Slashdot Mirror
Tech Groups Step Away From Gab Network After Shooting (ft.com)
Tech companies including PayPal and Stripe have suspended their services from Gab, a social network catering primarily to US conservatives that had been used by the man accused of killing 11 people in a Pittsburgh synagogue. From a report: The moves are likely to reopen the debate about the limits of free speech online and the potential for social networks to radicalise users. Gab was launched two years ago by tech entrepreneur Andrew Torba, who became frustrated with what he perceived as a bias against conservative views on California-based social networks such as Facebook and Twitter. His site soon attracted controversial rightwing figures, including Richard Spencer and Alex Jones, who had been suspended or banned from other social networks. Robert Bowers, who has been charged over the shooting at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh on Saturday, was among Gab's hundreds of thousands of users, the company confirmed on Saturday. Mr Bowers, whose profile on Gab featured images of guns and white supremacist iconography, made anti-Semitic posts and threats on the site just hours before the shooting. Since Saturday's shooting, Gab has been accused of not doing enough to prevent free expression from tipping over into hate speech on its site.
Online payments companies PayPal and Stripe, as well as hosting provider Joyent, all said they would stop Gab from using their services, [Editor's note: the link may be paywalled, alternative source] citing violations of their terms of services, which do not allow hate speech. Gab slammed the moves as "direct collusion between big tech giants" against it. This weekend is not the first time that Gab has been sharply criticised for the content it hosts.Last year, after a white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, Google removed Gab from Google Play, its mobile app store, claiming it violated its policy on hate speech.
Online payments companies PayPal and Stripe, as well as hosting provider Joyent, all said they would stop Gab from using their services, [Editor's note: the link may be paywalled, alternative source] citing violations of their terms of services, which do not allow hate speech. Gab slammed the moves as "direct collusion between big tech giants" against it. This weekend is not the first time that Gab has been sharply criticised for the content it hosts.Last year, after a white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, Google removed Gab from Google Play, its mobile app store, claiming it violated its policy on hate speech.
yeah social media made him do it, riiiight.
And it's Alex Jones supporters shooting up ghettos and committing half the violent crime in the nations. oh wait no, that's 2 demographic groups doing that and they vote Democrat.
sure, Alex Jone and co. are whackjobs but their followers are mostly harmless compared to savages I'm talking about....
Says it all.
https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/f...
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
Something happened as a god excuse to shutdown the remaining platforms before the election. The worst mistake made by the blog-o-sphere was consolidating into platforms that had a strong ideological bent and zero interest in free-speech.
These are all non-government corporations making these decisions. If Gab is free to conduct their service how they wish without government intervention, so is PayPal and Stripe. Simple as that.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
Let's be real here. This is all about Donald Trump's vile and hateful bigotry and conspiracy theories put into practice by his supporters.
Why are we even talking about social media? The President of the USA has encouraged his supporters to slaughter minorities and liberals and they are putting his words into action.
This isn't complicated. It's treason, it's terrorism. But it isn't complicated.
we would not have this ... thing we have now. 2019 is the year Trump will think of the Nazis' Hindenburg and will weap in front of the world, saying "oh the humanity". And the world will continue to laugh at him.
Torba can whine all he wants, but in the free market one is free to associate, or not associate, with who they want. No one says PayPal or Google have to deal with Gab.
As to Gab being a "conservative" social network, if conservatives believe saying Jews should die, that only white men should be in power, that women deserve to be raped, then sure, why not. Because that is what you'll find there.
This is almost as hilarious as white supremacist Robert Rundo fleeing the country he complains is being taken over by foreigners, and being arrested in Central America. If he didn't like people who weren't white, why would he try to hide in a country where his white skin would stand out?
On the other hand, banning such networks only drives them underground where no one can monitor them, creating an even bigger louder more resonant echo chamber.
If it is possible for such people to openly express their views, however disturbing they might be, while at the same time remove the perverse incentives for others who make money or leverage political power off them it would be better than banning them outright.
But it is very difficult to come up with such a solution where there are so many different players and enforcement is very difficult.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
You don't dare besmirch hot grits, especially down Natalie Portman's pants!
Abandon the radicals in their cesspool, let it fall apart due to their ineptitude.
From: https://medium.com/@getongab/gab-com-statement-on-the-tree-of-life-synagogue-shooting-a6c1de715b39
"Gab unequivocally disavows and condemns all acts of terrorism and violence. This has always been our policy."
They have had this policy for a while: https://medium.com/@getongab/gab-disavows-all-political-violence-cc4031b4899d
fuck off you god damn lying russian paid troll
All these damn trees are in the way!
All these virtue signalling assholes have lost the plot. WE dont need to be saved, we want free speech.
If you can't see the vile disgusting edges of speech, then you dont know where the middle is. When you hide, curtail, restrict, and lie about speech then the publics perception of it over time becomes warped and allows for true evil.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Let the other assholes say their stupid and vile stuff and we are big enough to point our fingers and laugh at them or even take them seriously and fix it ourselves.
And you the NPC- see this division is doing nothing for us as a nation.
The reason they haven't also banned Twitter is that Twitter has a policy of not allowing that kind of thing on its network. While it is far from perfect when it comes to implementing that policy, the issue with Gab is that it explicitly allows speech that Paypal does not.
"You are allowed to fail in applying your own PC-OK policy, but you cannot admit to not actually care whether your customers are PC or not." IOW, make like you uphold the politically correct social niceties and you're golden. Be honest, oh noez.
I expect the other argument will be that Paypal should be neutral and just act as a payment processor, which is somewhat compelling because it would be pretty bad if banks started booting customers who said things they didn't like.
Banks have been doing that even before the US law enforcement started a "follow the money"-campaign then forced through all sorts of "know your customer", "anti-money laundring", and other idiocy. It means that private financial companies now not only are expected to, but are forced to, play prosecution, judge, jury, and executioner on their own customers.
And the banks have willingly complied. Where they like to lobby for laws benefitting themselves, they have declined to do any such thing for their customers. And no, you-the-customer will not get your day in court. You'll notice soon enough, with your bank account gone, along with all your money. Because thieving is OK if the banks can say "the government made us do it". There's nary a bitcoin trader who hasn't had their money stolen and their bank accounts closed on account of "the bank no longer likes you". With multiple banks, for this isn't random incidents, this is quite deliberately orchestrated.
Besides, Pay"destroyers of violins"Pal aren't exactly noted for their neutrality or sophistication or anything. Booting gab now is simply opportunistic virtue signalling. Before this they'd been happy to take their fees just fine.
No, the issue is that Gab takes the platform / common carrier position while facebook and twitter exercise a degree of editorial control. This means that Gab is not liable for hosted content while facebook and twitter are.
Really?
No more PayPay or Stripe for computers or software!
Look, an anti-russite comment. Hatred is fine when it is endorsed by all these mainstream Democrats and crazy Brits, and benefits the weapons industries.
No, the issue is that Gab takes the platform / common carrier position while facebook and twitter exercise a degree of editorial control. This means that Gab is not liable for hosted content while facebook and twitter are.
That might be their official position but a little context is required.
Gab was started as a direct response to alt-right and white supremacist personalities getting kicked off of Twitter, it's the White Supremacist Twitter.
It doesn't really matter what their official policies are, they're a social networking company created to serve an extremely controversial community, they can't pretend extremists on their platform are some random unfortunate situation no one could have predicted.
I stole this Sig
Watch CNN and it is nothing but hate towards all things Republican.
Watch Fox and it is nothing but hate towards all things Democrat.
The only thing that differentiates them from Social Media is they have total control of the narrative.
His whole 6 followers on gab will most certainly miss his posts.
Except Twatter allows fairly unrestricted hate speech and calls for genocide on its service. You just have to hate the right people these days for it to be ok.
who got away with knowingly laundering money for drug cartels for years (decades?), got to keep all the profits and had little to no repercussions ($100 million dollar fine sounds like a lot unless you consider the profits they made from the illegal activity).
They way I look at it is like this: Police yourselves so the gov't doesn't have to. See here for a far more amusing take on it though
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
All hail to our glorious leader D. J. Trump. May he live forever and guide us to a land of whiteness, booze and firearms. MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA. Remember to vote for our leader, not voting for him is a crime.
We need more booze and arms. Vote for Republicans. MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA.
As in tomorrow, Monday at 9am US Eastern Time.
Now, the people running Gab have shown themselves to be idiots before, as in starting with the vanity .ai domain name which was easily pressured, and Joyent has long been social justice converged, one of the first purges of a developer was engineered by one of their people, the target just happening working for a competing company on the node.js project. But no one who believes in freedom of expression can believe this is a good thing.
Here comes the flood of free market conservatives mad at private companies for making private decisions. LOL.
This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
There is no service that has been created that cannot and has not been used for evil. But don't think for a moment that certain groups are not quick to recognize when one group uses the actions of the few to imply support similar desire by the whole.
It has taken some time, but many have managed to make even liberty look like it is only a tool used for oppression.... my my my how much work must have gone into convincing people that you cannot be allowed to manage yourself and must instead have your liberties managed for you. All in the name of keeping you safe.
Tyranny is usually though of as a problem brought on by Government agency... yet the control businesses have gained over our lives it has become clear that economically assaulting another group is more than enough to provide it's own form of tyranny.
Perhaps other businesses should start to refuse to do business with banks that do this as well... or do they too not fear reprisal? All it takes for a business to become suspect is by mere associate with something now... whether that associate is properly represented or not. We are only going to see more and more of this as we continue down this, "those that do not think like me are evil" path. This is the mindset that gets people to agree with mass genocide of entire groups of people and when those groups feel oppressed, no matter the form that oppression takes they will discover now that when avenues of diplomacy or discussion are taken away, they become isolated... and many unfortunately feel that violence is the final resort of regaining any attention for their cause... no matter how terrible other think of them for it.
No worries, the Giant Tech companies are not responsible for what people say on their platforms. Really this is good news. Gab itself was an innovative reaction to increasing censorship. For that matter BitChute and a few others. So fuck PayPal and Stripe. This will result in competition for them. When you shut something that large out, customers are already waiting.
Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
It's just like the way Facebook got shut down when Facebook user Alex Minassian ran over a bunch of people with a van.
Great deflection away from your own problems. Especially the keen use of a trendy, meaningless buzzphrase.
People can party in whatever filthy backyard they want, but your own backward will still remain just as filthy.
Muh white supremacy
For context we have a pattern of shooters hating Donald Trump therefore everyone who hates Donald Trump should be considered a prospective shooter. When are Facebook and Twitter going to act?
Dear Americans, What's all this debate about left-right, liberal-conservative, & Democrat-Republican? What Americans call left, liberal, Democrat values, the civilised world calls fringe right-wing. The Democrat party are fiscal conservatives and pro-austerity, with all the poverty and social injustice that this entails. Hate speech, racism, lynchings, white supremacy, manifest destiny, etc. have always been de facto protected in the USA since the moment you decided it was OK to commit genocide against the indigenous populations there. You learned it from the European colonials but have refused to acknowledge just how wrong it is and so do something about it. Shame on you all.
but that makes things a little hard for the American Right wing vis-a-vis gay rights, so I don't see that happening. Nonetheless if the right wanted this to stop for real that would be the way to do it.
