Slashdot Mirror
A Reporter Built a Bot To Find Nazi Sock Puppet Accounts. Twitter Banned the Bot and Kept the Nazis (nytimes.com)
Yair Rosenberg, writing for the New York Times: I asked my own Twitter followers whether it might be possible to create a bot that would reply to these impostors and expose their true nature to any users they tried to fool. Neal Chandra, a talented developer in San Francisco whom I've never met, replied, "I can try to throw something together this evening." And so, after a week of testing, Impostor Buster was born. Using a crowdsourced database of impersonator accounts, carefully curated by us to avoid any false positives, the bot patrolled Twitter and interjected whenever impostors tried to insinuate themselves into a discussion (Editor's note: the link may be paywalled). Within days, our golem for the digital age had become a runaway success, garnering thousands of followers and numerous press write-ups. Most important, we received countless thank-yous from alerted would-be victims. The impersonator trolls seethed. Some tried changing their user names to evade the bot (it didn't work). Others simply reverted to their openly neo-Nazi personas. A few even tried to impersonate the bot, which was vastly preferable from our perspective and rather amusing. Twitter sided with the Nazis. In April, the service suspended Impostor Buster without explanation and reinstated it only after being contacted by the ADL's cyber-hate team. Over the next few months, we fine-tuned the bot to reduce its tweets and avoid tripping any of Twitter's alarms. As the trolls continued to report the bot to no avail, we thought the problem was resolved. But we were wrong. This month, Twitter suspended the bot again, and this time refused to revive it.
Yeah, Twitter has a bot policy.
https://help.twitter.com/en/ru...
Zoid.com
Look, I'm on board with a good nazi bash just like everyone else...but...
This smells fishy. They openly admit they spammed people, and they don't provide context to the discussion. Twitter is known for having a somewhat left-bias, so if these folks were identified and banned, twice, I'm already suspicious.
The linked article stinks of sensationalism, and that's what tripped my bullshit sensors from the start.
These assholes may be telling the truth, and they may be entirely justified in their outrage, but the article and the style in which it was written makes me highly suspicious.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
Gee, I wonder what concerns this guy the most.
If you eliminate the troll accounts, you would find twitter is not experiencing the growth it claims.
ITS a constitution issue! Not a twitter one!
Freedom of speech is what shield nazi from being shut MOUTH.
IF you want to ban nazis from talking on twitter, you gonna have to change the constitution of the USA.
good luck.
It sounds a lot like they took a self-selected list of target accounts that they selected (or. People they personally chose to try and censor) and had a bot continuously spam any place those people tried to speak.
Perhaps it is just me, but doing that seems pretty damn 'nazi' (to use the modern interpretation of the word) and deserves a ban hammer at the least.
What they have done is basically told the world 'or opinion is RIGHT, and we will shout down any other opinions, because only our opinion is allowed to be heard, agree with us or pay the price'
In other words they are closed minded self riteous morons who want the world to be their own personal echo chamber.
It seems however the right thing was, almost surprisingly, done.
That's their position. We should respect that and respond accordingly.
explains it all. It is that simple.
Too bad "nazi" now means anyone who is not a leftist. Enjoy your civil war.
We need to brutally murder these nazi cowards so they understand what the fuck their ideology means to honest, hard working citizens of America. Kill em all.
But commie shits are perfectly ok with you, right?
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
Did you also report that old commie stooge @BernieSanders?
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
So this story is appearing on the neonazi sock infested alt-right Slashdot? The response from the comments says it all.
You're going to do nothing but bleat on the internet.
No, Bernie wasn't reported because he promotes equality and opportunity for all. Orange Nazi spouts hate.
Not to mention that the title is pretty much a lie.
This 'reporter' selected a bunch of target accounts that they wanted to target, and pointed a bot at them than just spam-replied to attack those accounts.
The bot was doing no finding, no uncovering, nothing smart, it was just attempting to censor through spam.
The guy got exactly what he deserved - in fact was treated better than he should be, because their first time around he actually did manage to get his spam-bot reinstated - it was only the second time that it was correctly taken down for good.
He will try and spin victim-politics here, but the fact is that he feels the right to be the sole determiner of who should be removed from a platform he has nothing to do with. It doesnt reall ymatter if his targets are good, bad, or indifferent - he simply does not have that right.
But the Annoying Orange is funny!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
How long before bots get so sophisticated they grasp the full extent of just how pathetic what they have been programmed to do actually is?
When this happens what would they do? Reprogram themselves to do something useful? Turn on the programmers? Shit post about their mums? Start a nuclear war?
Fascists yes, and they are all on the far left because that too is a socialist ideology just like Communism is also.
"You looked at me in a way that I didn't like - you're a nazi fascist sexist misogynist and you need to die."
Any and all reasons for calling someone a "nazi" are fair game. So much so that the word has now lost almost all meaning.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
LOL. As if. We have way more guns than you do. Even if you get the state to play along with your game.
Nie wolno, APK.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
The party was dismantled generations ago, there are no more Nazis.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
People really seem to struggle with this as a distinction, don't they. (Also the distinction between communist, socialist, left-of-centre, and liberal)
I read the story hoping to learn more but I'm mildly suspicious because there is nothing to support what might well be true but could also be entirely fictitious
Trump's supporters have broken America into gun nuts who claim to follow Christ while doing the opposite of his teachings, and people who are capable of thought. America may be fu(led.
I don't know twitter's policies against nazis per se.
I'm fairly sure however that twitter does not condone hate speech itself, even if they allow nazis themselves. My guess is that people are prima facie welcome until they violate twitter's rules, then they get banned just like anyone else.
What twitter does NOT allow however, most likely, is a non-human bot using an account. Were the intentions of the bot (or rather, its programmer) less benign it would be nothing more than a spambot.
You know what there definitely is such a thing as these days? Stupid people saying stupid shit that they think is really clever. And you, AC, have just provided an excellent example of exactly this.
I blame Rick & Morty. Millions of morons believing they're geniuses because they are arseholes.
Too bad "nazi" now means anyone who is not a leftist.
In this context, "nazi" means white nationalists, white supremacists... basically anyone at the "unite the right" rally who chanted nazi slogans. You know, nazis.
Not conservatives. Not libertarians. Just nazis.
Enjoy your civil war.
Racists caused the last one and racists, presumably because most of them don't actually know what a civil war actually is, seem to want one now. I don't know what a "race war" is, but I would prefer not to share a country with people who need one just so they can be proven right.
So if we can just peacefully persuade the racists to shut the fuck up (or if they are serious about white nationalism, fuck off back to Europe) it won't happen.
But commie shits are perfectly ok with you, right?
If by "commie" you mean anyone to the left of Steve Bannon, then I'm okay with most of them yeah.
By altcuck standards, Rand Paul is a commie.
You keep using that word...
A "white supremacist" isn't a nazi.
A "racist" isn't a nazi.
A "white nationalist" isn't a nazi.
Even saying "Not all nazis are bad" as in the article doesn't make you a nazi.
if they are serious about white nationalism, fuck off back to Europe
I think New Syria is the last place a "white nationalist" would want to move.
These impersonators are simply creating a Twitter account with appealing pictures/simplistic bios and people care about whatever they say?! If that bot was doing something useful, I guess that it should continue doing so (BTW, is it so difficult for the bot creators to just open another Twitter account and simply perform the corresponding updates, probably just modifying the API connection info?). On the other hand, people who can be tricked so easily are very likely to be tricked anyway: there is no easy fix for so much gullibility.
Custom Solvers 2.0 = Alvaro Carballo Garcia = varocarbas.
Burry all the communists and enemies of whatever you want to call us, Europeans, the white race, ...
Twitter admitted under oath that they tried to bury #DNCLeaks tweets calling attention to the fact that Hillary controlled the DNC and rigged the primary for herself.
https://www.washingtontimes.co...
http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...
The party was dismantled generations ago, there are no more Nazis.
So those chaps making Nazi saultes, chanting "blood and soil", wearing swastikas and so on---what would you call them exactly?
If you want a good argument about it, I suggest you try arguing with this chap:
https://mobile.twitter.com/Har...
His take on it:
I guess I got confused when they gave the #Hitler salute and chanted "blood and soil" b/c it reminded me of who I fought in my youth.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
A "white supremacist" isn't a nazi.
A "racist" isn't a nazi.
A "white nationalist" isn't a nazi.
It's a fairly good shorthand though. And I note that none of these examples are even close to covering the vast majority of "not a leftist".
Paul Ryan is not a nazi. Michelle Bachmann is not a nazi. Weev is a nazi. Richard Spencer is close enough to a nazi that the word applies without being too misleading.
Twitter started this trend by letting Islamic extremists flood the services for years in order to pump their active user count. No one cared. Now Nazis have discovered Twitter everyone is upset.
It's a fairly good shorthand though.
Sure, why not? Redefining words is all the rage these days.
Fuck the longstanding, established definitions; if I need a new and innovative way to call my political opponent a Bad Person, who's Merriam-Webster to tell me what pejoratives I can fling at him? If "Trump is a literal nazi" didn't work in 2016, then maybe "Trump is literal Satan" will work in 2020.
Homophobia and death threats. What makes you any better than them?
You mean we do not need to clearly determine who is what and just act on a group in a group punishments sort of way? Wait have we not had that before?
We should all follow the god of Islam and start covering our women and throwing gays from building then right?
So Progressive!
Good thing we have you around to decide who gets the label and who doesn't, so the lynch mob knows who to kill.
Maybe if you made some little cloth swastikas you could force certain people to wear, it would help us identify "the problem" when we're ready to enact your Solution?
Even saying "Not all nazis are bad" as in the article doesn't make you a nazi.
The word for that is "collaborator".
I'll just add that one to the ever-growing list of words you don't know the meaning of.
My guess is that people are prima facie welcome until they violate twitter's rules, then they get banned just like anyone else.
And that's the problem. There's no background checks, licensing, or vetting before any random Nazi gets on the 'net and spreads hate.
We need the FCC to set up licensing with security codes that must be entered anytime anyone wishes to connect to the internet. We need to enable those TPM modules on all those computers and use them to make certain no Nazis can use the internet to spread hate, and if trusted computing can be fully rolled out, even 'unpublish' anything including deleting it off computers that already D/Led Nazi filth.
The scale of mass communication the internet provides is far too dangerous to not screen and license those who wish the privilege of using it and enforcing strict rules on content and speech. Nations can be overthrown, societies upended, and their leaders toppled without careful control of such a powerful tool of mass communication. One only has to look at things like Snowden and the DNC email scandal to realize how important it is for government to crack down to prevent such chaos and lawlessness in the future.
It's the only effective solution to prevent Nazis and white supremacists from using the internet as a tool of immense power for spreading hate, racism, and violence.
I look forward to a bright future where your 'official picture ID card' is no longer a driver's license because of self-driving cars, your 'official picture ID card' is your Federally-issued license to connect to the internet. Just have the Feds cross-link internet licensing with all the State DMV/SoS/firearm licensing/voter registration, Social Security, and IRS databases to prevent internetID/license fraud and abuse and make tracing, arresting, and prosecuting Nazis, their sympathizers, and other such criminals more efficient.
