 'nationalists' that would prefer to live amongst the same race, not because they believe their or any race is superior, but because they have a realist view that there are so many racists of all races amongst the general population, that such a tactic increases their chances of safety, survival, and comfort.
This is not a simple problem. It's big. It's ugly. It's not new.
You want real mass murder? Check out Stalin and Moa.
You are comparing apples and oranges. Although Mao killed more people than either Stalin or Hitler, the vast majority of those deaths were from economic incompetence rather than intentional malice. They died from a man made famine, not in death camps or gulags.