That said, I don't think they do. The right wing own all 3 branches of government and nearly all of the media (they dominate talk radio, Fox News' ratings are much higher than MSNBC and, well, as a lefty I can safely say that MSNBC is right wing on economics, just go watch some of their coverage of Orcassio-Cortez and the Medicare for all Issue).
What I'm saying is this is great for them. It lets them paint themselves not as the ruling class in charge of everything that matters but as an oppressed minority because their extremist aren't welcome. That narrative of oppression grants them sympathy that folks like this normally wouldn't have it.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
If your system doesn't work for a large enough number of people, they create alternatives. Sometimes that is how the old ends and the new starts. Internet companies should know what disruption is, but apparently they don't recognize the other end of the stick. (Note that I did not make a moral judgment here, because it's irrelevant to the observation and the conclusion.)
We conservatives are so persecuted. We only control three branches of the government after all!
And all those violent people and their guns - they are all backed by George Soros. Soros is backing the Nazis AND Atnifa! He's such a brilliant Je...globalist.
Conservatives have ALL the answers.
Abortion? Ban it! And teach the only true sex education - abstinence. Even though all the evidence is against it, it just feels right! because Sex is EVIL and it's S-I-N!! Jesus said so!
Why yes, I do belong to the anti-sex death cult known as Christianity. We hate sex and worship a zombie!
Guns! Who cares if laws actually reduce violence It's a Jesus given right!!!!
Healthcare? Well now, that's a privilege. Once you're forced to be born, well tough shit. It's a dog eat dog Capitalist World and if you can't deal, then fuck-off and die! Jesus said so!
If you made poor decisions in life - we all know the good decisions are always there and apparent, then you can't help but succeed! Look at me! I chose to be born a white male in an upper middle class family where college was a given.
All those morons who choose to be born Black and poor or a woman have only themselves to blame! And Donald Trump - he's such a genius that he chose to be born a third generation millionaire - he's self made!
And the teaching of evolution in school. Plah-ease! We need to teach the truth of Creation and not this liberal evidence based horseshit!
No sir! As a conservative I know what's and right and wrong and those liberals with their "the world is a shade of gray" nonsense should just smarten up!
Paypal can choose not to associate with Gab - or any other network - if they want. Nobody can force them to do business with them. Similarly if people don't like that paypal doesn't want to work with Gab any more, they are free to find another way to move money to Gab (or orthogonal to them if they encounter paypal too often in regular transactions for their own liking). There is no free speech issue here when one company decides they don't want to do business with another one.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
I guess because it's "conservative" that it's automatically bad.
You're equating a white supremacist who shot up a synagogue with "conservative" (the backlash was for hosting that guy). You must really really despise conservatives.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
They want eyeballs for the advertisers. Extreme rhetoric and vitriol is how they get them. If it requires that some to shoot and blow each other up for others to buy a certain brand of soap or truck, so be it. The scary part is that it's taken a life of its own. You can't discuss current events in a meaningful and disarming way without ignoring some things and turning the other cheek. If you do that, your radicalized viewers will find their fix somewhere else, and so will your sponsors.
because it would be pretty bad if banks started booting customers who said things they didn't like.
You mean like when Democrats in the 90s tried to stop banks from discriminating against black people and conservatives got up in arms about it? This is just the chickens coming home to roost.
He apparently had Twitter and Facebook accounts too. Funnily enough, neither Facebook or Twitter are being deplatformed.
Ever notice every time one of these incidents happens, Facebook and Twitter competitors end up being deplatformed?
When the President of the United States is an open unashamed racist, and many members of his party are open unashamed racists, the inevitable result is the current state of the America.
People didn't make these things up about racist Donald Trump:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_views_of_Donald_Trump
This not fake news.
You end up with the insane fringe shooting people.
It's nice that the tech community would drop support for these racist organizations, but is it going to help?
Since when has it become a declared / definitive act to not be a flaming dumpster fire in public?
All of the social networking sites have toxic content, it's only the absolute worst of the worst that gets banned. For a site to specifically welcome it leads to stuff like has happened now.
I realized we were good and truly fucked when free speech advocacy started being denounced a "right-wing extremist" position.
I guess because it's "conservative" that it's automatically bad.
No, what made it bad is that it's a platform that designed to create echo chambers. In this instance the echo chamber it created got so bad that lives were lost.
But if we break up the social media giants, we are in this same situation where every one of them gets to do their own thing and we need to police every single social media site. So make up your mind, either monopolies are bad or they aren't.
it would be pretty bad if banks started booting customers who said things they didn't like.
That may be where we are headed. Conservatives and liberals once talked to each other. Then they started reading different newspapers, watching different TV channels, and moved to different forums on social media. Then forums got banned, and they moved to different social media platforms. Now platforms are being banned, so the next step may be for different ideological groups to have their own app-stores, payment processors, etc.
What is next? "Conservative" and "liberal" grocery stores? Conservatives banned from Whole Foods, and liberals banned from Walmart? Where will Libertarians shop?
All this polarization can't be good for our society.
Actually, it is protected in the United States. If it wasn't, people would be getting arrested for it.
Progressivism: Parasites helping parasites to help themselves - to other people's stuff.
Ahahahahahaha ahahaha
ahahahaahahahaahahaha
That bunch of brain damaged, lead-paint chip eating, soda swilling, conspiritards couldn't put up a wordpress site.
Conservatards don't invent shit by definition. They're anti-progress.
We are going to see the right-wing lolbertarian dream of "just build your own bro" crash and burn in the power dynamics of the real world.
They could just use Bitcoin, so not being able to use PayPal is a totally fake argument. Conservatives are such whiny cry babies these days, always playing the victim.
80% of people are just tired of political correctness. This partitioning is being driven by progressive extremists, for the express purpose of destroying America. They are slowly achieving their goal, but I do think the pendulum will swing back eventually. Most Americans left and right actually like America and want it to continue, after all.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
The reason they haven't also banned Twitter is that Twitter has a policy of not allowing that kind of thing on its network.
That's complete BS. Twitter allows multiple terrorist organizations to operate on there. They even have terrorist groups like the muslim brotherhood verified. It doesn't get much further in terms of extremism when you're talking about a group that wants to commit genocide because religion tells them to.
Om, nomnomnom...
They should stay away from the internet, telephones and outside too, since those were all used by the man accused of killing 11 people in a Pittsburgh synagogue.
Seriously, what an idiotic act of attempted virtue signalling to stop using a service because a bad person used it. "A bad person liked that thing so I HAVE TO hate it." It's like they're children or retarded or something.
The problem is that Gab is filling a niche that Twitter has forced open through bans, and disproportionately just that niche. Throw in the existing persecution complex of those groups and you've got a recipe for trouble, because you've created an even stronger echo chamber for the worst elements.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
The right wing own all 3 branches of government
Republicans do. Conservatives don't. It's still mostly the Establishment Uniparty in charge, which is why so little changes.
and nearly all of the media (they dominate talk radio, Fox News' ratings are much higher than MSNBC and, well, as a lefty I can safely say that MSNBC is right wing on economics
You're very high right now.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
You're missing the point.
A parallel is the Paula Dean case. She signed an agreement that, to paraphrase reads: "You fuck with our revenue stream, we will fire you."
That's precisely what happened here. Notice Gab is not filing a lawsuit. They signed the ToS that they violated.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Actually, he was a Trump supporter. When he realized Trump wasn't in for the anti-Semitic agenda, he turned against Trump.
Now, which side truly has the dangerous mobs?
They way I look at it is like this: Police yourselves so the gov't doesn't have to.
If corporations ban speech under threat of government coercion, how is that any different than the government directly censoring speech?
The problem is that any genuine "conservatives" are so bloody bad at drawing the line between themselves and the racist, hate spewing, violent Nazis out there.
They are so similar in many cases that the temptation for "conservatives" is to think that they are the same, only that the nazi scum is a bit more "dedicated", and in any case "better dead than red". Which becomes a particularly thorny problem when you define anything to the left of hard core reactionarism as "socialism" or "communism".
And you're right it's not good for a society. It's what happened in Germany in the past, Nazis to the right, Communists to the left. There are reasons why the people who ultimately bore the responsibility for put old Adolf into power, Alfred Hugenberg and von Hindenburg were very conservative politicians. And there were reasons why the Nazis let Hugenberg retain his place in the Reichstag until 1945, despite all other parties than the NSDAP being banned. These are also the reasons why Europe haven't had the kind of crazy "conservatives" the US has had for a long time; they all convinced themselves that the Nazis weren't so bad, and either joined the "winning" team directly, or allied themselves to them to the extent that they discredited themselves for decades. Only now, when the people who were actually around back in the day are starting to die out, are we beginning to see their ugly faces again - again accompanied by the hate-filled breed of losers they in vain hope they will be able to exploit.
No, "conservative" just means you can count on violent, willfully ignorant, loudmouth assholes being present in overwhelming numbers. It's not automatically bad, any more than a serious cockroach infestation is automatically bad.
It is, however, symptomatic of a place that lets filthy, loathsome pests take over, so that it becomes uninhabitable for decent people.
I hope this clears things up for you.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
Distributed Encrypted P2P Overlay Networks
Good luck censoring and shutting down the many of these now out there.
I2P, Tor, Pond, Briar, Tox, sooooo many other tools
you can use to ensure your freedom to communicate
with others. There are even complete social networking
sites running in these overlays. Start using them.
when twitter used to have HAMAS account. Maybe still does....
What is next? "Conservative" and "liberal" grocery stores? Conservatives banned from Whole Foods, and liberals banned from Walmart? Where will Libertarians shop?
Progressives already openly support segregation of students based on race. Seems to me the problem with extremism is fairly easy to find.
Om, nomnomnom...
Republicans do. Conservatives don't. It's still mostly the Establishment Uniparty in charge, which is why so little changes.
Erm... Look at the word "Convervatism" in the dictionary? Preserving the status quo is the whole reason for the Republican party.
The reason they haven't also banned Twitter is that Twitter has a policy of not allowing that kind of thing on its network.
That's complete BS. Twitter allows multiple terrorist organizations to operate on there
How is it bullshit?
You've offered no evidence that Twitter's usage policy does not disallow terrorist organizations.
All you have claimed is Twitter doesn't follow it's policy. You've completely failed to claim let alone show that this policy, the only actual requirement, doesn't exist.
Seeing as the person you replied to even stated as much, you aren't even bringing anything new to the table with your redundant claim.
In fact let's actually look.
https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/hateful-conduct-policy
That entire webpage, that you claim doesn't exist, is right there existing.
Click the link and look for your self. You outright claim that page doesn't exist, yet it does. If there is any bullshit here its your lies that are so trivial to show as lies that it is embarrassing.
So the page you claim doesn't exist, does exist, right there for all to see.
Your redundant claim that Twitter doesn't follow it, again already said and not insightful, is not any sort of requirement. It's legally so unimportant I question your understanding of law to even bring it up in the first place.
How are you so confused by this? Paypal and the like require you to have a written policy of such rules. They have NO requirement to follow such a policy. This is a simple binary situation.
The tragic events of this past Saturday make it more clear than ever the need to closely monitor these potentially-dangerous anti-Trump radicals.
of being Conservative? If change isn't happening then they're winning.
I think you're mixing up the radical right (alt-right?) with actual Conservatives. But even then the radical right wing is doing pretty well for themselves. There's been a massive and successful attack on gov't regulation. Much of Dodd Frank has been repealed. Most of the Obama era EPA guidelines have been eliminated or toned back. Net Neutrality is dead putting control of the internet in the hands of private industry. Mitch McConnell is even able to talk openly about ending Social Security and Medicare. These are policies the far right has wanted for decades and had to back down on.