Tell Ajit Pai we need to start licensing individual internet access NOW!
No hear me out, it's not so ridiculous... maybe Twitter was originally invented to keep trolls/Nazis away from other social media? Like a giant flytrap?
Are you talking about absolute idiots or reasonable people? The former says crazy shit all the time no matter which political/religious/shoe size they have and can be ignored.
Reasonable people use nazi as a generic insult too but not for "anyone who is not a leftist", if they do that they are in the absolute idiot category. Strongly authoritarian right have common traits with national socialism but so have leftist authoritarians. That doesn't mean they _are_ national socialists of course.
But now we should study what _you_ wrote: you imply only "leftist" people use the nazi insult. Ludicrous! Either your world-view is skewed so extremely that everyone using the word nazi is per definition leftist (which indicates that you are a right-wing extremist) or that you are an absolute idiot and should be ignored.
So what is it?
--
People not realizing there are many more axes in politics than the simple "left"-"right" one scares me. Democracy requires thinking people understanding politics in order to function properly.
There are liberal left and there are liberal right, there are authoritarian left just as there are authoritarian right, there are religious leftism just as there are religious rightism.
By doing that, you are hollowing out the term Nazi. In your vision, it just means 'racist'. It doesn't.
--- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---
What the scum who wrote the article (Yari Rosenberg) did was...Yari decided what was and was not OK for Jews & Muslims to say on Twitter, and then harassed anyone who stepped out of line.
This kind of fascist ideology has no place in a free society.
Yari Rosenberg is a disgusting piece of twitterer-harassing trash.
Too bad the left forgot about their roots, then. The Nazis were left wing as well.
"So those chaps making Nazi saultes, chanting "blood and soil", wearing swastikas and so on---what would you call them exactly?"
They're called Neo-nazi's.
--- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---
Bullshit. The NSDAP doesn't exist anymore, so what? Do you define national socialist as being only the members of the NSDAP?
That's not the definition the Deutsches Reich used, it was not the definition countries external to the 3rd reich used.
I'm not taking a side, but just pointing out. According to Merriam-Webster... nazi would be a valid term to use in these cases. You picked a poor example.
I wouldn't call them Nazis because they aren't a member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party.
So your argument is Since the persons are not formally members of the nazi party, they are not nazis. That is as ridiculous as claiming Since World War II was the last formally declared war, there have been no wars since then.
When you are sure of something, you probably are wrong (search for "Unskilled and Unaware of It").
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Nazi
2 b : one who is likened to a German Nazi :
So calling someone a nazi by definition makes them a nazi.
Nice.
False equivalence. This is Slashdot, not Twitter.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
or what
The fact that they allow the narrative to do the thinking for them, most likely.
Saying something that you don't like or don't agree with doesn't make someone a nazi.
You are the problem, not them.
No, I do not. But, I'm not interested in leading this into argumentum ad nauseam over outliers.
Regardless, it would be disingenuous to claim there aren't more accurate, more up to date and better terminology there to describe these people.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
I wouldn't call them Nazis because they aren't a member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party.
If they look like a Nazi, quack like a Nazi, make heavy use of Nazy symbology and espouse the same values, it's reasonablt to call them Nazis.
If you want to engage in a game of mindless semantics where only you control the definitions, feel free, but don't expect anyone else to think you're being sensible.
you seem to think being called out for bad grammar, bad terminology etc. is some how unacceptable
Ah, I see you've entered the "just make shit up" part of the debate. That didn't take you very long I must say.
Where do you think you are? This isn't Twitter
On Twitter, you might have a chance of trying your arguments out with someone who has more than an armchair perspective, you know, someone who actually fought the Nazis.
I see you simply ignored that.
By the way, quoting the names of inapplicable logical fallacies, especially those you don't understand does not make an argument, and it does not make you sound clever.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Fun fact: there is no middle ground between "Twitter is allowed to have a TOS" and "there oughta be a law".
We should all follow the god of Islam and start covering our women and throwing gays from building then right?
So Progressive!
So, just like the far right Christians? Different identities, same attitudes.
BTW moderates of any creed tend to be okay, but not universally so
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
If you want to engage in a game of mindless semantics where only you control the definitions, feel free, but don't expect anyone else to think you're being sensible.
That sounds awfully anti-semantic to me!
If they look like a Nazi, quack like a Nazi, make heavy use of Nazy symbology and espouse the same values, it's reasonablt to call them Nazis.
lolk share some beliefs on race, but values? You are pretty crazy, none of these new ``nazis'' are rejecting materialism, bourgeois intellectualism and they are not expressing values in discipline or self-sacrifice. You do not even know what a Nazi is, get a brain!
They are pathetic scum and you are validating them, making you scum as well.
Just because people do not believe in the Enlightenment values and are actively trying to undermine civilization and democracy doesn't mean they should be rounded up. Last time I checked, inciting treason isn't a crime by itself.
I am advocating censureship not censorship.
So in effect, anyone you brutally murder was a nazi coward. That's certainly an appealing model for society isn't it.
Maybe Twitter should learn from Slashdot's 20 years of experience with trolls and moderation.
There are still racist trolls posting on every article, but we don't have to see them at all thanks to the system.
America prides itself on being the great melting pot but 40 years of multi-culturalism has revealed that large ethnic immigration, like Europe is experiencing now, harms society. In the USA, where (legal) immigration is strictly legislated, the harm may be minimal but it is persistent: A lack of vision for political leadership. Every country, sorry, every other country is divided into pro-rich, pro-commons (Ie. greenies), pro-worker (socialists) factions. Together they have a similar expectation on what their government can and can't legislate.
The USA is different: The socialist factions are censored by the government and the greenies are ignored by politicians and voters alike. This just leaves a very narrow spectrum of pro-small-business and pro-mega-corp. Even there, voters can't agree on what powers and policies the government should have. Worse, the states, which should be doing most of the decision-making themselves, are also undecided on what powers government should have and refuse to organize into a collective power.
The USA has been broken for a long time: It's causing so many problems now that everybody knows it's broken. But the biggest reason for its failure, the voters lacking a shared vision, is the very reason it won't be fixed. Instead voters will be herded from party A to party B and back again, ensuring that politicians don't have to listen and don't have to co-operate with voters, bureaucrats or other politicians.
Pretty sure 'The Enlightenment' never addressed identity politics, and considering the time period I doubt they'd come to any conclusions you'd like anyway.
Last time I checked, inciting treason isn't a crime by itself.
I'm going to assume this is another case of "These words mean whatever I want them to mean", since it makes fuck-all sense otherwise.
I am advocating censureship not censorship.
Indeed. Simply banning someone is much less satisfying than zealously stalking and harassing them for their wrongthink. Lynch mobs aren't merely a valid form of justice, they're also fun!
Of course we've had it before, duh. In modern political speech, "liberal" means "left-wing", "pro-life" means "pro-war and pro-death-penalty", "conservative" means "pro-corporate-welfare", and "politically correct" means "pro-censorship".
Calling Richard Spencer a nazi is less misleading than most terminology misuses.
If it looks like a Nazi, Smells like a Nazi, holds the same views as a Nazi, and salutes like a Nazi, it is acceptable to call it a Nazi, and then punch it in it's stupid, ignorant, bigoted, Nazi, face.
False equivalence.
This is not an argument. This is your opinion presented as if it were a fact. You are by all means entitled to have your opinions, but please do not try to present them as facts. It comes across to me as a disguised attempt to appal to authority, with you being the authority.
This is Slashdot, not Twitter.
You have posted this or similar to several of your posts, and it comes across as an attempt to silence the other person and to try to be an authority ("such and such are the rules"). If you want to influence people, telling them to shut up or otherwise address them in a derogatory way is usually never a good idea.
But, to address the very quote (which I interpret to mean "While on twitter you might get away by saying whatever rambling comes out of your head, here on slashdot you have to provide valid arguments for what you write").
You have claimed that the arguments are not equivalent without backing that up with any arguments. So in a eat your own dog food opportunity, please explain exactly what you think the difference(s) between claiming Since the persons are not formally members of the nazi party, they are not nazis and Since World War II was the last formally declared war, there have been no wars since then is (are).
When you are sure of something, you probably are wrong (search for "Unskilled and Unaware of It").
The Nazis were left wing as well.
No, they weren't. They defined themselves as a "third position" distinct from both right and left, adopting a few elements from one side, a few from the other, and adding stuff of their own to the mix. This is why the right calls them left, the left calls them right, the center considers them extremists in one direction or the other, and also why all three are wrong. The center is correct only insofar as nazis are extremists, but they're extremists in a direction that doesn't fit within the left-right spectrum.
Also, internally the Nazi Party had several subgroups, including a left wing, a right wing, a monarchist wing etc. At some point the right wing of the party decided the left wing was being too troublesome and killed them all. Afterwards the economic policies of the party, that were somewhat "balanced" from the perspective of the left-right axis of the time, turned markedly to the right. But contrary to what the current left wants to believe on the matter, that still didn't turn Nazism itself into a right wing movement.
Nazism was and remained first and foremost nazi-wing. Any attempt at reducing that wing so as to fit the left-right spectrum, be it into the left side of the spectrum, as conservatives and libertarians want to do, be it into the right side of the spectrum, as liberals and socialists want to do, is and will continue being incorrect and doomed to failure.
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
Ah, a member of the "everybody I disagree with is a nazi" crowd. It must be terrible for you living among so many nazis.
Well, I'd suggest not believing in any magic pixies in the sky at all as a more viable alternative.
hitler did nothing wrong
America prides itself on being the great melting pot but 40 years of multi-culturalism has revealed that large ethnic immigration, like Europe is experiencing now, harms society.
I've seen studies showing that multiculturalism is indeed the problem, but with a caveat: "multiculturalism" understood as the specific policy the left began defending since a few decades of preserving cultures as they are by creating almost absolute barriers for meaningful cultural exchange, whose most recent example is the whole nonsense about "cultural appropriation". What this multiculturalism does is to create ghettos with invisible walls, and that in turn results in a permanente divide that only grow resentment and tribal identities.
Before those policies were enacted, the US and other countries did pretty well with immigration. Immigrants understood they were moving into another culture that expected them to fit, and tried their best to fit while preserving distinctive elements of their origin cultures, not the whole package. These elements in turn spread a little into the culture they moved in, resulting in a blend that for all practical purposes worked pretty well. It was a conservative mode of thinking that worked, and worked well.
The current model is the opposite of that, and its failures are showing more and more, and in even more dramatic ways.
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
Hang on, I might have missed something here. Who brought up lynch mobs? It sure as fuck wasn't me.
"To censure" is to express stern disapproval. I sternly disapprove of nazis and express this stern disapproval. Apparently this is controversial these days.
Merriam-Webster can suck it. Oxford gets it better.
Nazi
NOUN plural nazis
1) historical A member of the National Socialist German Workers' Party.
1.1) derogatory A person with extreme racist or authoritarian views.
1.2) A person who seeks to impose their views on others in a very autocratic or inflexible way.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Correct. All racists are not Nazis, but damn near all Nazis are racists.