Meanwhile the left can't get any tracking on Medicare for All, even though a majority of Republicans support it (let alone Democrats). The left are completely on the defensive in all respects. The right is winning on all fronts.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Liberals? They're not liberals. Liberals believe in freedom of speech. They might disagree with what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it. You are talking about Leftists. Leftists have little use for free speech and will happily silence those with whom they disagree. As is happening here.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
You can't make direct threats. That's what's at issue here. Paypal was fine with Gab until one of their own shot up a place.
That said, Paypal's a payment processor, not a web forum. I don't think this is pressure from the gov't. It's more likely they're worried about a backlash from their customers.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Republicans haven't been conservative in their actions since the 90s. The Establishment, most Dems and Most Republicans, is a small group of huge donors who always gets their way. Democrats and the GOP put on this kabuki theater ritualized show where they make a very public show of disagreeing on things like gay marriage, things with no financial consequence to the big donors, but they agree on everything important. (And even on issues like gay marriage, the outcome is as scripted as professional wrestling).
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
> Twitter allows multiple terrorist organizations to operate on there.
Not the least of which is the leadership of the United States...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/22/world/middleeast/trump-threatens-iran-twitter.html
> As is happening here.
Please point out where in the First Amendment it says that payment processors must be forced to do business with companies they disagree with. Thanks.
Don't worry, the tech giant's will fall once the massive subset of the total population that supports the indiscriminate shooting up of places loosely affiliated with whatever hate these guys are blaming for their terrible lives realizes they can't swipe to pay for their red arm bands, hats or white hoods.
That's all true except that there is no counterpart to Germany's pre-war communists in the States. The closest we have is a tiny and powerless minority within the Democratic party that advocates for a universal healthcare system the likes of which have been successfully implemented in every other industrialized nation decades ago. Hell our "liberal" party would be center-right or moderate right in any other industrialized nation.
I see this every day on social networking from my liberal friends.
Historically, conservative leaders took the moral high road and measured their words carefully. But now the conservative standards bearer is saying crap like "If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously, OK? Just knock the hell ... I promise you I will pay for the legal fees. I promise, I promise".
Many more statements called "dog whistles" have been made, such as "If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks... Although the Second Amendment people â" maybe there is, I donâ(TM)t know.â
Now you can say this is all just political hyperbole. You might even try to say it's merely coincidence that violent hate crime is up dramatically over the last 2 years.
But the point isn't about "proof" or causality. The point is trying to understand the opinions, rather than merely dismissing them as "must really really despise conservatives". This sort of speech which is likely to incite hate and maybe leads to violence is reckless. Until only 2 years ago, far outside the norm of what anyone would consider acceptable from the president or other elected officials.
Then again, maybe you'd prefer to believe Republican leaders have acted ethically or may be above questioning. In that case, I suppose the only explanation that fits is some folks must just really really despise conservatives.
PJRC: Electronic Projects, 8051 Microcontroller Tools
This partitioning is being driven by progressive extremists, for the express purpose of destroying America.
I think that's taking it a bit far and probably attributing reasons to most of the people who fall into that group that don't exist. In reality, the explanation is much more banal: They're doing it because they think it will impress other people like them. It's as simple and stupid as that. It's not really different than conservative Christians that try to take tough moral stances against homosexuality so that they can show everyone how Christian and moral they are.
Naturally this attracts a lot of sleazy people who want to hide behind the facade of moral superiority. They don't really care about the message, or even disagree with it, but find that they can hide behind it. Just like not all of those conservative Christians are closeted homosexuals, you can bet that of the people trying to appear to be the most virtuous, some are banging other men in private gay clubs. Just like you have no trouble finding many of the men who claim to be feminists have been harassing women and doing all of things they decry in public.
I don't think the political correctness really matters. Even if you quit dancing around some issues, the solutions that the different political factions have are so incompatible as to be incapable of compromise. In the end it comes down to dogma and you won't get the conservative Christian to go along with gay marriage any more than you'll get the super-woke progressive to agree that inherent gender differences exist. The gun nut will never agree to any form of gun control and the socialist will never agree that their economic policy just doesn't work. Once you hit the central tenants of some faith, it doesn't really matter.
In this case, does anyone that anti-Semitic ever listen to reason? Even if you let him run around screaming about the Jews on Twitter all day, is he ever going to listen to anyone who he doesn't already agree with, or does he just invent some reason to lump any disagreement as proof that the Jews are controlling everyone? I almost think that social media disconnects people from one and other to the point where it's not possible to solve this issue even if you have a single service that everyone gets to use no matter what. I think that requires actually sitting down with people and talking to them. Fortunately, there's good reason to be hopeful that something like that actually works.
In a corporatist system of government, corporate censorship is state censorship. If Paypal had any competitors, they could be used. There aren't any that I've ever heard of. It's not a free market.
You might not have sympathy for Gab as an individual, but I'd still be worried about the legal precedence this sets. You might not presently live at the cliff edge yourself, but the gradual erosion of liberty will certainly ensure that you eventually do.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
> Twitter allows multiple terrorist organizations to operate on there.
Not the least of which is the leadership of the United States...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/22/world/middleeast/trump-threatens-iran-twitter.html
A political leader making inflammatory (and often empty) threats is not terrorism.
I'm a Reagan era conservative. My party was hijacked by religious fundamentalists and whackjobs years ago. Although these days I guess I'm more libertarian than anything. I don't believe more government or more taxes is the solution to a problem
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
https://arrow-journal.org/why-... Which is hilarious because that's what segregation was.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
No, the backlash is not for hosting that guy. He was on Twitter and Facebook too. No backlash there. The backlash is for not banning conservative speech in general. But that's just an excuse, really.
The is the Silicon Valley Cabal using this shooting as an excuse to destroy the competition - pure business. Gab was starting to get actual traction as a competitor, and there's nothing a monopoly hates more than a competitor!
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
No worries, the Giant Tech companies are not responsible for what people say on their platforms. Really this is good news.
You keep up that spirit my friend. But the world has spoken, and will speak again, this kind of radical thought that is obviously leading to radical behavior, we won't tolerate it, and we will pull the rug out from under you if you don't clean up the act.
Free Markets working as they should, for once. Legally, yes, 'Big Tech' isn't responsible for your shit posting, but morally... some of them are making a stand. FINALLY. There is simply no place for this in our world.
Except, you know, Antifa, which takes its name and flag from the last paramilitary organization of the German Communist Party, and is operating as a paramilitary arm of the Democrats/Deep State. If you deny the latter, why hasn't the DoJ dismantled them?
You don't have the right to commit crimes.
They really aren't. It's just that the left has degenerated into a mass of white liberals spewing "NAZI!!!!!!!" at everyone to the right of Bernie's even-more leftist cousin. You hear it over and over and over from left-leaning media, and thus assume it is true.
The media you choose to consume dictates your opinions to you, and the people in charge of the media on the left have goals that they think they need to achieve at any cost. And it is costing them EVERYTHING.
And yet it was a "Rightist" that shot up this church. And the last one. And the last one and the one before that. In fact when is the last time a "Leftist" walked into a church in the US and shot up the place?
But lets suppose only 90% of the shooters, magabombers and other murderous redhats were right wing nutjobs. That isn't the point. The point is what does the elected to the federal level party leadership say?
Trump said he will pay the legal fees for people who beat up other people exercising their first amendment rights. I don't think any other President has said that in my lifetime, and certainly not the living ones. Not all Trump voters are racist, jew hating cowardly magabombers or murderers. But Trump is the leader of the those people. He is the leader of the white nationalists, the anti unionists, the jew killers, the frat "its not rape if you didnt hold a knife to their throat" rapists, the birthers, the flat earthers and the other conspiracy nuts. As that Florida guy said "I'm not saying he is a racist. I'm saying the racists believe he is a racist."
Show me one, just one good person who has an account on gab.
Any true conservative would have let the banks and auto makers go under back in 2008. The free market has showed their business model as unsustainable Instead the Republicans let them drink from the government tit.
Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
And what, prey tell, is a crime, if not today, then tomorrow? Already you're defining Gab's normal, better than Twitter policies and actions as a crime.
I think that the underlying issue there is that Republicans despise Democrats more than they hate Nazis or similar ilk. The same could be said of Democrats who despise Republicans more than they hate Antifa or similar groups. That is, they really don't like the most extreme elements of what could be broadly called their side, but they're too fixated on what the view as their main enemy to care or feel as though acknowledging that group in the same breath as themselves is just an attempt at a smear job. The more crafty (or perhaps the ones who don't minding playing with matches) among the parties even view those extremists as a kind of useful tool.
I think the only thing that really frees us from this is ultimately removing the first past the post election system so that we don't get a concentration of two parties that must naturally exist in opposition to each other. I wouldn't be surprised that if you took the platform for a party and asked everyone who considered themselves to be a part of that party about their honest opinion for all of the different issues, that on average you'd find people only supported about half of those positions personally. They're really only a member of that party because of a few, or perhaps maybe only one, key issue that they view as that important. You don't really find many candidates who are both pro-gun rights and pro-abortion rights for example. Once you free the Republicans from needing the white nationalist vote and the Democrats from needing the Antifa vote, I think you'll get both of those parties telling both of those other groups to fuck right off.
Advocating and organizing crime is conspiracy to commit crime and itself a crime.
You mean the Leftist who shot up a baseball field full of Republicans, trying to kill a bunch of Congressmen so there would be new elections? PS it wasn't a church.
You know those people got caught red-handed on camera saying they deliberately bused in crazy people to Trump rallies to start shit, so that they claim victimhood? Leftists beat the shit out of people all the time, it just doesn't get reported (for obvious reasons).
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
And where and how, precisely, did Gab do that?
When liberals hate conservatives, it is because they do not understand what conservatives believe, nor do they care to learn. When faced with questions such as "One of the worst things a person could do is hurt a defenseless animal" or "Justice is the most important requirement for a society," liberals assumed that conservatives would disagree.
Jonathan Haidt's experiments ask liberals and conservatives to fill out questionnaires about their values, then to predict how someone from the opposite tribe would fill out the questionnaire. He finds that conservatives are able to predict liberals' answers just fine and seem to have a pretty good understanding of their worldviews, but that liberals have *no idea* how conservatives think or what they value.
One of the most telling discoveries was that conservatives tend to be curious about what liberals think and why, while liberals see conservatives as inferior "other," inherently incapable of thought. The slur as substitute for argument is glaring on this website.
One only needs to utter the name "Sarah Palin" to see how interested liberals are in women's rights, or "Clarence Thomas" to see how interested they are in racial equality.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
Then forums got banned, and they moved to different social media platforms.
Banned for breaking the rules, not for having a conservative political ideology. Mainstream social media platforms don't want people spewing hate speech on the company's dime. I've said it numerous times before, if bakers don't have to bake a gay wedding cake when it conflicts with their values, then Facebook/Twitter/etc. doesn't have to bake your KKK cake, either.
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
If Paypal had any competitors, they could be used.
Gee, wouldn't it be great if someone had invented a decentralized means for transferring money online?
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
There have been crazy people on YouTube as well, such as Elliot Roger. At no point did anyone suggest shutting down YouTube after such incidents.