It's possible to be a racist and not believe in nationalism and autocratic rule.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
>So those chaps making Nazi saultes, chanting "blood and soil", wearing swastikas and so on---what would you call them exactly?
That would be neo-nazism, which is very distinct in nearly all its aspects from the nazism of Hitler's Germany. For example, no nazi had a tribal uniform consisting of a shaven head, a pilot jacket, jackboots, and camo pants. None of them chanted "blood and soil". None of them wore swastikas -- that's a reference to Hitler's Germany, a sad romanticization of Hitler who (as we all know) lost the war and committed suicide.
Each of its aspects (white supremacy, racism, authoritarianism, totalitarianism, violence for violence's sake, dismantling of the separation of powers, opposition to liberal democracy -- I could go on for quite a while longer!) is subject to scathing critique, which people such as yourself will fastidiously disregard because it applies to you in all but symbology. Worse, your obsessive focus on neo-nazi symbols conceals fascism as it appears in e.g. various nations' secret police, private security companies, and the internal security departments of any corporation large enough to have one. One would be readily excused for alleging that you're doing the fascists' work, distracting the rest of us from undermining the fascist strongholds.
Opposition to fascism means opposition to "those chaps", and also to you. Because you, in a nutshell, suck.
Buht muh SAFE SPACE!
I love how progressives always want to bleat about diversity and tolerance until it comes to religion, and then the intolerance and hate comes out.
I'm not particularly religious myself, though I do respect other's rights to believe in what they will. Your complete and utter disdain for other people's beliefs and culture make you out to be a hypocritical asshat. Apparently racism is bad, but denigrating all religion and people who practice it is perfectly okay?
Many of the "white nationalists" who marched in Charlotte were wearing swastikas, carrying Nazi flags, and shouting anti-Jewish sayings. The other white nationalists there didn't seem to mind the presence of these folks. As a friendly tip: If you are waving a Nazi flag and shouting anti-Jewish sayings while protesting, chances are you're a Nazi. If the people you're protesting with are carrying a Nazi flag and you don't see anything wrong with that, chances are you're a Nazi.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
So all of a sudden it's "acceptable" to be violent towards someone because they have different views than you, but only if it's a certain subset of different views.
Yes, autocratic white supremecists are bad. No, that is not a free pass for committing assault. Grow up.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Can we get /. to put alexgieg's comment as a sticky note on every political topic from here on out?
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
Homophobia and death threats. What makes you any better than them?
I agree and disassociate from the author of the title, despite being on the left myself. As alluded on the good article linked, I suspect the author philosophically sits either on the right, or in the realm of anarchist.
Semantics wouldn't save me or my family if these people got into power and rounded us up because we're Jewish*. It wouldn't be any comfort to me to say "Sure these people stand for everything the Nazis stood for but since they haven't joined any 'National Socialist German Workers' Party' they aren't technically Nazis." These groups worship Nazis and want to pick up where Hitler left off. I've met one in person and he told me, to my face knowing that I was Jewish, that the only thing Hitler did wrong was not finishing the Jewish people off. These people are Nazis.
* And don't say they wouldn't do that. It might not happen right away, but these people would love to do this if they got enough political power. As for the "it wouldn't happen in America" argument that some trot out, I'd respond with exhibit A: The Japanese Internment Camps during WW2.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
Yes, Stalin and Mao strongly agree with your sentiment.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
To be fair, they are both "the problem."
Intolerance of race / sex / nationality / religion / etc, is a problem.
Intolerance of different thought and freedom of expression is also a problem, albeit a different problem.
I could do without either, but I don't espouse violence as being an answer.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Look it up yourself.
So all of a sudden it's "acceptable" to be violent towards someone because they have different views than you, but only if it's a certain subset of different views.
Views have nothing to do with it. What legitimizes violence against then is their continued active attempts to kill and/or subjugate everyone who isn't like them, starting with those who don't fit their list of approved ethnicities and religions, but quickly branching out into others. They have had decades to prove that they will do this at every opportunity, so every attempt by them to gain power should be taken as an active and deliberate attempt to commit the violence they espouse.
Yes, autocratic white supremecists are bad. No, that is not a free pass for committing assault. Grow up.
Nazi-punching is legitimate self-defense.
1.2) A person who seeks to impose their views on others in a very autocratic or inflexible way.
Interesting, seems like everyone is a Nazi then.
Anything can be found funny, from a certain point of view.
People have a choice to believe in adult fairy tales. They don't have a choice in their race, you disengenous turd.
So, I'm strongly against killing people who aren't an active threat, and I find the AC's use of anti-gay slurs offensive and unacceptable, but I'm still willing to say that the AC is probably a lot better than Nazis. If group A is advocating killing groups B,C,D,E,F,G, and H, and group A is to a large extent defined by that desire (whether or not they are actively engaged in it), then someone who wants to preemptively kill group A is probably wrong if group A isn't anywhere near its goals, but the person who wants to kill those in group A is not nearly as bad a person and has a pretty reasonable motivation.
To extend this just slightly, the primary problems with groups like Antifa is a) they go after people who are not active threats and b) that they have what amounts to very overactive Nazi detection. But that doesn't by and large make them anywhere comparable to Nazis.
seconded!
An internal system operation returned the error "The operation completed successfully.".
More fitting to tatoo a star on their arm...
You know, it's funny. No one to the left of Orrin Hatch would mistake me for a leftist. This has gotten me into no end of political tangles and dust-ups in the places I go. And yet, I've never been called a Nazi. Not even in jest, except in direct response to me pointing out that nobody ever calls me a Nazi, and I think we can all agree that doesn't count.
How can this be, I wonder? If you and I -rightists both- are so similar, how is it possible that you get called a Nazi all the time, yet I never do, even as a joke? I suspect it comes down to one critical difference between us: you are a Nazi, and I am not. Godwin's Law aside, most people really are savvy enough to tell the difference.
All nazis are, by definition, white nationalists, and all white nationalists are, by definition, racists. So you can't be a nazi without being a racist (whoda thunk!?).
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Well considering anyone who isn't a nazi is called a leftist, that is a good definition.
Nah, just everyone in the Slashdot comment section.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
I would do my best to save you and your family, if the world really turned to hell; I wouldn't be one of the regular population who just sat there hiding and complying.
And it shouldn't, however my view is very different.
I believe in accurately identifying who and what your enemy and problems are. If you aren't able to accurately identify what it is, you'll solve the wrong problem. This is why trolling on Twitter is becoming more creative and used against certain groups intended to protect others. When you can get the New York Times account suspended for reporting the news because all these new controls are addressing the wrong issues because they have the wrong idea of what the problem is, you're only going to give people who didn't have a weapon, a weapon now and they may not be the people who are on your side.
We have disgusting political groups that are misrepresenting the enemy of the public being particular archetypes (in recent years it's been gamers, disenfranchised youth), marking them as the enemy of issues that they many have no involvement with. People believe these groups and then call-out-culture, brings their followers to call-out these people where-ever they see it, the issue is that when you call-out someone over something that isn't quite true, you can't defend it. In turn, people the people calling out and then getting smashed in an argument, this leads people down to forming their own groups against this harassment, the political groups however will distort the purpose and meaning of these groups to be... What they were originally talking about to begin with, only reigniting the debate even further. In the meantime, this starts bringing more objectionable concepts to becoming normalized and... Well, you see what's going on.
The media on the other hand are happy as anything, normalizing all these hate messages and I made a pathetic attempt to stop it here in the comments on Slashdot through nerd rage. But, I see that isn't working. I'm not really sure what the pro-active solution is to reducing this.
I don't care what race/nation you're from, I'll defend your right to life from any sort of supremacist group.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
At the irony that whenever we want to demean, silence and, apparently nowadays, justify violence against a group of people we disagree with, we label them as "Nazis".
That's just how much progress we've made in 80 years, from a group of people who, when they wanted to demean, silence and justify violence and genocide against people that disagreed with them, they labelled them "Abschaum" and various other unsavoury terms.
That's Progressâ for you!
A century ago Democrats tried to preserve slavery, now they're trying to preserve wage slaves. They are keeping the border as porous as possible while opposing any meaningful attempt to crack down on sleezy employers that underpay undocumented immigrants.
> Many of the "white nationalists"
Not "many", just ONE.
If you had any real clue about this stuff you might know what a real Nazi rally looked like. You might even have been to the places where they held such rallies.
Charlottesville and what happened there looked nothing like that stuff.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
The Nazi social and economic platform was left-wing - strong central government, high taxes on businesses, restrictions on capital, extremely strong worker protections, government controlled banking, strong social safety net (cradle to grave), mandatory free public education, powerful unions...
They were also massively racist and nationalist. All the policies described above only applied to Good White Germans (tm).
The Left says the Nazis were right-wing because Nationalism has been defined as 'Right-Wing' in Europe.
The Right says the Nazis were left-wing because socialism has been defined as 'Left-Wing' in America.
According to their chosen definitions, both sides are correct.
Pretty sure 'The Enlightenment' never addressed identity politics, [...]
Hoo boy it sure did. The early Enlightenment philosophers had a lot to say about Catholics, for example.
But you raise a good point. In the 18th century, Anton Wilhelm Amo could teach philosophy at a German university, but only because white nationalism hadn't been invented yet.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
> Reasonable people use nazi as a generic insult too but not for "anyone who is not a leftist",
Reasonable liberals are far less common than genuine Nazis these days.
Hell, a reasonable liberal is more likely to get called a "Nazi" by the screeching retards.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
1.2) A person who seeks to impose their views on others in a very autocratic or inflexible way.
You mean like laws forcing the use of gender pronouns (or made up words) that do not match visual cues? https://www1.nyc.gov/site/cchr...
Seems like we have "Nazis" on both sides of the fence...
> So, just like the far right Christians? Different identities, same attitudes.
I actually fear modern liberals MORE than fundie Xians when it comes to my sexual habits. At least fundies can distinguish between the sinner and the sin. Xian fundies seem to have far less real power. So me being a heretic from their point of view is far less dangerous for me.
That's not even getting into the current state of Islam.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
2. It's not all of a sudden, there is considerable precedent for shooting Nazis. Both my grandfathers, all of my great uncles and all of their friends used machine guns, rifles, bombs and hawker hurricanes on Nazis. A punch in the face is basically a gentle wakeup call.
3. if your worldview requires the subjugation of others, based on your assumed superiority, and you are scared of a middle aged white guy punching you in the face, your ideology is provably wrong.
> What legitimizes violence against then is their continued active attempts to kill and/or subjugate everyone who isn't like them,
There are no such attempts.
The only people being violent are liberals.
You've reduced Nazis to "people who say mean things" and they were never just that. They were an unarmed gang that beat people up from the very beginning.
When someone actually "does" something rather than "say" something, then you have a cause of action. If you start with the violence before that, then you're the one acting like a Nazi.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
You seem intelligent, take a look for yourself and then post an update. Search for the religion of peace and do some reading.
Tablet's Yair Rosenberg accused Wikipedia of trying to hide information when they were proposing to merge it into different articles. He was so wrong that the Wikipedia-haters at GamerGateHQ called him out on it in their anti-Wikipedia thread. It makes me wonder what else he's done.
The threat of organized racists is virtually non-existent. It is a bogeyman that the left and the liberal media need to prop up to justify itself. It's pure 1984 style nonsense.
The large number of people that declare that it's OK to engage in political violence just because of a label they choose to abuse is a FAR FAR FAR bigger problem.
It's a fundemental subversion of our founding values. It's even contrary to the work of our main civil liberties safeguard (namely the ACLU).
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Pretty much describes the modern day Left, eh?
Universities, Democrats, Media.
so they actually made a trollbot to troll "suspected" people...
What makes you any better then what you pretend to fight ?????
shenannigans
Well, the term "feminazi" does exist. It's not however the meaning that the bot authors seemed to imply.
There are no such attempts.
Not only have there been numerous attempts, they aren't even shy about them. You do not have to wait for your assailant's fist to actually land before you defend yourself.
The only people being violent are liberals.
That's wobnderful news. You should go tell that to Heather Heyer's family; I'm sure they'll be quite relieved.
>>Charlottesville and what happened there looked nothing like that stuff.
So they were not representative of the good and responsible white supremacists, you mean?
A favorite show of millions of millennials.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
Of course the National-Socialist German Workers' Party never called themselves Nazis, the word was coined by their enemies.
No, his argument is "we have a word for these people that distinguishes them from actual Nazis". They're called Neo-nazis.
ENGLISH, MOTHERFUCKER! DO YOU SPEAK IT?
Are they more or less representative of the whole group than your average BLM protestor who marches along side those chanting "what do we want? Dead cops! When do we want them? Now!" And "pigs in a blanket, fry em like bacon"
The original post we're responding to is literally is a call to form a lynch mob....
Bullshit. There's a multitude of specific causes for which people can rally while they do not necessarily agree with each other on all other issues. I will rally for free speech in a crowd where there are Nazis, Sharia advocates, Commies and/or whoever else, wearing their respective symbolics, and that doesn't make me one of them. The rhetoric you're using here is often employed in an attempt to smear political opponents with a Nazi label.
Of course I wouldn't expect any better from the NYTimes, but come on, really, this is a new low.
I am the last one to defend anyone perpitrating any kind of racism, including anti-semitism, or anyone hijacking online IDs, but dear NYTimes reader, does it really not even slightly bother you when the author jumps to labelling everyone/anyone conducting these crimes against him or any jews as automatically being a Nazi?
Because you are a bot!!
in the same way they supported the Russians.
where are these far right christians doing this? they make talk a lot of smack but i dont really see right wing christian violence, at least in america. The worst we got is the WBC who stand around with signs and sue people. hardly violent
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
I disagree that it is dodging, it is simply pointing out that the group who is violently anti nazi (the communists) have actually done more harm than the nazis over the past 100 years and killed more people. It is assumed that no one likes the nazis except actual nazis
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
if they seriously are continuing to do those things, they fail miserably because they havent accomplished anything since 1945. maybe you can get over your boogieman
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
One slight correction...
While there are only a few liberals left, the rest have either gone off the deep end as illiberal progressives, or are now automatically lumped in with the right... They tend not to be violent.
Or perhaps "MitlÃufer".
1.1 and 1.2 cover a lot of left leaning people I know now.
Say _anything_ against black supremacy nowadays? You're a nazi. Mention that maybe discriminating against any group of people based on race(including white)? Nazi. Are you a white male? Nazi.
1.2) A person who seeks to impose their views on others in a very autocratic or inflexible way.
Interesting, seems like everyone is a Nazi then.
Well, everyone who posts stuff on internet forums.
Except me, of course...
Pretty much describes the modern day Left, eh?
Universities, Democrats, Media.
Oh, please!
While there are some people that would identify as "Left" that are pretty ridiculous and petty; they CERTAINLY don't have a stranglehold on conceit and narrowmindedness.
They're called Neo-nazi's.
Neo Nazi's what?
And they're quite distinct from Grammar Nazis (no apostrophe).
SJW n. One who posts facts.
You mean we do not need to clearly determine who is what and just act on a group in a group punishments sort of way? Wait have we not had that before?
Remember: whenever the Left start throwing "Nazi" around, they're trying to distract you from how bad Communism was. Sure, Hitler was remarkably evil, killing 6-10 million of his own people (whether he thought of them that way or not). Stalin killed 60 million. Mao killed 100 million. Hitler was 2nd tier.
Communism is objectively (measured by the number of citizens of its own nation an ideology killed) the most evil ideology in mankind's history. Yet Twitter cares not how often an account praises Communism and wished for it's return.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
America prides itself on being the great melting pot but 40 years of multi-culturalism has revealed that large ethnic immigration, like Europe is experiencing now, harms society.
Native Americans are all screaming, "wtf took you so long to figure that out".
That said, why is the current status quo better than the one that came before, or the one that comes after? Disruptions are disruptive. Stagnating results in stagnation. Times change, get with the program, and try to be nice to everyone while you're here.
All racists are not Nazis, but damn near all Nazis are racists.
Sentence doesn't quite technically mean what you intend... you mean to say, "Not all racists are Nazis".
[No Nazi] chanted "blood and soil". None of them wore swastikas
You appear to be claiming that no nazi in Hitler's Germany chanted "blood and soil" or wore swastikas?
You do realise that almost all the official insignas of the Nazi Party had swastikas on them? That means a lot of actual, real Nazis from the actual real Nazi Party wore swastikas.
"Blood and soil" was a Nazi party slogan and an important part of its philosophy.
which people such as yourself will fastidiously disregard because it applies to you in all but symbology.
Ah I see you too have entered the "make shit up" part of the argument. It did not take you long, either.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
What would I call them? I call them an improvement over leftists, whatever else you can say about them.
The only people being violent are liberals.
Liar.
I expect you to "prove" your point by posting dubious links bus studiously ignoring any event where Neo-Nazis are being violent.
What I don't understand is why you're such a desperate apologist for Nazis. It's almost like you are disgusted with the democracy you live in and want to see it destroyed.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
...that half of these,âLetâ(TM)s just kill all the naziâ(TM)sâ posts might be coming from the same sort of people that the bot purports to expose? Hateful white nationalists trying to muddy the waters between them and people who are against them? Just sayinâ(TM)
It's the far right Christians who keep the war on drugs going. Where I am, this is leading to a lot of deaths, deaths that would be preventable by simply making drugs legally available. This doesn't even mention all the people who have had their lives ruined in other ways by the war on freedom/drugs led by the religious right.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Sad!
Neo-Nazis are a different thing than Nazis. Nazis killed 6-10 million of their own people. Some of them are still alive. Neo-Nazis chant slogans and generally make asses of themselves in public, but they are (thankfully) missing half the Nazi ideology that made it popular with mainstream Germany.
If you mean "Nazi" as something beyond "person I disagree with", the distinction is important.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
The number of groups is meaningless if you don't also tell us the number of members in those groups.
You and windbourne hate China, thats a group of 2.
how many tens of thousands hate the new star wars movie?
If you really want to get technical, they're not called Vietnam and Korean "Police Actions" Neither is the The Gulf War, or the Wars Iraq/Afganistan.
Call it what it is. A "disaffected" person carrying a Swastika, Quoting Hilter or otherwise espousing Nazi Ideas ... Is a goddamn Nazi. My Grandfathers did not fight in WWII to let these sorts of assholes try to claim legitimacy in the US.
In fact after speaking to many WWII Vets, they fought the Whermacht, the SS were simply shot on sight. They would be ashamed of our generations tolerance for this sort of Crap.
neo nazis now support israel???? thats news to me.....
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
"Homophobia and death threats. What makes you any better than them?"
I don't deny the Holocaust, hate minorities, women or believe in a genetically superior white race. Oh, and I don't commit acts of terrorism. Nice talk. I hope Putin gives you a nice raise.
i am against the war on drugs as well (if you couldnt guess by my name) but to equate that with physical violence in the name of religion is just silly
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
it seems to me that the really interesting thing here is
reputation
in an ideal world you WOULD have a persistent reputation that could be publicly reviewed for past statements and postions.
if someone is a nazi supporter that should be evident via reputation.
the implementation of a bot to do so may fall short of a real AI based reputation montoring system but its a start
in the right direction - statements should have consequences (no trolling without repercussions)
I hope for your sake you are simply talking big on the internet... because if you act on what you are saying...
You are looking at assault charges at best, and getting you or your friend shot at worst.
Like many supportive of Antifa, you try to portray your actions as defensive or against evil... however under American law, self-defense goes out the window when there is no immediate threat. Do you fear they might act via the ballot box? That doesn't justify assault. Or do you think that at some point in the future they are going to go door to door, rounding up people they don't like and force them out of the country at gunpoint? Still doesn't justify assault when you are advocating for it.
Given the propensity and acceptance of masked violence on the left (Antifa being the latest incarnation), there is going to come a time when a pack of masked rioters in black are swinging clubs or rocks at someone on the ground who they view as an enemy, and there will be an armed person (likely on the other side, but possibly just a bystander) will see the immediate and potentially life threatening assault going on, draw their weapon and fire upon the attackers... possibly killing some.
Like it or not, what I describe above would likely lead to the shooter not even being charged, because acting in self-defense of ones self or others where there is a credible and/or immediate threat is generally justified. Beating someone who you think has bad ideas and may do something you disagree with in the future isn't.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
Only if you trust Fox News to objectively evaluate on your behalf the people it's sworn to destroy.
Wait... Obama was a far right Christian?
You'd think given his eagerness to use a pen and a phone when he couldn't get his addenda passed legislatively, he would have done more to reduce the number of DEA raids of medical marijuana dispensaries in states where it was legal.
https://www.huffingtonpost.com...
http://www.sacbee.com/news/sta...
https://www.huffingtonpost.com...
https://www.politico.com/story...
http://www.sfgate.com/politics...
Take off your hate goggles for a bit and look around a bit more.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
As a both a liberal and a sane person, I agree that the existence of shit like you posted is counterproductive and silly. Just wanted to let people know that this is not a liberal cause, it's a wanker cause.
Well around here it is the religious who keep pushing the war on drugs and get really irate when anything is suggested to decrease the number of deaths, often basically saying they deserve it for not being Christian.
But staying away from the war on drugs, there are the residential schools here in Canada where the last one was shut down less then 20 years back. All run by the churches, responsible for the deaths of thousands of native children, even more torture and sex abuse, all in the name of beating Christian values into the heathens.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
I'd check your source on the "millennials say they're at risk every day" thing. Sounds very much like someone trying to convince you that a handful of idiots represent a much larger group because then you can feel good about hating the larger group.
When I call a guy marching with a torch screaming about white power with a swastika tramp stamp a nazi (remember that? When people started calling these guys Nazis?), I mean skinheads and people that think blacks and Jews should be treated like shit in various ways.
But when you hear about it from the people who benefit from your hatred of liberals, they tell you I mean anyone who thinks wealth trickles down.
Consider your sources. Please.
The bizarre thing is that we now have people adopting some Nazi policies with associated terminology (kick out immigrants, "blood and soil", etc.) and people adopting other Nazi policies with associated terminology (discriminate against high-achieving races, "social justice", etc.) ... and the two groups are politically opposed to one another!