The DoJ can't exactly raid their headquarters and arrest their CEO. You should note that they also haven't dismantled more deadly and centralized protest groups on the right, such as the Proud Boys which are openly running "security" for Trump's rallies these days.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
I think that the underlying issue there is that Republicans despise Democrats more than they hate Nazis or similar ilk.
Yes, this is why Hindenburg, Hugenberg and many other conservatives saw the Nazis as the lesser evil.
The more crafty[...]
You see, here's the big problem. These people are not half as clever as they think they are. They think they can use the Nazis, the dispossessed and desperate, but they are wrong. Any association with fanatics will invariably end with the legitimization of their absurd ideas and the would-be manipulator being devoured. Basically Nietzsche and the abyss.
Leftists have little use for free speech and will happily silence those with whom they disagree. As is happening here.
Wrong. Gab hasn't been silenced, they can still happily Gab away at whatever "thinly-veiled-racism masquerading as a nationalist agendas" trips their trigger. They may have to find another web host or plug their own server hardware into the internet, and accept cryptocurrency instead of PayPal.
When you start telling business they can't choose to act on their own morals, you might end up telling Christian bakers they've gotta bake that gay wedding cake, too. I've always said it must take a lot of cognitive dissonance to be an alt-righter.
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
We even have a Ball for them.
Maybe more of these assholes should be invited to it, so they can see how real Haters operate, with style and discrimination :)
In other words Twitter isn't the enemy of free speech you think it is. They allow groups that the government considers terrorists, as long as they stick to the rules about not calling for genocide on Twitter.
Do you really want the government to take over Twitter so they can be less biased against conservatives? Because if they do then groups on their official shit list will be banned.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Read up on the history of how the Feds did this in the 1960s and 1970s. Or note how, in an extreme that caused them to fail in the courts, almost half of the Oregon protesters/occupiers of that Federal wildlife center or whatever were Federal informants.
BTW, who exactly have the Proud Boys killed? And what do you have against self-defense? You may not realize it, but you're putting yourself firmly on the side of Antifa.
Now that requires a citation, especially seeing as how the Secret Service, probably other Feds, and the state and local police are visibly running security at those rallies. Only way the Proud Boys could be a part of that is if those agencies were tacitly working with them....
That's because sane people are predictable. You can't predict what crazy people think or will do, nor is it possible to learn. Of course one could argue that one should predict that a conservative would lie in a questionnaire because they are unmitigated hypocrites, but I guess that kind of cynicism belongs to the right.
and you shouldn't be using that word. You're misusing it. Perhaps intentionally in order to get real conservatives on your side. I've said this before, but Hilary Clinton was and is the best true conservative in America. She'd have kept everything the same, only making a few minor changes to keep everything on course. She lost because Americans don't want actual conservatism. They want change, and it's no wonder why.
Also nobody is in favor of small government when it suits them. Folks who get it with a natural disaster want the Fed to come in and help. Most people support a large, national military for defense. And our interstate highway couldn't be built by a small government. The "Conservative" Red states get more money from the fed than they put in and if you touch those subsidies expect their Senators to fight tooth and nail against you.
What you're really in for is "small enough to drown in a bathtub" government. In other words, small, local governments that can be pushed around by large power organizations. Even if that's not what you want, it's what the folks who fund and run the "small gov't" movement do. And they make the rules.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
he was an active member of a community that in turn actively encourages folks like him to come to their side. You know this. You're trying to shift the narrative. I don't think anyone's gonna fall for it though. At least not anyone who doesn't _want_ to fall for it.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
The geek community was first constructed as a haven for the unfairly rejected. But in our rush, we forgot that sometimes, the rejection is fair. It's long past time to kick the fairly-ostracized back out into the cold where they always belonged, but better late than never.
Social networking is the WORST computer technology inflicted upon the unsuspecting public ever. From Russians influencing the US presidential election in 2016; to leaks of people's personal data; to all the killings and other violence in India, Myanmar, and the United States; to the enormous wealth which is only outdone by the enormous arrogance of Silicon Valley; social networking is a plague upon humanity. Boycott all social networks.
It was his mental health hachetjob that lead us to where we are today, first in California then the US as a whole, with both the far left and far right being people who should have been institutionalized years ago for violent or antisocial tendencies. Probably another reason Scientology spread so far and wide, also.
At this point in time the critical mass has been reached. Either the US will find a way to split into Liberal and Conservative states/nations, or it's going to fracture under its divisible nature much like it should have during the Civil War.
As usual, this entire episode has been politicized. But it's the wrong kind of politics. Instead of parties, this violence is about public health, and about how understanding personality disorders is crucial to public health.
Acknowledging all the risks of this kind of armchair diagnostics--which should never be attempted publicly, not even as a hobby, and therefore even posting this is in violation of a prime directive of psychiatry--I'm going out on a limb to say: this man is not really a political activist. Rather, he suffers from a Personality Disorder. It's almost certainly Histrionic Personality Disorder. That's in cluster B, which has associated with it the traits of lack of empathy and tendency to rule-breaking. Politics is the idiom he has chosen to use to get attention. Hence the activity in the early 2000s, and all the bumper stickers.
What he doesn't seem to have is the desire to do actual harm for fun: that is, he is not a psychopath or sadist. What he really wants is attention, but he still operates within some kind of human limits, unlike those types.
No surprise, in this day and age when people pay attention to political messages as if they had much more meaning than they really do, and when they attach huge emotional packages to political speech that is in fact completely vapid, he chose exactly the right idiom to get the most bang for the buck. This forum is a great example of how his strategy works: it works because most people, and especially people in information technology, sneer at psychology courses.
Banks already do that. Marijuana dispensaries have enormous problems obtaining banking services.
Banned for breaking the rules, not for having a conservative political ideology. Mainstream social media platforms don't want people spewing hate speech
"Hate speech" is an ideological concept. Liberals are against it, and conservatives think it is "politically correctness" run amok.
Saying it is not about political ideology, because it is about "hate speech" (a politically ideological concept) is a contradiction.
Bans on "hate speech" may look reasonable if you look at the worst racist garbage being posted. But any power to ban will be abused, and "hate speech" has been used to justify censorship of calm rational express of conservative opinions, such as banning speeches at state run universities. That is government censorship of political speech, precisely what the Constitution was designed to prevent.
Even if you are unwilling to defend free speech on principle, you should defend it for practical reasons. As a liberal, you need to realize that you are LOSING the ideological debate. The right has been winning elections, and dominating nearly every branch of government. Much of this is because they try to convince their political opponents, while progressives try to silence theirs.
When people take the "ideological turing test" (a liberal tries to impersonate a conservative or vice versa), conservatives do way better. Conservatives understand liberals. They just disagree with them. But liberals tend to not even understand conservative viewpoints, misrepresent them, and sound fake to actual conservatives. It is hard to win over the middle ground, when you don't even understand your opponents.
then Facebook/Twitter/etc. doesn't have to bake your KKK cake, either.
I don't see anyone questioning their legal right to ban speech they don't like. They are private companies and can do whatever they want. The question is whether that is the right thing to do, and whether it is good for our society to have more and more segregation of people with opposing viewpoints.
Long-term, this was 100% the result of Vladimir Putin's attacks on the United States. He is desperate to maintain control by dividing people, and wants to divide every one who might be strong enough to kill him to increase his safety. The best reaction would be for Trump to declare war on Russia now while the United States can still win easily.
While fox quite clearly show a bias, and they gladly admit it, CNN does not necessarily has such a bias. In fact if you both er to check you will find that when it happen they also report bad things said or done by democrats. e.g. just simply example if you want like anthony wiener sexting. This isn't equivalent to fox. that Fox and some right wing people managed to bring a narrative that cnn and co and other media are democrat aligned , shows that they have managed to really control media and people far more than they readily admit.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
That was what he meant. He's racist enough against most other races, but Jews have a special place in his heart, since they're the only reason he's not poor.
There are "some very fine people" there.
- Donald J Trump
If Gab only hosts evil people then so slashdot, Twitter, and Facebook.
BLM is nothing but anti-white hate, as was the Obama administration. The KKK is a bunch of assholes. Let's get extreme and ban all the extremist left and right. Goodbye shitty Fox, CNN, and MSNPC, and the rest.
Common carrier status doesn't apply to Twitter or Facebook. They are "information services" per the FCC.
The problem is that any genuine "conservatives" are so bloody bad at drawing the line between themselves and the racist, hate spewing, violent Nazis out there.
Did you mean to say liberals are so bloody bad at drawing the line between conservatives and the racist, hate spewing, violent Nazis out there?
It's interesting that you are doing the exact thing you're complaining about liberals doing. Lets face it, conservatives project so much because they complain about things they PERCEIVE liberals would do....and they think liberals would do those things BECAUSE that's what conservatives would do in that position. Conservatives can't understand that other people can be better than their most basic vices.
As for you, we've already established your just a fucking idiot.... and you certainly don't know shit about liberals or how they think. As for what conservatives think... well, Jesus said to feed the hungry, heal the sick, cloth and shelter those in need.... and conservatives vote people into office that do EXACTLY OPPOSITE of that. Your rewriting of history in your post would be laughable if you weren't so fucking stupid as to believe yourself.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
I posted a link to a wikipedia article about the racist views of Donald Trump. And it was downvoted as Troll.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_views_of_Donald_Trump
Has Slashdot become a haven for racists?
Your a fucking idiot, and apparently a fascist sympathizer... although those two things do go hand in hand.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
In the 1940's the antifa in the US had a different name: the US military. You are placing yourself firmly on the side of nazi's.
https://www.splcenter.org/figh...
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
Did you even read his comment? DNS&BIND referred to research where conservatives answered questions just as liberals themselves answered, but liberals couldn't do the same when asked to answer for conservatives.
Conclusion: Conservatives understand Liberals just fine, Liberals don't understand conservatives. You yourself show this with your own invective; and if your seething hatred prevents you from understanding a 7-sentence comment, what else is it keeping you blind to?
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
Bullshit. Twitter actively defends this kind of thing as long as it's someone like Sarsour or Farrakhan doing it. They're perfectly happy to allow people to advocate violence against jews, men, asians, anyone as long as they're using the right feminist buzzwords in the process and kiss the ring of social justice.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
That may be a problem, but I'm not sure what the solution is.
I expect Gab will find hosting somewhere and this may even attract more users.
I'm not in favor of (gov't) forcing Twitter to host content they don't want to as I believe that would violate their First Amendment. Shareholders and the public applying pressure is a different matter.
And the government can't block Gab unless they're somehow engaging in criminal activity and as far as I know, they're not. I've only looked at Bowers account, but I'm not sure any of his messages actually crossed legal lines in the US. I'm sure they would elsewhere in the world, but I'm not arguing for any changes to the First Amendment.
I'm just not sure anything violated US law (credible threats? inciting violence?), but I'm not a lawyer.
Of course the gov't could monitor the internet even more closely but it's often hard to tell the difference between trolls, crazy but harmless people and potential threats who may at some point do something. And before they do anything you can't do all that much.
I sort of like the idea of exiling extremists to their own corner of the internet (makes them easier to avoid, easier to monitor), but then that just amplifies their echo chamber.
What's particularly ironic is that SJWs are the most homogenously rich and white group out of basically everyone in the US.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
Conservatives aren't the ones so bad at telling the difference between Nazis and literally anyone else in the world that they'll call even Orthodox Jews "Nazis". You're thinking of the regressive left.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
There aren't any that I've ever heard of.