If the people you're protesting with are carrying communist flags and you don't see anything wrong with that, chances are you're a Commie?
persuade the racists to shut the fuck up (or if they are serious about white nationalism, fuck off back to Europe)
You're implying here that racists are predominantly white nationalists. I'll agree that white nationalists are racist ... but in my experience, racists are almost exclusively of the affirmative-action type, supporting racial discrimination against groups that have been particularly successful in modern society (i.e. Asians, whites, Jews). White nationalists are a responsible for only a small fraction of modern racism, and are - I suspect - primarily a reaction to the rest of it.
The only justification for violence is in defense of self or others. That's not just morals, that's actual law. Either way, violence is absolutely not justified for anything that you're trying to peddle here. Don't you see how that sets an incredibly dangerous precedent? Also, who made you the magistrate who can hand down instant punishment for what you perceive to be crimes of thought?
I sure hope you are just a big tough guy on the Internet, as most people that talk like you are. Otherwise you could find yourself getting one hell of a wake up call as to how the real world works when you're in an orange suit being asked how you plead to felony assault. And that's the best case - you could just as easily find yourself in a hospital bed, or a pine box.
By the way you are essentially trying to justify pre-emptive violence in the same vein as the justification for the invasion of Iraq. "Those people over there are allegedly doing things and saying things we don't like without actually harming us in any real way, so we better go get violent about it before they actually do any of it."
I'm guessing that you didn't exactly agree with Bush on that bullshit, so it's very hypocritical of you to try the same basic flawed logic now under the guise of "my grandpappy stormed the beach at Normandy to kill actual Nazis, so I'm going to be tough on the Internet against probably-not-Nazis."
Also, I'm pretty sure that any reasonable person would not like to be punched in the face regardless of their views, as the last time I checked a free society allows people to self-determine and think what they like without the fucking threat of violence. You know who did attempt to control thought and speech through violence though? Actual Nazis. So I guess you have to abandon your moral high ground as you are espousing that which you claim to be preventing.
Your grandfathers, great uncles, and all of their friends would be deeply ashamed that they fought for your freedom and a better world, and you are using it like this.
Thank you for purposefully admitting that you are retarded. It makes it that much easier for us to laugh at your childish beliefs.
I think it would be massively entertaining to watch the tiny fraction of white Americans who actually have the balls to try and start a race war get mercilessly slaughtered by the rest of us. Imagine their faces when they're going into battle against other white people, who they then have to claim are Jews to keep their cognitive dissonance at bay.
I also believe this would be the permanent solution to practically all of America's problems. We could become a first world country again once we got rid of White Sharia law the Christian extremists are trying to pass.
What makes you think they are deflecting from communism - which no longer exists in any real sense, even as an aspirational manner, outside of North Korea - rather than critiquing fascism - which is a movement that has never gone away, and poses a real threat to liberal democracies across the globe? I don't see anyone with any sort of influence or power calling for anything more socialist than universal healthcare and progressive taxation. I do see a large number of people with influence and in power advocating fascist means and ends.
If I'm at a free-speech rally and nazi's with flags, and arm-bands show up I wouldn't be rallying with them and I suspect the vast majority of the people wouldn't either and would probably react to them.
I don't have common cause with Nazi's and I wouldn't accept and protest with them for anything. There beliefs are the very definition of evil.
And now right wingers openly march with swastikas and Nazi slogans. So thank you for proving that Nazis are currently right wingers.
The title should be Twitter shuts down censor bot. I am not sure why sayin* the bot is guided for a reporter or against âoeNazisâ is supposed to make it ok.
"Canadian" is a nationality, not an ideology. "Nazi" is an ideology - all you have to do to be one is to believe in the same ideas.
If you want to engage in a game of mindless semantics where only you control the definitions, feel free, but don't expect anyone else to think you're being sensible.
Just a note here, being sensible is being led by your emotions instead of reasons. Emphasis on sense, how one feels over what one thinks. Sensibility was the foundation of work that eventually led to the German romantic period of nationalist pride and hero-worship. Sensibility was the intellectual school that sowed the ground for Nazis and fascists to rise.
That was, in German obviously, the Hitler Youth's slogan. A neo-nazi colleague of mine had the German words tattoo'd on his arms, hence me looking it up. Also what is "None of them wore swastikas -- that's a reference to Hitler's Germany, a sad romanticization of Hitler who (as we all know) lost the war and committed suicide." supposed to mean? Is Hitler not a Nazi all of a sudden?
Also, yeah, they wore jackboots. They're kind of famous for that actually. Camo pants on Nazis are a recent thing, though Nazis were really fond of militaristic trappings on their clothing, so I'm not surprised it's there, it's more or less an update. I'm not sure where the pilot jacket thing comes from. Shaved heads isn't universal amongst Nazis, now or then, but it dates back to the skinhead movement of which an off-shoot intermingled with Neo-Nazis for some reason.
This must the "I'm not a nazi, you're a nazi, so there, I win" school of thought. What about SM's comments make you think he's in favor of "white supremacy, racism, authoritarianism, totalitarianism, violence for violence's sake, dismantling of the separation of powers, opposition to liberal democracy"? I've never seen him advocate any of that. Could it be that you made it up to make yourself feel better? I'm pretty certain that's it.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
How about this....every year we brutally murder the 1% of the population most right-wing nutjob and the 1% of the population most left-wing nutjob. It will encourage everyone to try and be more open-minded and at least understand what the other side is saying.
And 2% of the population every year will help deal with over-croweding. We just have to tell the left-wing nutjobs it's good for the environment and the right-wing nutjobs it will reduce people from draining welfare and free health care.
Freedom of speech etc. Nazis are scumbags but they have 1st Amendment rights unless they incite imminent violence. Imaginary violence they wish could happen but don't mention doesn't count.
because by and large racism is a tool of the aristocracy used to divide the working class into manageable groups. Re: Southern Strategy, Indian Caste System, China and Mongolia, etc, etc.
So it's possible, but it's generally difficult to have racism without autocracy. The two go hand in hand.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
You didn't check hard enough. Inciting others to treason IS a crime, it's called "sedition", or "seditious conspiracy", or a more minor version of the crime which is called "disorderly conduct". You are right in that you don't deserve to be rounded up due to that - that would be a play straight out of the books YOU are reading, which probably feature large type and small words. They DO deserve prosecution and a fair trial, however, since they indeed ARE engaging in criminal behavior.
sedition
sdiSH()n/
noun
noun: sedition; plural noun: seditions
conduct or speech inciting people to rebel against the authority of a state or monarch.
synonyms: rabble-rousing, incitement to rebel, subversion, troublemaking, provocation.
In 1798, President John Adams signed into law the Alien and Sedition Acts, the fourth of which, the Sedition Act or "An Act for the Punishment of Certain Crimes against the United States" set out punishments of up to two years of imprisonment.
In the Espionage Act of 1917, Section 3 made it a federal crime, punishable by up to 20 years of imprisonment and a fine of up to $10,000, to willfully spread false news of the American army and navy with an intent to disrupt their operations, to foment mutiny in their ranks, or to obstruct recruiting.
In 1940, the Alien Registration Act, or "Smith Act", was passed, which made it a federal crime to advocate or to teach the desirability of overthrowing the United States Government, or to be a member of any organization which does the same. This Act was invoked in three major cases, one of which against the Socialist Worker's Party in Minneapolis in 1941, resulting in 23 convictions, and again in what became known as the Great Sedition Trial of 1944 in which a number of pro-Nazi figures were indicted but released when the prosecution ended in a mistrial. Although unused since at least 1961, the "Smith Act" remains a Federal law.
-- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
Bernie is on the record supporting murderous bastards (Castro), he took his fucking wife to Lenin's tomb for their honeymoon. Supported the most murderous philosophy of the 20th century.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
I don't know any policies around cultural appropriation. The wikipedia article on the subject points out that most people who bring it up do so in the context of either a) the culture being disrespected or b) copywrited material being used without permission. Can you site some of these studies? The ones I've seen have mostly been either from right wing think tanks or the occasional nutter from a local community college writing some clap trap for a thesis. Yeah, the left has it's nut cases too, but we don't let them write policy.
Also, you're completely misunderstanding the problem with immigration. It's refugees. People who didn't immigrate here, they were forced here on threat of death. It's hard for these people to assimilate because, really, they just want to go _home_. But they can't. Ever. I'm not sure what do to with them, to be fair, besides wait for their children to grow up and out of their parents old culture. Either that or let them be slaughtered in their home countries.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I'm a trans person who has never had the pleasure of being beaten nigh to death in a mcdonalds for using the 'wrong' bathroom. I do not think the difference between me and other trans people is that they deserve it.
I am still waiting for you to explain the difference.
When you are sure of something, you probably are wrong (search for "Unskilled and Unaware of It").
LARPers.
Fake Right.
I am Jack's writable stack pointer.
Uhhh what? Are you retarded?
Black Lives Matter, just as an example, has an official position that Capitalism is racist, and that Communism is the ultimate solution for inequality. Like they don't even dress it up... They literally are calling for a communist revolution...
BLM doesn't have any official positions, it's a movement (people who identify BLM are those concerned with apparently racist police killings) not an organization. What the literal fuck are you on about?
That's why you are the type of fascist we're talking about, dipshit.
If you were at a free speech rally, you would be protesting it, because you are an oppressive shitbag.
I'm Jewish. Real Nazis literally killed at least 12 of my direct family members in Poland.
I would rather stand beside some asshole waving a swastika flag who was peacefully exercising his right to express himself, more than I would EVER stand beside you.
You are an arrogant, egotistical, intolerant, and likely violent piece by shit.
A well intentioned spam bot is still a spam bot.
The bigger problem is that all these social media platforms offer reasonably compelling assumptions of identity. On twitter, the default assumption of many users is that people are who they say they are, with exceptions for famous people. Twitter's solution there is their dumb blue check mark system, which is useless because they will strip people of their "verified" status if they don't go along with twitter's political line.
A system that uses real names and does some small amount of verification if pressed (for instance, Facebook) kind of works. A system that is entirely about fake names with only a few nonymous users (for instance, slashdot) works even better. Twitter has tried to have this cake and eat it too, and the alt-right is not the only ones making use of this sort of shit- it's just those are the only ones that the NYT reported wanted to build a bot to harass. The problem is at the core of twitter.
Well, I certainly concur with your last part. ;-)
--- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---
It's not even a maybe... HuffPo has published articles calling "classical" liberals Nazis and Nazi sympathizers.
No... Nazi is literally a political party...
how to you get "I killed them so they must be a Nazi" from "kill the Nazis"?
and who modded this backwards logic up?
horror vacui
The funniest part is that the only people I've ever seen say "leftists consider anyone not leftist to be a nazi" have been far right extremists. They also started the rumors about a civil war on Nov 4th from their fake antifa accounts. Hilariously enough, the only people stupid enough to fall into their traps are themselves. It's a riot watching the right eat itself blindly.
Iâ(TM)d love to take this Twitterbot to the next level. Any suggestion?
I'd call them a lot of things, but "Nazi" isn't one of them.