That's because you have shit for brains, and don't know what you're talking about. Any business can setup a payment system through their own bank.... they don't have to rely on Paypal. They could also use a merchant bank.... and not rely on Paypal. Or, they could use any number of OTHER payment takers online like: Webpay, Square, Dwolla, Paydivvy, Wepay, Serve, Paytoo, Google Wallet, Skrill, Payoneer, Payza, 2Checkout, Intuit... or any one of LOTS more. But you're too fucking stupid to have heard of ANY of these... or you're a fucking liar. Again, my money is on the latter.
The LEGAL PRECEDENCE is that a business can set standards for it's members, and if they break them, they can boot them. It ain't a new concept... but what you want isn't to protect their free speech, it's that you want to insure they don't have any consequences to the things they say. You want to elevate THEIR free speech to being more important than anyone elses. But then, you're just a whiny little victim, aren't yah.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
How about that leftist that shot up a church over rape culture after other leftists spent 10 hours on the poorest blackest two streets in all of NYC? Oh, right, you guys pretended he was a right winger.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
Not as much as it takes to be a leftist that calls orthodox jews "nazis"
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
Bullshit. You can say all the sexist, racist, antisemitic things you want on mainstream social media as long as you use a few feminsit buzzwords now and again. If you actually gave a fuck about the values you pretend to have you'd be losing your shit over Linda Sarsour and Tamika Mallory continuing to be blue checkmarks on twitter.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
They call for genocide all the time. Against jews.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
That's interesting. Is like to learn more. Neither link was to the actual study (methodology, numerical results, ...) - only to takeaways. Do you have any idea where to find out about the actual study?
I'm curious because the guy said he asked 2000 "visitors" to fill out his questionnaire. I wonder which visitors? To where?
Ah yes the SPLC... the same organization that has no problem with Tamika Mallory taking selfies with a holocaust denier who publicly praises Hitler but thinks that anti-salafism women's rights activists like Ayaan Hirsi-Ali are "dangerous extremists".
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
They can say what they want.. but there should be real world consequences
> The reason they haven't also banned Twitter is that Twitter has a policy of not allowing that kind of thing on its network.
Except they don't really enforce it. They will happily accept blatant anti-semitism if the perpetrator's politics or "identity" lines up correctly.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
The problem is that Gab is filling a niche that Twitter has forced open through bans, and disproportionately just that niche.
I'm not sure that's true. It is true that many more people from the right have been banned, but the right is home to much more virulent rhetoric at this point. I've also seen complaints from people on the left that progressives are being banned for relatively benign things while people on the right are able to get away with extreme content.
The mail bomber Sayoc threatened multiple people on Twitter, they complained to Twitter, and he never got banned.
I think the process is just too random to accurately detect bias on Twitter's part.
Throw in the existing persecution complex of those groups and you've got a recipe for trouble, because you've created an even stronger echo chamber for the worst elements.
That is true. Ideally you'd find some way to encourage them to behave civilly but there doesn't seem to be an easy fix for that. And I don't know how you kick off the extremists without the exiled extremists gathering together somewhere else.
I stole this Sig
Different people have different lines for what is too much "political correctness".
Most Americans would agree that the "n-word" shouldn't be used in everyday conversation. That's why we even created the euphemism "the n-word". I certainly wouldn't want it banned though (either by rewriting Mark Twain or attempting to expunge it from history).
But we'll argue about whether saying electing the black candidate would "monkey this up" is a racist dog-whistle or just an innocent expression. It seems incredibly tone-deaf of him if he didn't mean it as the dog-whistle. In fact, IMO, it stretches credibility.
DeSantis says Florida shouldn’t ‘monkey this up’ by electing Andrew Gillum
Moving towards more questionable "PC" arguments, there's this FB post that a school district's police department deleted and apologized for.
(To save people the click, it's a picture of an overloaded bus (presumably in India) with people on top and hanging on to the back with the caption "Don't forget! It's National Bus Safety Week" and it seems obvious (to me anyway) the point was bus safety, not "look at all the Indians!")
Katy ISD apologizes after parents express outrage over what they call a racist Facebook post
And then we have cases of people not wanting children to play Cowboys and Indians or dressing up for Halloween as a Disney character from a different culture.
And should I really feel guilty that I enjoyed The Party starring Peter Sellers in "brownface"? Or Mickey Rooney in Breakfast at Tiffany's?
I almost think that social media disconnects people from one and other to the point where it's not possible to solve this issue even if you have a single service that everyone gets to use no matter what.
That's probably true. If Twitter didn't ban anyone and they were the only option, people would quickly for their own echo chambers and there might be more interaction but that would mostly be posting to people of the "other side" until most people block all those people.
People forming their own gated communities all in one huge walled garden.
any true Conservative's first concern would be preserving the existing order and stability. That's what Conservatism is. It's what the word means.
Now, a libertarian would have let the banks fail. But not a Conservative.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
the economic right wing own virtually everything. Talk radio is almost completely right of center (with NPR being a bit left on social issues but still centrist on the economy). Same with newspapers when it comes to money. Right of center.
What's more, America is not nearly as divided as the media tells you. 70% of us support medicare for all. You'll find similar numbers for marijuana legalization, infrastructure spending and putting a stop to our endless wars.
Americans are actually pretty well united. Our ruling class figured that out in the 50s. They used hot button wedge issues to motivate a fringe to vote against their interests and gerrymandering, voter suppression combined with our pseudo Democracy (e.g. Senate & Electoral College) to make sure the majority didn't get what they wanted.
But this created a problem. It was now too obvious America wasn't a Democracy anymore. So they bought up the media and started pushing a narrative that we're divided. We're not. Not on the issues anyway. We have a classic tyranny of the minority.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Isnâ(TM)t there an oven waiting for you somewhere?
It may be more a question of how they interpret things.
"“One of the worst things a person could do is hurt a defenseless animal”"
The liberal might think, well conservatives are often avid hunters so they guess conservatives would disagree. The conservative might think, well most vegans are liberals so liberals would agree. In reality, many liberals hunt, many conservatives don't, few liberals are even vegetarians let alone vegan and define "defenseless".
We kill defenseless animals all the time, usually for food but also for wildlife management and even sport. But if we're talking about animal cruelty I think most people regardless of political belief would agree that's horrible.
That animal question is far too open to interpretation.
It could be a question of people saying one thing while really thinking another. I see nothing wrong with slaughtering defenseless cattle for their meat. If they're honest most people would agree that it's not one of the worst things but they think others will see them badly if they admit that.
And can we even agree on what is liberal or conservative anymore? Aren't most of us rather moderate? Were the liberals answering what they thought the extreme right would say?
> catering primarily to US conservatives
1. That's only seen as the case because they've been systematically deplatformed by twitter.
2. The idiotic notation that there are only two political perspectives is literally six times dumber than astrology.
I'm strongly left leaning, but more anti-authoritarian than left, so I'm seen as right wing buy left wing useful idiots because I oppose their aspirations of authority, and seen as left wing by right wing useful idiots because I oppose most of their social policy.
Gab is laudable for their free speech support. Smearing them is more reprehensible than being the mere host of speech you don't like will ever be.
>The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.
—H. L. Mencken
Question everything
Is it a real right wing loony or a parody of one? The lack of spelling errors suggests parody yet the gratuitous capitalization suggests genuine loony.
Trump's own estimate is that he only controls about 70% of what's going on in America. Even though his buddy Putin says that he's 90% in charge compared to Putin's 80% control of Russia.
Time for another journalist joke:
Q: What's the difference between a Saudi reformer journalist and chopped liver?
A: We know where the chopped liver is!
And MBS is 100% in control of Saudi Arabia. Trump can only be envious.
Hey, here's a solution to solve ALL the problems in one swoop. Trump can build the wall out of prison cells. Several stories tall because he wants a YUGE beautiful wall! Plenty of cells for all the immigrants and asylum seekers AND their children!
"Lock kids up, LOCK KIDS UP!"
My back of the envelope calculation says millions of cells, so there will still be plenty of empty ones for all of Trump's political enemies and journalists, too. If there are still any vacancies, they can convert some of the nice locations on the top floor into condominiums and sell them to Trump's great buddies from Russia, Saudi Arabia, and maybe some really stinking rich Asians who can qualify as honorary white people.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
They call for genocide all the time. Against jews.
That's a lie.
The Muslim Brotherhood is a peaceful, mostly secular charity organization. BLM is a pro-racial-diversity group. Antifa promotes open dialogue between people with differing ideological views
-- J. Brennan, B. Obama, M. Waters, N. Pelosi
Well, how would anyone be able to tell the difference, when even the right can't themselves?
Besides, if anyone who isn't per definition right wing can't tell the difference, that's not a particularly big problem. Ruffled feathers at most. But when the right can't tell, and nobody else can to the extent that calling oneself "conservative" has effectively become a code word for being a bloody Nazi in all its totalitarian vainglorious, destructive and ruthless stupidity, that's a fucking big problem! Not the least for the "true" conservatives, because if you can't tell if you're a Nazi or not because you do not know the difference, you're in real trouble.
Antifa was a German Communist terrorist group, that tried to destroy all opposition to the Soviet-dominated German Communist Party.
The US did NOT fight the Nazis in order to turn control of Germany over to the Soviets. In fact, we very nearly had nuclear war of that issue more than once. That whole "50 years of Cold War" wasn't a joke.
Also, the SPLC is a criminally convicted defamation center - they lie about political opponents in order to raise more money for their seriously overpaid executives. Citing them is worse than citing Donald Trump for facts.
Liberal: The problem with Twitter is that there are too many Racists and Nazis.
Conservative: Oh so you're saying Twitter should ban conservatives?
Liberal: Uh, no, just Nazis, you know White Supremacists/Nationalists, people who describe themselves as such or even as Nazis, and often even include swastikas and stuff in their profiles.
Conservatives: Oh so you think conservatives are Nazis? Well I'll have you know that Nazis only applies to members of the German National Socialist Party between 1922 and 1946, so you ARE talking about banning conservatives.
Liberal: *headdesk*
A sizable number of conservatives have basically decided that Racists and Nazis are just ordinary conservatives. And the Nazis themselves have capitalized on it, with things like the "Unite the RIght" rally which wasn't a rally where people listened intently to speeches by Marco Rubio and Charles Krauthammer, and discussed the merits of flat taxes and deregulation, but, you know, involved flaming torches, chants against immigrants, blacks, and jews, and one flat out murder of a woman who had earlier in the day protested against neo-nazism.
And how many conservatives complained about "Unite the Right" and made it clear this bunch of lunatics had nothing to do with conservatism? None. Because you've gone completely blind in that area.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Yeah, I think most data shows that any corporate social media bans/censorship have the independent left taking about 75% of the bans. Unfortunately, 0% of the bans are on the corporate left, so it's easier for the right wingers to pretend that it's an attack against them. Furthermore, they tend to be more public about the right-wing bans, and they blame a lot of the left-wing bans on 'Russians.'
Basically, social media giants are making the worst possible choices on their ban policy.
I would argue that we need the very opposite approach. The way you neuter extremists is to have the opposite of bubbles. Force people into having to interact and see people with drastically different viewpoints. But that's not much in line with what users want or what advertisers want. so we end up with a machine that breeds right wing extremists.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
TV is less and less relevant, while the Internet sphere is more and more relevant. By downplaying the vast importance of the Internet on cultural issues and ignoring that politics is downstream from culture, you've spun quite the narrative there.
If Paypal had any competitors, they could be used. There aren't any that I've ever heard of.
Are you seriously suggesting there are zero other ways to give people money?
The mind boggles.
The Muslim Brotherhood is a peaceful, mostly secular charity organization. BLM is a pro-racial-diversity group. Antifa promotes open dialogue between people with differing ideological views
-- J. Brennan, B. Obama, M. Waters, N. Pelosi
Heh, nice! Well played.
See, *this* is how you defeat intolerant busybodies on the Left *or* the Right!
Not with violence, not with incivility, nor with guns (unless it's the very, very last resort to save lives in the case of deadly force).
You bury them in *laughter*!
Authoritarians...Left or Right...are incapable of understanding humor or seeing there own absurdity. It's the exact reason why the NPC meme has gotten them so stirred up.
They can't meme. They can't joke. Comedians no longer do shows at Left-leaning colleges and universities. They have no ability to laugh at themselves and have no defense against being ridiculed for their anti-freedom views and blatant "some animals are more equal than others" hypocrisy.
Just reveal them as the wannabe-nanny laughingstocks that they are. Make it so whenever average people see these groups or hear them speak, they can't help but laugh. They won't give such people power for the same reasons one doesn't give a gun to a monkey or a toddler.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
incapable of understanding humor or seeing their
meh, oops
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
They are private companies and can do whatever they want. The question is whether that is the right thing to do, and whether it is good for our society to have more and more segregation of people with opposing viewpoints.
It really comes down to the sponsors not wanting their ads next to some neanderthal spouting off about how he hates $minority_group. YouTube used to have "almost anything goes, so long as it's not illegal" attitude right up until sponsors started freaking out.
As a liberal, you need to realize that you are LOSING the ideological debate. The right has been winning elections, and dominating nearly every branch of government. Much of this is because they try to convince their political opponents, while progressives try to silence theirs.
You don't even need to wait for an election to vote in the free market. Don't support the companies you disagree with, and if there isn't a competitor - start one. Surely there are enough like-minded individuals to support your venture. Unless what you're implying is the right is good at winning elections, but lousy at voting with their wallets.
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
Funny euphemism for "nazi"
Wow, great job making the OP's point for them.
you're a funny guy. I'm being sincere here too - I've laughed at every single thing you've posted.
I'd still be worried about the legal precedence this sets.
The difference between precedents and precedence is like the difference between prints and prince.
Yeah, if the OP was arguing he was myopic he really made a good case. Hopefully a lens correcting the perspective was helpful.
Still believing BLM is anti-White and that Obama attacked poor pitiful White America?
Huh.
Too bad all you could produce was Trump.
We believe it because its true; you're in denial over how racist the Left has become
And then we have cases of people not wanting children to play Cowboys and Indians
Why would anybody want to have anybody play THAT farce?
Think about it.
Actually, that isn't something that people can handle.
Remeber the whole controversy over a routine about Trump? Or the time that outrage poured forth when a Bush rubber head was used as a Game of Thrones prop? Not to mention dozens of times where South Park was attacked?
Sorry. It just doesn't work.
Strat.
It's all fine and dandy when you tow the party line- but the 2nd you deviate with your own thoughts and views governments and monopolies thereof will crush you. That is what we are seeing here. I'm no fan of the right wing nutters, but the socialists are no better. Both major political parties are hell bent on stealing from, killing, and controlling the masses. We need decentralization and to remove the control from government over financial matters, communications, and similar so all parties and view points can prosper. The idea that we can't have separate countries with different systems is fucked up. Both sides need to grow up and divide things up peacefully. The only rule that should be true everywhere is that one should be free to leave. If everyone is free to leave then the conservatives can ban gay sex and the gays will leave and the socialists can steal from themselves and the conservatives, libertarians, and pretty much anyone sane can leave to a freer parts. I already moved personally from NJ to NH. Free State Project and all that.
Found the NPC!
of Government. See: Robber Barons. The Machiavellian Merchant Class. The Military Industrial Complex. Etc, etc.
The thing you've got to remember is that at the end of the day this is all about one thing: A small group of people want to have a lot of money in exchange for doing nothing but owning shit. Used to be the Monarchy & Aristocracy. Then it was the robber barons. Now it's the 1%ers. But it's all the same thing and it's all the same pattern.
Democratic Governments have been the only thing that's ever gotten us past those people, however briefly (and I do mean briefly, it's been less than 100 years since they had total control and abused it with impunity in all countries and they still have that control in 70% of the world).
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Where will Libertarians shop?
The black market, obviously.
Because no gul-derned gov'mints gonna tell me wha I can er kint buy
All this polarization can't be good for our society.
It's really not. Partisanship is tearing us apart. I said this a decade ago and it's only gotten worse.
The killer used Facebook and Twitter and gab.ai. Only the one that refused to censor non-violent conservative voices was attacked by the tech giants. Guess which one that was.
BLM are a bunch of racist shitlord Nazi assholes. Sounds like you're a Nazi, too, AC.
And that sir is why you are a stupid fuck. You are no better than the racist by judging people you donâ(TM)t even know anything about.
The problem is, the internet is mostly made up of private networks and private service providers. Yet its purpose is more akin to the public square of the pilgrim years.
Without net neutrality, Comcast could decide to censor millions of people at any time. Without some government-mandated protections for free speech, companies like Facebook, Twitter and Google can prevent any idea they disagree with from being heard.
That may not seem like a problem to you because you think they're on your side right now. But they are multi-billion-dollar international corporations, not ordinary Americans. In the long run, it's going to poison our free society.
Blaming a platform is so intellectually dishonest. In no way is it a platforms at fault for what users choose to do. If we apply the same logic we would need to deplatform Facebook because the Orlando shooter used Facebook. Oh are wait Lewis Farikan is actively spewing anti-semitic crap on Twitter but that is A-okay for some reason. The only blame to be had is on the individual. His up bringing and life has way more to do with him shooting people than Gab ever did.
... says the anonymous coward. Obama admin did some good & not good things, like most presidential administrations. But to claim they caused racism would only be true for the simple fact that Obama was president and certain (white) people couldnâ(TM)t stand having a black man for a president. Obama did not cause that; people were already racist. And now those people are openly expressing their racist views because the current president does.
If only these organizations had supported BDS and helped prevent the much BIGGER slaughter of Palestinian innocents, this event may not have happened at all.
If you condone the killing of children, medics and journalists with SNIPER rifles, then it's pretty hypocritical to lash out at a platform that MIGHT be used to host comments that you don't like.
There's a much bigger picture here, and it starts with the ongoing genocide, not just a "school shooting" style event.
Remember, when a radical US Jew in Israel slaughtered 29 Muslims in Hebron in 1994 ? Many Jews in Israel STILL celebrate him as a hero, though the "shrine" in his memory has now been dismantled.
To answer your question: The Right's outgroup is non-Americans, but the Left's outgroup is the Right.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
Jonathan Haidt has shown this most powerfully in his work on morality and how the moral positions we take are not governed, as we like to think, by our intellect and reason but by self-serving mental processes outside our awareness.
See Haidt, J (2012). The righteous mind: why good people are divided by politics and religion. Pantheon Books.
Here's a book review on Areo Magazine. If you don't read Areo, you really should add it to your RSS. Quillette too. They're both outstanding websites that carry material that the usual sites would happily censor.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
Poor butthurt Nazis, Bannon and his fascist sidekicks kicked out of the White House and even Trump dare not repeat his "both sides" crap, face it nobody likes you except the Putinbots and now your shitkicker supporters are going full retard because they can't face their hateful lives any more.
You want to send money to Gab, mail them a check. If that's too much trouble, too bad! Start your own payment processing company. There aren't any barriers to entry for that. There are network effects that have made Paypal big, but you don't care about big if you need to support a fringe website - nothing stops people using it from using Paypal for everything else (unless this episode makes them want to boycott Paypal, but good luck getting Gabpal accepted everywhere like Paypal is...)
Surely there are enough far right nutjobs who want a platform to talk about white nationalists and killing Jews without consequences that they can start their own hosting company to host Gab's servers.
Is this really the level of discourse that slashdot has fallen to consider insightful? I realize the quality here has dropped considerably over at least the last decade and most knowledgeable "old-timers" have already left, but this is really a new low
From the very beginning, even before they launched, they were actively using white supremacists that had been kicked out of every other network to promote their website and app to their followers. Those people, coincidentally, also happen to be white supremacists. And now we're shocked and appalled that these white supremacists are use Gab to coordinate and discuss how much they hate everybody? Come on now. It's not like any of this has ever been a secret. It's not like anyone's even tried to keep it a secret. And it's not like we haven't seen hugely problematic posts emerging from Gab since it first went live. Dude, there's a nazi frog in their logo. Gab has always been a Nazi hate network. Always. It's not an accident, it's by design.
Yeah, CNN, NBC etc are not as left-wing as the right make them out to be. Liberals have very few progressive media outlets, like FreeSpeechTV for example. They just use them to rile up their base, people generally believe almost anything these days.
Except, yknow, in the real world we already have years of very public examples of the left calling everyone up to and including orthodox and gay jews "nazis" just because they're not further left than the Khmer Rouge.
So really the conversation is more like this:
Regressive: Twitter is full of nazis like Shapiro and Rubin!
Conservative: What are you talking about they're jewish, Rubin's gay for chrissake
Regressive: OMG YOU'RE AN ALT-RIGHT NAZI TOO!
Ad Hitlerum. And also don't forget that rampant antisemitism is perfectly ok for anyone on the left.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
Both sides have racists assholes.
Being conservative I can call out the far right, and condemn them for their ideas and actions.
However the left new modo seems to be by any means necessary, including violence and making false assault claims.
When a professor swings bike locks into someone's head, and the left won't call out that behavior as disgusting, then they have lost all credibility with me.
Those who live by the sword shall die by it.
And you leftards kids don't control any part of the government, and you never will if you keep doubling down on your identity politics, so please... continue.
So, do you have an example of this? I'll hit the report button for you, I just need a link.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Antisemitic ideas are ACTUALLY a Leftist ideology, everything that was implemented, and allowed is actually the policy of the left, thanks very much, #note the sarcasm for the thanks, to a national socialist named hitler. If they are blaming the Right on antisemitism that means they are further left than hitler was, since he implemented marxism ... SINCE ... hitler stalin and mao implemented Marxism ideologs which lead to redistribution of wealth AND millions dead.
hitler and the founder of planned parenthood, allowed and had the motivation to allow abortions in order to allow "inferior" Race's to eradicate themselves. hitler and the left wanted gun control so "inferior" races couldn't fight back, gun control in America was a state sponsored Jim Crow law to prevent Beautiful Black people from fighting against the kkk. hitler did the same for Jews.
When we discuss the left or right it means economics, if you redistribute wealth you'll get the Russian gulag work camps... and it always fails. What the extreme left doesn't realize is that they legitize hitlers final solution... but they hide behind not being discriminating... "if you're not with me you're against me, and you must die": is the leftist manifesto, and they self cannibalize. Read history books for once.
self cannibalizing example.
Suzan surandon and debrah messing when she mentioned trump on twitter.