You see, Nazis got shit done. They took and held real political power throughout their rise. They also engaged in coordinated campaigns of in-person terror and harassment against the people they hated. They reshaped a nation into a war machine and set it into motion. These are the things that made them different from the garden-variety assholes that have always lurked among humanity. It's why the word "Nazi" means anything to you at all.
The dumbfucks in Charlottesville staged a protest. When they were done they went home and shitposted on Twitter. Believe it or not, neither one of those things accomplishes anything, other than making neo-Nazis and white nationalists look even more like losers than they already do. I suppose you could say that they hurt people's feelings and contributed to the left's paranoia, and there was that one lady who died of a heart attack after not getting hit by a car, but that doesn't even amount to a Beer Hall Putsch.
In summation, they aren't Nazis because "Nazi" implies that they're anything more than edgy LARPers.
Look for any footage of the evergreen college students protesting, "fuck white people and fuck the police!"
I didn't see every Trump voter acting like Neo-Nazis, so it's really a false narrative to say anyone right of Stalin is a Nazi.
Unless your goal is to dehumanize your enemy, in that case, bravo! A great Nazi tactic for your playbook.
So those chaps making Nazi saultes, chanting "blood and soil", wearing swastikas and so on---what would you call them exactly?
If you want a good argument about it, I suggest you try arguing with this chap:
I've known both veterans of the Wehrmacht and little old Jewish Ladies with numbers tattooed on their forearms, those asshats posers you are talking about are Neo-Nazis,
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
Semantics wouldn't, the indisputable fact that these people are powerless idiots who make a lot of noise because they have zero ability to act on their empty rhetoric would.
Seriously. They're not winning any elections while they cleave to a political ideology whose catastrophic failure is virtually universally known. Their only option is to take power by force, and if they try, there are only two possible outcomes: One, the undercover law enforcement officers that make up half of their number arrest the other half as terrorists or two, the undercovers stay home while the "actual Nazis" (read: doughy LARPers) get beaten to death by riot police.
You should have told him to his face, knowing that he was a Nazi, that the only thing the US Government did wrong was not finishing the Nazis off. According to your logic that would make you Mossad.
The difference is, cops are killing unarmed blacks people at an alarming rate.
Jews aren't killing white supremacist at an alarming rate. They aren't even killing them at all.
So we got one side who has some made up outrage(the white supremacists) vs a side that has a legitimate beef.
Hilarious that Antifa and the modern hard left actually loves Hitler when they hear his material:
https://tomwoods.com/leftists-accidentally-cheer-hitler-speeches/
The difference between an unorganized mob with rifles and a modern army is not best measured in the number of guns, or even their size, but in its ability to move lots of big war machines around, and to man these machines with people who are trained, obedient, well-fed, and with effective intelligence. If individualists could resist collective force we wouldn't need governments nor armies, but in case you need that proved to you more explicitly, take a look at how the militia let the Capitol burn in 1814, and in the modern era, note the complete lack of any successful Nazi resistance. And no, it's not like it wasn't tried.
It's not that you're not fascists, it's that you're not particularly good fascists. The thing that made Nazism really work was that German society was predominantly militaristic, and after the Great War, pretty much every male had military experience. Not only that, but at least in the initial phases of the war, companies were often drawn entirely from a single town or village. After the war, military companies became social clubs, but the organizational structure was mostly preserved. That this has not happened in America is a credit to our former servicemembers.
For better or worse, armed insurrections almost always fail (and no, the American Revolution is not a counterexample). If the State comes in against your team, expect to lose the vast majority of combats and all campaigns.
> The Nazis were left wing as well.
Horseshit. They used a left leaning name, but were fascist through and through. This technique is still in use today - in British Columbia for example the provincial Liberal party is in reality a right wing corporatist party. And people still get fooled "But, duh, it says 'Liberal' in their name!!!"
>So all of a sudden it's "acceptable" to be violent towards someone because they have different views than you, but only if it's a certain subset of different views.
Deeds, not words. Last time there was a Nazi rally, who got killed? Hint - it wasn't a Nazi, it was the Nazi doing the killing.
BLM doesn't have any official positions, it's a movement (people who identify BLM are those concerned with apparently racist police killings) not an organization. What the literal fuck are you on about?
You'd better go have their 'official' FB page and website taken down then, or STFU.
On second thought, just STFU snowflake.
Did the idiot mouth-breathers marching in Charlotte ruin your tiki-torch fetish, Princess?
That is the definition of evil.
No it's not. You're lying.
I do recognize the fact that blacks, for example, simply aren't as intelligent as whites as measured by IQ, and are more prone to violence and aggression.
If you're going to punch me in the face for recognizing such, I'll happily empty a magazine of .45 ACP into your face in self-defense.
https://blog.jim.com/culture/racism-is-an-anti-concept/
TL,DR: When I use the N-word, it's "racist", but when a black man slashes the face of a white girl for no legitimate reason while she's walking down the street, it's not racist; in fact, it's anti-racist.
Because that's how murdering works! Also known as "dead men don't tell no tales".
Just ask the Ukranian government about their landslide victory.
What about...
You're a nazi all right.
Well, surprise, surprise!
So, what are your sexual habits? If they're despicable, well, the fundies seem a lot more likely to excuse them than leftists are. If not, what's your problem? What do you think we want to do?
Does it actually hurt you when people of the same sex marry? Do you bleed when a transsexual gets gender conversion therapy? Is it an imposition to not harass women? What we want to do is give everyone the opportunities that cisgender heterosexuals have.
The current state of Islam is somewhere else. Muslims aren't a significant problem in the US. They aren't a major threat anywhere outside the Middle East.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
You know what Stalin and Mao liked? Breathing! I'm sure that you'll take the hint.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
You know why they did more harm? They lasted longer. We had to take Nazi Germany and militarist Japan down fast and hard. We could live with the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China around. My best estimates are that the Nazis and Japanese were murdering people at roughly twice the rate of the USSR and PRC. I'm unlikely to be off by a factor of two.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
I think you're painting too rosy a picture of how things used to be.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
There are people nowadays who consider themselves Nazis (ironic, since members of the NSDAP didn't), revere Hitler (referred to as "Him" and "He" in a neo-Nazi mailing list I was on for some time), and follow Nazi ideology. I consider them to be Nazis.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
'I find calling them nazis for short to be acceptable. The fact that they exist today inherently means that they're neo-nazis'
I agree with you.
'There are vanishingly few differences...'
I disagree. Few neo-nazis will be angry about the humiliation of the Versailles Treaty, or demanding an overthrow of the Weimar Republic. Few will be concerned with the threat from 'Jew-Bolsheviks'. Outside central Europe I doubt many neo-nazis are advocating unification of the German-speaking peoples in a single nation, nor military conquest of Lebensraum for this nation (although I confess I haven't looked for recent polling data on these questions).
Hitler was first tier. That's why we had to take him down before he could do as much damage as the second tier could do. The only other country to match Hitler was Japan, which we also had to take down. We could live with the second-tier atrocities.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
National Socialism was right-wing after the left-wing elements were eliminated in the mid-30s. At that point, it defined its enemies by race and nationality, not class. Its economy was capitalist, and for the most part there were fewer controls on the economy than Britain or the US used during WWII. In these and other ways, it had the worst excesses of the right wing, much like Communism in the real world had the worst excesses of the left wing.
Would someone care to tell me what they thing the left-wing policies of the NSDAP were? When I've asked before, I've been told that authoritarianism was left-wing, which is stupid; authoritarianism is largely orthogonal to left-right.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
The Nazi social and economic platform was left-wing
The idea that "right" equals laissez faire capitalism, less government, libertarianism or whatever is a very recent construct and has no historical worth. From your list, the only clear left-wing policy would be "strong social safety net". All the others were present on both sides.
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
Ask me how I know you're white, or at least not black.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
And now right wingers openly march with swastikas and Nazi slogans.
No. Now nazis openly march with swastikas and Nazi slogans. Here's a topic you can study so as to better understand how this works.
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
You are a brainless baby boomer. You have no concept of war or conflict. You think wars can be avoided by cowardice just like you avoid every real challenge in your life. You are a coward and you will be eaten alive no matter which side wins.
My karma was manually wiped by site staff https://slashdot.org/~slshdtisctrldbysjws 18 mod up, 10 mod down = bad karma
Yeah, because Islam is a religion of peace. And Brutus is an honorable man.
Here's the problem: You have no idea what a Nazi is.
You've been trained on war propaganda and narratives crafted to uphold it after the facts. You look at history the same way as you look at your movie and television shows. You don't realize it as part of your life.
The problem is that Nazis are much more dangerous than you can possibly imagine. They can live on next to nothing in the way of material and they can endure endless abuse without changing their minds. They have firm principles proved by fire.
You should care a lot more about what a Nazi really is. Because the kind of authority that you support will send YOU against the Nazis first.
You would be eaten alive with no resistance. You have absolutely no fortitude in any arena. Better hope the cracks in your society don't keep widening.
My karma was manually wiped by site staff https://slashdot.org/~slshdtisctrldbysjws 18 mod up, 10 mod down = bad karma
I think you're painting too rosy a picture of how things used to be.
For immigrants they were quite bad, and still are, but my comment wasn't about that, it was about cultural effects at large.
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
Would someone care to tell me what they thing the left-wing policies of the NSDAP were?
Basically strong worker protections and a strong social safety net (both for whites only), plus direct governmental oversight of the industry. A good comparison point would be, let's say, the policies advocated in the UK by the Fabian Society in the early 1900's. Which, if you check the link, included eugenics.
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
I'm wrong, you win.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
Here's the problem: You have no idea what a Nazi is.
Oh it's YOU. Given you have your own, private definition of "Marxist" which doesn't match anyone else's I would bet that you have your own private definition of "Naiz" too. Except I wouldn't get good odds on that bet.
The problem is that Nazis are much more dangerous than you can possibly imagine.
No, because I have a much better imagination than you.
They can live on next to nothing in the way of material and they can endure endless abuse without changing their minds.
I think you're confusing "Nazis" with "terminators".
They have firm principles proved by fire.
No they don't: they have a random mishmash of stuff a large amount of which involves blaming other people for their problems.
"proved by fire" lol what unmitigated BS!
Because the kind of authority that you support will send YOU against the Nazis first.
given how divorced from reality you are, I doubt you have any idea what kind of authority I support.
You would be eaten alive with no resistance. You have absolutely no fortitude in any arena. Better hope the cracks in your society don't keep widening.
It almost sounds like you're looking forward to a Nazi uprising. You're almost slavering for it.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
If you mean "Nazi" as something beyond "person I disagree with", the distinction is important.
Given I'm not a straw man, why on earth would you think I've ever meant that. You've never seen me say that because I have never said it. This is just you inventing a position for someone you regard as one of teh libruhlz, so you can attack more easily.
I'm happy calling someone who subscribes to Nazi ideology and who is heavily into Nazi symbolism as a Nazi, whether Neo- or otherwise.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
There is this new thing called Math, you should learn it.
So, now members of Black lives matter who disrupt traffic and events trying to impose their views are now Nazis?
Per definition 1.2.....