It's worse than that. The guy also said some shit on twitter and facebook as well. But since twitter and facebook are "mainstream" and are now skirting certain entity protections they already receive, not a damn thing gets done to them. GAB, from what I have determined so, had not only adequately complied with LE, but they reached out to them. This is something that facebook and twitter have not done and you have companies like Apple and Google who have typically abstained from complying with the FBI, yet no one says a fucking thing.
What is going on is far worse than a 1A issue. You have a technocratic mafia making a shit ton of money off of social media rubes with the full power to easily squash competition at whim across the board for any gosh damn reason. They don't follow any sort of rules, just whatever their expensive lawyers allow them to get away with.
Google, Apple, Twitter, and Facebook need to be addressed and they need to be addressed immediately.
That only works for values of "non-American" that translate to "anyone who lives within 100 miles of seawater", or who doesn't bow to Tyrant Jesus.
The summary alone cited several subhumans that use it, so that's already more than one. If you don't think Gab is a cesspool filled with scum then guess what ... You are also scum.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Who in this situation has a "monopoly position"?
I don't respond to AC's.
Here's the problem. That's your view of a typical exchange, and it in no way, shape or form represents reality. Yes. You are part of the problem. I have never heard anybody except people like you liken conservatives to nazis. I, however, do not support censoring nazis. I have a long essay on why, using history and psychology as arguments as to why. I'd post it here, but you wouldn't read it, but it has to do with a history of not working and forbidden fruit, etc, etc, etc. But I digress.
I recommend you go out and actually meet some conservatives. If you'd like to chat with me, I could help inform you on how people who think differently than you actually aren't evil. In all fairness, some people who think differently than you are evil (read neo-nazis, antifa and similar, yes, antifa, they do regularly go out and beat people who disagree with them), but most aren't. They just have different opinions than you.
Here's the problem. He posted some stuff that attempts to be studies. You can disagree with their methodology, but at least he tried to put supporting information. You retorted with your opinions and slurs. I don't feel I really need to say any more.
Leftists have little use for free speech and will happily silence those with whom they disagree. As is happening here.
Interesting. Aren't you doing to leftist's what you say they are doing?
Are rightist's any different?
Seems like the whole left right paradigm has had its day.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
Libertarians can shop everywhere because we can fit in with both sides on enough issues to fake being either one. ;)
No, when he said "conservative" he was talking about Gab, not this particular psychopath. You are equating him to conservative. Shame on you.
No, "conservative" just means you can count on violent, willfully ignorant, loudmouth assholes being present in overwhelming numbers. It's not automatically bad, any more than a serious cockroach infestation is automatically bad.
You mean like the terrorist organization, Antifa?
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
The one thing that bothers me about these corporate policies is the domain revoking, whether PayPal wants to do business with you or not, I don't think that domain registrars should be able to apply the same standards, if that is the only way to be listed on the internet and register DNS entries is through the 'gatekeeper' registrars then they are basically voices of the government and therefore should not be allowed to revoke a properly paid-for registration. If they want to be able to do this the the government should be required to issue domain registrations themselves or maybe you should be allowed a $domain.citiizen.gov domain that is irrevocable providing you are operating legally. I don't want to make any excuse for this particular person, or ideology. But if we are revoking domains that contain hate speech, let's start with facebook, google, cnn, foxnews and anyone else that uses comment sections (how about /.?)
Remember that you said this when the sword cuts your way.
Nope, lightyears of difference there my very ignorant and willfully obtuse friend
Nay. Name a time the Right has silenced anyone in the last two decades. The Right is committed to the Constitution. The Left views the Constitution as an outdated relic that needs to be trashed.
And it seems the US left side hasn't really learned from this. You're just doubling down on the criticism of The Other. Youtube and Facebook and all the big tech are censoring them, and people who claim to believe in Net Neutrality excuse this as 'a private company censoring people doesn't violate the First Amendment'. Which is true, but irrelevant.
Pushing people out of polite society is pushing them to the support the far right, and yet the media both old and new seems intent on this. So is excusing violence from AntiFa and the media seem intent on that too.
Something very nasty is happening to America, and you're not helping to stop it.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
What do you think happens when you dehumanize people and deplatform them? Do you think they disappear? No, they who perceived themselves as persecuted now, actually persecuted, congregate elsewhere into louder and louder echo chambers. Your solution seems to be a game a wack-a-mole which would only serve to radicalize people with each attack.
Um no, another idiot who falls into the bullshit trope that anti-zionism == antisemitism. They are absolutely not the same
>banks started booting customers who said things they didn't like.
are you high? of course banks don't do business with certain groups because of their views.
isis comes to mind.
fuckwit.
Like I said in my first post. If the terrorists are bashing people and destroying property in the name of #YourGoals, it's all OK. When it's the other way around? It's downright hateful... Violence isn't good either way, and the moral indifference of so many on the Left is what gives rise to fascism - which is what the radical Left in the US is - fascist.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Wrong. If you haven't heard it, it's because of your fingers are in the way. Pull them out of your ears and you'll hear. People like you _are_ the problem. You do not support shutting down Nazis, because you sympathize with them. The Nazis already had their turn with "free speech" - it resulted in the biggest war in history. I don't think they deserve another go at it.
The problem with "conservatives" are that you can't really tell them from Nazis, because both ideologies are rooted in hate and contempt for anything different, and both have more sympathy for social Darwinism (which is an appalling name, it makes people think it's some kind of science - it has Darwin's name in it! - but it's bollocks) than is healthy for any society. "Just different opinions" are to short sell the differences quite significantly. Both conservatives and Nazis agree that the weak should just succumb in different ways, there simply is no common ground with people like that.
but it's not a conservative response. The entire social and economic order was at stake. The banks really were too big to fail, at least not without a massive counter balance in the form of a total government bail out of the economy, which itself would have been a huge change to the current order and social/political systems.
Bailing out the banks was the correct response from a Conservative standpoint. It preserved as many of the existing power structures and systems as possible and with them the existing order.
From your post it's hard to infer your entire politics, but I don't think your a conservative, rather you like the sound of it. But it's not healthy to use the word incorrectly.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
See Haidt, J (2012). The righteous mind: why good people are divided by politics and religion. Pantheon Books.
Yeah, I saw the book reference. I want to read about the actual scientific research that underpins it. I'm not used to seeing research published only in books - normally there are published articles first, and the book follows afterwards as a digest, but doesn't go into the same depth of details about methodology and raw results.
Do you think the book is the only source I can look at for this information?
Sure, insist on playing the "racist" card on others even as you cheer the idea of purity tests.
The Right-Wing doubles down on the insanity they've embraced. At this rate, you'll blame trees for pollution and the sun for global warming.
Fantastic, enjoy getting yourself banned from twitter and thrown in the pit as an evil alt-right nazi. Also I'm not responsible for your repetitive strain injury from the enormous amount of clicking you'll be doing. Why don't we start with left wing racism and violence in general since really it all comes from the same place. There's far more out there and I'm sure going through these tweets you'll be able to find it. (Ignore this: Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 25.3).Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 25.3).Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 25.3).Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 25.3).Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 25.3).Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 25.3)Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 25.3)Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 25.3)..)
https://twitter.com/AnnaCafoll...
http://archive.is/C4e9C
https://twitter.com/karengeier...
http://archive.is/ZuDFs
https://twitter.com/zackroth/s...
http://archive.is/Ihyc5
https://twitter.com/stevehowey...
http://archive.is/7USCr
https://twitter.com/laraeparke...
http://archive.is/FbkD6
https://twitter.com/johnhornor...
http://archive.is/kJxO7
https://twitter.com/yosoymicha...
http://archive.is/xyc1N
https://twitter.com/tressiemcp...
http://archive.is/JxZqH
https://twitter.com/arthur_aff...
http://archive.is/hHK8M
https://twitter.com/zellieiman...
http://archive.is/lZY2J
https://twitter.com/andreagrim...
http://archive.is/rFlqZ
https://twitter.com/JeanGreasy...
http://archive.is/53kNY
https://twitter.com/moshekashe...
http://archive.is/rslxf
https://twitter.com/LouisPeitz...
http://archive.is/KwYN5
https://twitter.com/OrganikHip...
http://archive.is/SnD2K
https://twitter.com/ShinobiNin...
http://archive.is/qdMJ1
https://twitter.com/tomdefeat/...
http://archive.is/bup4m
https://twitter.com/travishelw...
http://archive.is/j6FLa
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
In a corporatist system of government, corporate censorship is state censorship. When there's no meaningful space between corporate power and government power, it doesn't make much difference whether the guy silencing your dissent is Mark Zuckerberg or Jeff Sessions. America most definitely has such a system.
That entire paragraph is plagiarism.
And when independent candidates run for office and can't get their message out for being shadow banned, and the corporatist candidates are always the number one trending subject, you'll be there to finger wag for not bothering to set up their own world-class content distribution system first.
So is this one.
Any time you try to talk about how internet censorship threatens our ability to get the jackboot of oligarchy off our necks you'll always get some guy in your face who's read one Ayn Rand book and thinks he knows everything, saying things like âoeFacebook is a private company! It can do whatever it wants!â Is it now? Has not Facebook been inviting US government-funded groups to help regulate its operations, vowing on the Senate floor to do more to facilitate the interests of the US government, deleting accounts at the direction of the US and Israeli governments, and handing the guidance of its censorship behavior over to the Atlantic Council, which receives funding from the US government, the EU, NATO and Gulf states? How "private" is that? Facebook is a deeply government-entrenched corporation, and Facebook censorship is just what government censorship looks like in a corporatist system of government.
Well that sure looks familiar too.
What takes random paragraphs from internet sources based on key words, with a time span ranging in years, and cobbles them together to make forum posts?
You are very confused. I didn't dehumanize them. They dehumanized themselves.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
The civil war is going to be interesting. I already have a good idea which side is the most likely to dominate based on firearm ownership numbers...
>The problem is that any genuine "conservatives" are so bloody bad at drawing the line between themselves and the racist, hate spewing, violent Nazis out there.
No, it's the opposite! (((conservatives))) are bloody great at distancing themselves from their crazies, whereas you have Maxine Waters and Eric Holder literally promoting theirs'. Don't forget: it's the left which attacked the right first in 2016. You didn't see massive rioting crowds of NRA members outside Hillary events!
That you even got any karma for this is sad. Your thinly-veiled derision is repugnant, as are you. You're as bad a 'name-caller' as those you pretend to be objective about.
The fact that half these posts are still up and the accounts not banned proves that there isn't a word/phrase filter.
As I said, it's down to user reporting and then Twitter staff make a decision based on context and account history.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Gab hasn't been silenced . . . They may have to find another web host or plug their own server hardware into the internet, and accept cryptocurrency instead of PayPal.
Hey, wait a minute. I thought liberals were in favor of net neutrality.
I guess only if net neutrality means not paying more for additional bandwidth and service. However, if net neutrality means being neutral to content, especially content liberals don't like, forget it.
I've always said it must take a lot of cognitive dissonance to be . . .
. . . a liberal.
FIFY
We are truly witnessing an attack on free speech.
The banning of conservatives was already an alarm, however you rationalize it, because it was a targeted effort. Whether you believe the narrative that strongly worded opinions and conspiracy theorists influence violence, you can't ignore the actual extremist groups that actively utilize the service and suffer no consequences.
The argument was, imo, a weak one, but at least it had some credibility. It's their service. They can allow or not allow whomever they want.