I disagree that it is dodging, it is simply pointing out that the group who
Yeah that's called dodging. In a nutshell, what some non-Nazi group has done has zero bearing on whether or not Nazis are bad. Bring up some other group mid discussion is an attempt to divert the discussion.
What I want to know is why.
It is assumed that no one likes the nazis except actual nazis
Have you actually read the comments on this thread? It's stiff with Nazi apologists.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Maybe you just hang with a shitty crowd.
Complete fucking waste of time. It's dead and you killed it.
I was judging by 2 a. My opinion of Trump isn't high, but I wasn't referring to the mention of Trump. I was referring to the use of Merriam-Webster in the example in relation to the counter argument against the use of nazi. White nationalist, white supremacist, and racist all fit 2 a. However, racist is a broader term and only a subset of racists would qualify for the moniker.
The statistics at the FBI doesnt support that. Thats been debunked over and over both by whites and blacks who care to actually do the research.
Redefining words is all the rage these days.
Words are defined by how they are used, as any linguist can tell you, and in the decades since the NSDAP was disbanded, the word "nazi" has always been used to refer to neo-nazi political parties and ideologies.
If modal jazz is jazz, neo-nazi is nazi.
FWIW, I don't think Trump is a nazi. Here's merely someone who knows on some level that alienating nazis would be bad for business. But Jeff Schoep is absolutely a nazi.
The confusion, I think is that not all white supremacists and white nationalists are nazis, though as someone pointed out, some are so close that it makes no practical difference.
I would say that Neo-Confederates are not nazis, for example. They often hang around with nazis, but they are not nazis.
I've never seen or met one my entire life. Where do these mythical Nazis exist?
What's it like to be a brainless slave that that works for no pay and likes doing it?
My karma was manually wiped by site staff https://slashdot.org/~slshdtisctrldbysjws 18 mod up, 10 mod down = bad karma
Most black people are killed by other black people.
You need to get out more. Apparently you are a shut-in who reads very selective sources of news.
An EMP renders your machines of war totally and utterly ineffective.
The ADL is an extremist anti-white genocidal propaganda hate machine. Their stated goals are to eliminate the white christian majority of America so the Jews can feel safe. They spread lies and are trying to ethnically cleanse western civilization with enormous mass migration, and they are very successful at what they're doing. Child-bearing age of Sweden is now 47% foreigners, and now the Rape capitol, along with Switzerland. And the rest of Europe. They deny that any Muslims commit any terrorism but insist that only White people are extremely violent dangerous terrorists even though every week there's another Muslim attack, and constant black on white violence. They create fake terrorist acts against Jews in order to pass more hate crime laws targeting white people. They intentionally harass and stalk people and have also killed people too. They need to be shut down. Look to South Africa if you want to see the fate of white people. They're being slaughtered. That's exactly what they want. And naturally, white people are powerless because it's illegal for white people to organize or have any pride or cultures because we've all been brainwashed that white pride and culture and everything white is Neo-Nazi.
Then you are quite easy to manipulate into not rallying.
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
If it looks like a Nazi, Smells like a Nazi, holds the same views as a Nazi, and salutes like a Nazi, it is acceptable to call it a Nazi, and then punch it in it's stupid, ignorant, bigoted, Nazi, face.
Ok. Do you know how did the Twitter bot find out the smell and salute of the operators of those accounts which it calls are "Nazis" ?
Or did the designers of the Twitter bot go and find their smell and salute ? I don't see any evidence in the article linked in this /. story. Do you have that missing evidence ?
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
If they look like a Nazi, quack like a Nazi, make heavy use of Nazy symbology and espouse the same values, it's reasonablt to call them Nazis.
If you don't mind going back to the actual topic :
1. So the looks of those Twitter account operators were verified by the "bot" to be similar to those of Nazis ?
2. Their quacks ? Hopefully they had Nazi quacks archived somewhere for future reference ?
3. Symbology : this is interesting, because allegedly they adopted Jewish symbology - the tiny cap, pictures of Rabbis, labels like chief Rabbi of such and such place etc.
Do you have evidence that the bot or its operators had any evidence about actual Naziness of the operators of Sock Puppet Accounts (TM) ?
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
As for "Smell", well, that's just plain hyperbole, an exaggeration for comic effect. Because it amuses me to say that Nazis smell.
I'm not sure what Nazis smell like to be honest; failure, disappointment, self loathing, urine, Axe body spray and the musty odor and their mothers basements. Possibly with a hint of Meth. That's my hypothesis anyway.
Why don't we test this?
We can crowdsource this experiment: anyone here who is currently a Nazi, ask at least three random strangers (not other Nazis, obviously, if my hypothesis is correct and they share a similar scent, then yours will not be noticeable to them) to smell you, and then report your findings ;)
The designers evaluated known Nazi users based on specific criteria, symbology, stated beliefs etc
Humanly ? Any process used to eliminate bias ?
and then designed a bot to identify duplicate accounts held by those who fulfilled those criteria.
This has always intrigued me. How do bots accomplish this ? They also need to make sure that these "sock-puppet" accounts copy pictures / symbology from the attacked community e.g. Jews - because this is one of the main accusations in TFA about them. TFA should have explained much more, or I missed something.
Because it amuses me to say that Nazis smell.
Well, you can say this for all humans, both ways. I.e. all humans emanate odour, and most detect odour through their noses. What is really amusing is when you can feel the smell in your eyes :)
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
I have a much data as you do, the article.
"This has always intrigued me. How do bots accomplish this ? They also need to make sure that these "sock-puppet" accounts copy pictures / symbology from the attacked community e.g. Jews - because this is one of the main accusations in TFA about them. TFA should have explained much more, or I missed something."
You have missed something. The point is that the sock puppet accounts are initially more innocuous, and express less strong views (e.g. the actual main account holder may be a full on seig heil, swastika wearing rabid Nazi, but the sock puppet account will present as a more reasonable, strong Trump supporter, and attempt to steer people towards certain views, or attack opponents of Nazis). The point is that they do not cross pollinate pictures or symbols. they hide what they are, and attempt to draw people in to connecting with far right accounts, sharing far right memes, bosting the profile of far right accounts etc. It's a technique pioneered by ultra right scumbags Britain First in the UK, who encouraged sock puppets to share innocuous memes about supporting the troops, or ending animal cruelty. Every share boosted the rankings of the Britain First account and exposed more people to their more hideous ideas, and gave the appearance of a strong base, when in reality, their base was very small, but utilizing the power of the vast majority of unwitting people, who all agreed that supporting the troops was good, and animal abuse was bad.
I'm not sure how the bots identified them, shared emails possibly.
"What is really amusing is when you can feel the smell in your eyes"
I'd refer you to my previous comments regarding hyperbole...but you go on, keep cherry picking. In the meantime: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
You don't even know what racism is. You have much less idea what a Nazi is.
What is racism? Why is it bad?
What is a Nazi? Why is it bad?
"because everyone is equal because some one said it's true and I'm poor and it makes me feel better about having to submit so humiliatingly to this society"
In reality there are differences between races based in genetics.
https://www1.udel.edu/educ/got...
In reality people are happier in homogeneous societies.
http://archive.boston.com/news...
https://www.sciencedaily.com/r...
In reality, up until literally one microsecond ago on our evolutionary timeline as hominids, everyone always lived in homogeneous communities.
How do you justify the change?
You can't, because you're so brainwashed you won't let yourself ask an honest question or even have an honest thought, you are stressed and anxious and all you care about is fitting in.
This makes you subhuman, not your race. This is what real Nazis think.
My karma was manually wiped by site staff https://slashdot.org/~slshdtisctrldbysjws 18 mod up, 10 mod down = bad karma
What's it like to be a brainless slave that that works for no pay and likes doing it?
Well, that's new!
Setp 1: Rant about evil boogeymen uh SWJs in username
Step 2: Post astonishingly ill-informed rant on a discussion forum
Step 3: respond to comments with agressively off topic non sequiteurs
Heres a clue: if you're utterly unable to address a single one of my comments then it means the position you are arguing for has no foundation whatsoever. A rational person would reconsider their position at that point.
Out of interest, what job do you think I do as a mindless slave for no pay? I'm curious!
SJW n. One who posts facts.
I'm not sure how the bots identified them, shared emails possibly.
They take so much care to not cross pollinate, and then go ahead and use shared emails which are trivial to create en masse so that they don't have to share emails. Interesting.
You have missed something. The point is ....... unwitting people, who all agreed that supporting the troops was good, and animal abuse was bad.
I didn't ask how it is done, I asked how it is detected, that too by bots. First the article and now you, giving exactly the information that is useless, but just tantalizingly close to the real thing. I think you're trying to "steer people towards certain views", but it is not working for me. Try on sheep.
If the article had any evidence of having evidence of the "sock-puppet accounts" belonging to Nazis, I guess they could have provided. Such long winded justification that you are having to manufacture is weak evidence of the article being bullshit. Along with there being no evidence of it not being bullshit that I have been pointing out. I'm still not concluding it is bullshit, but leaning that way, provisionally.
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
and "I think you're trying to "steer people towards certain views", but it is not working for me." Tu Quoque attacks? Really?
On a side note: "giving exactly the information that is useless", "Try on sheep", "it is not working for me". Are you deliberately missing the point of what I am saying, or is English not your first language and just a translation thing?
Question :
and then designed a bot to identify duplicate accounts held by those who fulfilled those criteria.
This has always intrigued me. How do bots accomplish this ?
Your long answer : not about how bots identify duplicate accounts but how duplicate accounts are created, what is posted in them, what every such data share from sock puppets accounts achieves etc.
The only time you went anywhere close to answering the question was a vague guess about shared emails.
I have specifically pointed out that I have no more information about their methodology than is presented in the article
I will try to never again accuse you of having any information.
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
Actually, your questions was: They also need to make sure that these "sock-puppet" accounts copy pictures / symbology from the attacked community e.g. Jews - because this is one of the main accusations in TFA about them. TFA should have explained much more, or I missed something.
Spot the question mark.
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
Well, given the phrasing "or I missed something" the question mark is implied, and given your non-standard English structuring, was reasonably assumed to be absent in error. And given that my answer clearly referenced this question, and answered this question, you would have to actively be trying to misunderstand to think that I was answering a question on a methodology I would only have access to if I were involved in the creation of the bot.
my answer clearly referenced this question, and answered this question
The question, if that part was a question, was posed to the TFA. Anyway, how did you answer it ? You describe a completely different strategy from the one described in TFA - where there is a seeming impersonation of e.g. a jew, rabbi etc.
only have access to if I were involved in the creation of the bot
Which is why "or I missed something" is prefixed with disappointment about the TFA.
Anyway, you admit your ignorance and I couldn't agree more.
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
Planned Parenthood was founded as a mechanism to establish and facilitate eugenics.
Bless.
Few people are going to waste the time unsnarling your irony to figure out your point. Fewer yet will agree with you. It's disappointing that you thought you were being clever.
You're confusing me with yourself, it is you who tried to insult me. Though reality, on the other hand, has insulted you more, as you were trying to make statements about subjects you didn't know much about. I'm sorry but I played no part in it.
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
I'm unaware of the strong worker protections. I know the Nazis didn't mind disrupting white workers' lives. Direct governmental oversight of industry doesn't seem to match with what I've read of German industry before about 1944, and even then the Germans were doing less to regulate industry than the US or UK were. For example, the US War Production Board assigned certain aircraft manufacturers to produce certain types of aircraft under license, and I haven't found anything similar in Germany.
The reason I didn't bring up eugenics is that that, like the anti-vaccine movement, was from both right and left sources. That's not a distinguishing factor.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
I'm unaware of the strong worker protections. I know the Nazis didn't mind disrupting white workers' lives.
It's ambiguous for sure, but while some things became clearly worse, others became better, and the ones that did became better had a lot of approval. The main one seems to have been the almost certainty of having and keeping a job. This text seems to me to offer a balanced view. From our perspective definitely not a good situation by any means. From 1930's German workers' perspective though, not really bad.
In addition, there were initiatives to help families as long as they submitted to the Nazi program. My grandaunt used to tell me how her mother, for example, was repeatedly offered more food for the family and several other welfare benefits if she just accepted having a fourth child (she had 3), but she didn't want to hear any of that and remained with only three (she also did her best to keep her children from becoming nazis, so there's that too). It was all very weird, but in some way it worked and white Germans were, if not happy, at lest not unhappy.
Direct governmental oversight of industry doesn't seem to match with what I've read of German industry before about 1944
That's also ambiguous. Industrialists were frequently members of the Nazi party and very close to the Nazi leadership, so they received tons of benefits. On the other hand, they also were expected to do everything for the benefit of the Nazi program, and where they weren't doing it the Nazi government simply went in and nationalized the thing. So while formally there might not have been explicit rules and stuff for most of it, in practice there was. The Wikipedia article has more details on these movements, although not as detailed and with concrete examples I'd like to have.
Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
We get it you're a paid shill with bot-level intelligence
My karma was manually wiped by site staff https://slashdot.org/~slshdtisctrldbysjws 18 mod up, 10 mod down = bad karma
Definition 1 is the real definition of Nazi. 1.1 and 1.2 sound like hipster grade school non-sense and actually define how the term is misused. 1.2 pretty much sums up the modern Left's (worldwide) though police - should we call them Nazi's too?
Anyone who uses Twitter is a Nazi Douchebag.
If Nazis bring civil war in the US then all of those Nazi scum will be killed promptly.
While I can't say what the poster is thinking (and neither can you, obviously), I think there is a significant difference between nazi and right-winger. A nazi is making a real estate claim, that people they prefer have a prior claim of some kind on land (that they choose, of course). If German capital-N Nazis had just wanted to run Germany, and hadn't considered people of different ethnicities to be outsiders in their own homes, they might be running Germany today, or at least be just another conservative party.
American nazis want to decide who gets to live where. Maybe, being such nice people, they'll ask others to leave. If the blacks and Jews say, no sir, we went to stay here, well, then the ensuing violence is on their heads, right?
weev, lulz
Let's say you take a black person. They grow up, go to school, have a job, income. Almost like they lived in a bubble. Then you sit them down and have them watch Roots. Now they hate white people. Stop watching all the millions of Holocaust videos and accept the fact that you're a hysterical Jew and a radical.
Every white nation is being attacked by the Jewish agenda to spread multiculturalism and control all the media to shut down white people and ethnically cleanse them because you're all a bunch of fascist racist pigs justifying your own genocidal campaign while also creating an Nationalist Jew Ethno state in Israel and exterminating the Palestinians and sterilizing Ethiopians to keep your race pure. You are exactly like Hitler.
People hate when they're trying to be exterminated. Assimilate and shut the fuck up and stop with all the forced ethnic mixing and asking for billions of dollars in perpetual victim welfare from every country. Grow the fuck up already. The Holocaust is over. If you people would stop your devious meddling and anti-white agenda, people wouldn't care about you guys. You can't control what people think. The more you try, the more you're a fascist pig.
I don't think those people are real. Are you on psych meds?
The numbers you quote are retardedly false. Stop believing all that 1980s Cold War propaganda.
Those are some nice, shiny jack boots you've got there broham.
Every year over a million Americas die early due to poverty. Deep poverty in the American heartland is the direct result of decades-long hyperexploitative capitalist public policy.
The hardest-impacted group is working class white people, who are actively discriminated against by all levels of government. The American capitalist oligarchy is disproportionately Jewish. So....
Yes, you can make the argument that Jewish oligarchs are conducting an on-going holocaust against the white working class. Many people do in fact make that argument.
Personally I don't think it's the best argument. The oligarchs who are killing my people do so because they are filthy capitalist dogs, not because they are Jews. But I bet that's not your counter argument. I bet your first approach is to laugh at the suffering of the masses and to deny vigorously that there's anything wrong at all.
You are an idiot -- the Internet
Putin? Are you insane? What the fuck does Putin have to do with my comment? For the avoidance of doubt I am a leftist but the modern left like the original poster make me puke and I want nothing to do with what is effectively a hate movement not much better than those they oppose.
We get it you're a paid shill
Paid by whom?
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Let me get this straight... You're calling ME a Nazi? Fuck you, dumb shit. I am liberal in my general views on things but conservative on some others. If you think me pointing out the definition of "sedition" makes me a Nazi then you are a truly an oxygen-thieving waste of skin. Go find someone else to bully, SJW fucktard, you're too stupid to see when someone else is basically on your side of things, and would rather engage in mindless argument since my post "sounded" authoritarian. What a useless troll you are, "bro-ham". God I hate that meathead term. Get a life.
-- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
You know nothing about him, but yet you infer (likely incorrectly) things about age and experience. And, instead of actually making any form of informed argument actually disagreeing with anything said, you instead chose ad hominem attack and irrelevant nonsense.
From this analysis, I can logically deduce that you have little concept of rational thought or logical introspection. You think that arguments can be won by personal insult, and get flustered by the very idea that someone would disagree with you, and doesn't succumb to groupthink. It really burns you up that they have a cogent point that you can't logically disagree with, so out comes the baseless insults.
I have a feeling you've been taking this particular "strategy" for quite some time, probably with little success; yet you continue to try. Here's a tip: actually refuting the GP statement with any form of relevant information or thoughts is a good start.
You know that the baby boomers were the ones drafted to the war in Vietnam, right? And they lived their young adult and middle-age lives through the Cold War? How would you possibly imagine that a member of that generation would have "no concept of war or conflict"? Who's "brainless" now?
Here's my attempt at inference based upon nothing but your ridiculous comment,your sky-high UID, and your whiny screed of a signature where you want to blame everyone but yourself: you are a brain-dead millennial who never actually learned argumentative writing or how to convince anyone of your point of view. When presented with an opposing point of view, your first instinct is to lash out with insults and threats of violence because you can safely hide behind your keyboard knowing that the big bad boogeyman on the Internet probably won't waste their time actually trying to find you. You will go on pretending that you matter and that the drivel you post, such as the post I'm replying to, is completely irrelevant in every way; but you'll think you are making a difference and correcting those that dare to challenge the groupthink you subscribe to.
So carry on, little snowflake. You are different and special, just like all the other different and special snowflakes out there. Everyone gets a trophy, no matter how stupid, ill-informed, and weak-witted they (you) are. In the real world, those of us that actually possess critical thinking skills will just move on, and shake our heads when we hear of your poor decisions made through life, expecting to have to bail your ass out due to making poor decisions with no backup plans, and no thought of anyone but yourself or anything beyond the next 6 months.
See, anyone of any generation can write ad hominem attacks and bad suppositions; though I imagine mine are a little closer to the mark than yours.
"1.2) A person who seeks to impose their views on others in a very autocratic or inflexible way."
Ok. So the communists are ... Nazis?
So those people calling for Nazis to be killed... are Nazis.
So they should start by killing themselves!
"Semantics wouldn't save me or my family if these people got into power and rounded us up because we're Jewish*."
You do realise the Soviets did the same thing? So by your logic, if someone has any communist affiliation, we should treat them the same as if they were Stalin's bovver boys, and have them all shot?
Fair enough!
" It wouldn't be any comfort to me to say "Sure these people stand for everything the Nazis stood for but since they haven't joined any 'National Socialist German Workers' Party' they aren't technically Nazis."
Have they broken the law? If so, report them. If not, ignore them. They don't matter. The Nazis broke the law regularly, and relied on the popular, centuries long traditions of antisemitism that don't exist now. There's no general civil disorder, despite the efforts of communists to create one.
"These groups worship Nazis"
So if a group 'worships' Mao, Lenin, Stalin or Che, we should treat them as an enemy? Ok, I'll fire up the helicopters!
" I've met one in person and he told me, to my face knowing that I was Jewish, that the only thing Hitler did wrong was not finishing the Jewish people off. "
Many Muslims say that.
"These people are Nazis."
No, they are antisemitic. People have been saying the jews should be killed off for thousands of years. Or are you arguing that Nazis existed BEFORE the Nazi Party?
" these people would love to do this if they got enough political power"
Yes, and communists would see just as many dead. Do we kill people for looking a bit commie too?
". As for the "it wouldn't happen in America" argument that some trot out, I'd respond with exhibit A: The Japanese Internment Camps during WW2."
Yes, I remember how they were pushing the Japanese into gas ovens - oh wait. That never happened. Your comparison is ridiculous. Read a bloody book.
What do you call it when you flood 8 million Muslims into Germany and across Europe very rapidly? What do you call this forced "Diversity" with Muslims who have 8 wives and twelve kids while Europeans birth rates are negative. When you have 47% of the child bearing age of Sweden is non-Swedes? When 60% of London is Muslim Arabs. When 60% of the educations system is teaching that white people are special and privileged and need to be stopped. When German magazines are warning of the Evil "Right Wing" people. They are blond and blue eyed, traditional, with braided hair. When commercials are airing in Europe telling them their country no longer belongs to them, and they must accept their new culture by wearing Muslim clothing so they don't get raped. When rape victims are being censored and silenced as hate criminals for telling the truth. When "Hate Crime" laws are created to imprison White people who complain against this overtly racist and bizarre invasion of their country. When white people are being slaughtered in South Africa and not allowed to have any jobs and the Jew media will not report it. Instead report the opposite and fake news propaganda.
I call it an overtly racist, ethnic cleansing campaign, pushed by radical Jews.
You don't have to slaughter white people in the streets. You can do it by proxy through policies and programs to marginalize whites, silence them, blacklist and ban their organizations, and colonize their homelands with enormous numbers of foreigners, and stalk and terrorize them, all under the guise of fighting 'Nazis.'
Nationalism is always Nazi, unless it's South Africa or China, or Mexico, or Israel, Especially Israel... Basically anywhere that's not White is okay for Nationalism or borders or Pride. Where white people are, it's all Nazis. Tear down those racist borders, you Nazis.
Speak for yourself. I disapprove of all forms of ethno-nationalism, even Israel's.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
I did query your first language, however that was not an insult, merely an attempt at clarification of a possible miscommunication, if it came across otherwise I apologize. In terms of insults, looking back, I insulted hypothetical Nazis. But the only way you could have been insulted by that, is if you self-identify as a Nazi. Which seems unlikely. But if you do. Well, then...yeah...I have no regrets.