And technically that's correct, but that's another discussion.
Now, they just don't want you off of their service. They want you off of everywhere.
Before, you could say it was akin to being kicked out of a coffee shop. At least you could find a new coffee shop, right?
No, you can't do that either. Because they're going to tear down whatever fucking coffee shop you decide to go to.
Free speech is a right not only worth being protected, but also must be extended. The right to free speech was not written with the understanding that one day human beings would be communicating largely through an intermediary. The fact that so many people are okay with an intermediary dictating the extent of their free speech, speaks to either their ignorance or their indifference of this right.
If people don't see a problem with a company holding the majority stake in the way ideas and thoughts are able to be shared, and then ruling that with an iron fist to suit their political leanings, then we are truly lost. Might as well burn the constitution and replace it with a EULA. All hail our corporate overlords, for they are wealthy and smart and have nice cars, private jets and mansions, and obviously that means they know what is best for us.
So true, that's how ISIS was formed and the like. Anyone catch last night's Supergirl? As much as I would like to equate conservative speech as hate speech, and as an attack on humanity in general; I don't see this going away anytime soon. Can't we all just get along, and serve the common good? When will we realize that our fellow humans and aliens also have feelings, and bleed alike. Before mouthing off or planning your next shoot out, take a moment to really think how the shoe might feel on the other foot. Seems the golden rule of treating others as thou you would treat yourself has been long forgotten. I know it can be very difficult, especially once negative emotions take hold; but we really need to try and strive for more peaceful resolutions instead of reaching for the nearest pitchfork. Now sod off and get off my lawn!
That's quite a false dichotomy you've got there. Nazis have murdered over 1,000 people since Trump was elected, and the closest thing they've done to "good" is Proud Boys patrolling post-hurricane streets ensuring non-white people aren't "looting". On the other hand, the extent of violence antifa has performed is breaking store windows and punching people who have publicly called for the genocide of all non-white people (and logically, calling for the extinction of humanity simultaneously). Antifa spends more time giving away food and clothing to hurricane survivors than anything political; you just never hear about that unless you follow their personal blogs with pictures and videos, or listen to the stories of the millions they've helped.
I'm sorry reality does not fit your political narrative, but I suspect you're used to that by now. At least you're now more informed than you were :)
... and the socialist will never agree that their economic policy just doesn't work ...
Luckily the majority of people are learning that this simply isn't the case. Chile recovered to be an economic powerhouse in South America strictly because they returned to socialist economic policies after the disaster that was Pinochet. Ask any socialist country in South America (besides Venezuela, we all know the CIA is still actively instigating there), and you'll hear that they are quite happy, have everything they need, and would not touch a capitalist economic system ever again. Even most eastern Europeans are signing back up with socialism, after seeing how capitalism has failed them so miserably.
CIA constructed lies are being exposed for what they are, and the already flimsy narrative is falling apart. Within a generation "socialist economics don't work!" will be in the same intellectual realm as "white people are inherently predestined to enslave all non-whites!". And our entire species will gain a collective 30 IQ points for it!
No, I don't mean that. What kind of twat-head moron would even ask such a question?
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
The hit dog hollered. Are you ok?
Yo broham, you forgot to end your post with
#HODLGANG
Mate what a load of bollocks. You leftie commie asshats want to destroy free speech and create Orwellian governments that police everything in our lives. The MSM is basically ultra-left wing, because its pervaded by journalists. You know the degree that has a 90% completion rate by women, the group thinkers and progressives and the communists. Its also backed and funded by globo-homo corporations and the uppity classes who fake virtue ad nausea to be seen as "good people". This is whats driving the anger. The fake news and the propaganda are so blatant and you make claims like its not in your favour. Your an NPC, you cant see reality and you just regurgitate what you hear on the media.
And you rightists call lefties "snowflakes". Maybe there's a real threat of violence in there somewhere, but everything I randomly clicked on seemed to be either obvious humor or frustration taken out of context. And the reality is I suspect you know that, I doubt you think a single one of those tweets is by anyone planning even thinking about violence, you're just so fed up of RWNJs being caught doing actual racism and actual threats that you want to believe the "other side" is at the same level, otherwise you'd have to question whether you're the good guys.
to mean "right wing" is that it's disingenuous at best and dishonest at worst. You have people in favor of radical change using the word to get folks who just want stability under their tent. In the process those people lose the stability they seek when the radicals use the political power gained from those genuine conservatives.
Don't get me wrong, I'm a lefty and a progressive. I think our society should always be improving. But it's hard to get the conservatives to buy into that when the radical right have gotten so good at scaring the bejeebees out of them. If they recognized the radical right for what they are (radicals) worst case the real conservatives would push for stability (which, as a progressive I find preferable to regression; e.g. I voted for Hilary, the ultimate conservative) and it might make it easier to get them to agree to progress.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I don't know, I'd suggest looking at the references at the back of the book, or look up Haidt on the usual scholarly databases.
I get what you're saying, you don't believe it's true. Haidt is a liberal and attacks his own side very gently, with the intention of making it better. It's a fact that the Left, having ostracized the Right, no longer knows what Right positions are and feels free to just make up shit that makes them look like monsters. We see this all over our culture.
One of the reasons why it is important for an organization to stay committed to the truth is that any organization that systematically lies will eventually be populated entirely by people who _believe_ that lie. I believe this explains a lot of the Democrat's problems right now; for instance, the people who cynically stoked racial hatred and white hatred for their own political gains, but didn't _actually_ hate white people and knew better than to push too hard, are now gone. Now they are replaced by people who believe the surface lie, and truly hate white people. And the party is now being led not by people cynically exploiting the system, but people actually trying to burn it down, and voters who couldn't detect cynical exploitation are detecting the "burn it all down" aspect of the party.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
How 'could' we know what conservatives think or value? They, themselves, don't even know anymore.
As a liberal, I'll stop 'really, really, despising' conservatives when they (unequivocally and steadfastly) abandon Trump. But so long as they're hitched to his vehicle...
I get what you're saying, you don't believe it's true.
I'm not saying that, and I'm not a liberal! I just want to know precisely what was found and what is being claimed.
No "Reagan era conservative" would claim the GOP was hijacked by "religious fundamentalists".
The republican party was CREATED by Christians who opposed slavery on MORAL GROUNDS. The party was birthed in Christian principles, and has always been populated by a rather religious population. There was a time when secular Republicans hijacked the party (the Rottenfellars and their ilk) but they lacked enough principles to be accused of standing for anything and thus rarely succeeded politically. In the Reagan era, the GOP was quite religious and was boldly and officially anti-abortion, anti-LGBTQWTF, anti-women-in-combat, pro-marriage, etc.
Of course, back in the 1980s the Democrats were pretending to be civilized too and thus were also officially opposed to things like "gay rights" and "trans rights" and "gay marriage" and such things. Indeed, when Obama and Hillary were running for the Dem nomination in 2008 they were both on record publicly opposed to "gay marriage" on religious grounds... the DNC has simply gone insanely far left over the past 10 years so that NONE of its most-famous historical figures (Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, Woodrow Wilson,FDR, JFK, LBJ, etc) would even be allowed to speak at a podium at any official event today.
Except twitter has repeatedly taken mass action far beyond the scope of what any human or team of humans could possibly accomplish, proving they are acting algorithmically. They've also clearly turned verified status into a way to heavily weight (or outright whitelist people from) their algorithms. Twitter is not acting in accordance with safe harbor provisions anymore and hasn't been for a long time.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
Sure, they sometimes do mass bans based on things like association with verified fake accounts and the like. But that's still one off actions taken with human oversight. There is no automatic filter that simply removes tweets with certain words or phrases or anything like that.
Do you think that the larger actions based on what is basically spam detection are a problem? Telcos that benefit from safe harbour seem to be free to boot people abusing their ToS off, for example.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Siddhagiri Metals and Tubes, 254 Smo Fasteners, Stainless Steel 304 304l Fasteners, Stainless Steel 304h Fasteners, Stainless Steel 309 Fasteners, Stainless Steel 310 310s Fasteners, Stainless Steel 316h Fasteners, Stainless Steel 316l Fasteners, Stainless Steel 316ti Fasteners, Stainless Steel 317l Fasteners, Stainless Steel 321 Fasteners, Stainless Steel 321h Fasteners, Stainless Steel 330 Fasteners, Stainless Steel 347 Fasteners, Stainless Steel 347h Fasteners, Stainless Steel 904l Fasteners, Copper Nickel 70 30 Fasteners, Copper Nickel 90 10 Fasteners, Duplex 2205 Fasteners, Hastelloy B2 Fasteners, Hastelloy C22 Fasteners, Hastelloy C276 Fasteners, Incoloy 800 Fasteners, Incoloy 825 Fasteners, Inconel 600 Fasteners, Inconel 601 Fasteners, Inconel 625 Fasteners, Inconel 718 Fasteners, Monel 400 Fasteners, Monel K500 Fasteners, Nickel 20 Fasteners,
Nay. Name a time the Right has silenced anyone in the last two decades. The Right is committed to the Constitution.
President W bypassed the US AG to grant himself wartime powers. Then passed the patriot act which effectively trashed the US Forth Amendment. The same acts were passed in every western country, all by right wing governments who trashed similar freedoms in those countries as well.
I read three of those acts and *specifically* identified issues like body cavity searching children as young as eight and wrote to over 100 politicians demanding that part of the act be removed if they had to pass these powers.
So what did you do back then to defend constitutional freedoms?
The Left views the Constitution as an outdated relic that needs to be trashed.
The Left maintains the status quo that the right establishes. That is why it is referred to as The Establishment. It's a thought pattern that is obsolete.
And it seems the US left side hasn't really learned from this. You're just doubling down on the criticism of The Other.
He said, doubling down on the criticism of The Other.
Youtube and Facebook and all the big tech are censoring them, and people who claim to believe in Net Neutrality excuse this as 'a private company censoring people doesn't violate the First Amendment'. Which is true, but irrelevant.
I'm glad you use your freedom of speech to show everyone how crazy you are.
Pushing people out of polite society is pushing them to the support the far right, and yet the media both old and new seems intent on this. So is excusing violence from AntiFa and the media seem intent on that too.
There are no ears in US politics, only mouths.
Something very nasty is happening to America,
Yes. Your country is leading the way in implementing the soviet criminal code in all western countries. Can you explain why the *right* is doing this? If you read the laws instead of watching TV you would understand this. Instead you're gaslit into attacking the people that are trying to defend you. Have you actually *read* the patriot Act?
and you're not helping to stop it.
A week ago I finished a month long project to analyse almost 200 pages of legislation and wrote a 30 page critique of a law designed to provide warrantless searches of people's mobile phones in every western country, including the US. You're trolling the person defending your freedom of speech and association.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
Well, you're going to have to chase down your own references then. Go to the library and look at the back pages. I can't do it for you.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
According to Jews they're exactly the same. Not saying it's right, just saying they love attention.
I think you might be high.
It's the government that banned banks from doing business with ISIS, they didn't regulate themselves.
It's called sanctions, you fuckwit.
Really all you're arguing here is that twitter doesn't have a biased algorithm it just deliberately employs every conceivable kind of silencing tactic against wrongthinkers.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
One of the most telling discoveries was that conservatives tend to be curious about what liberals think and why, while liberals see conservatives as inferior "other," inherently incapable of thought.
The "why" part is really important here as an explaining factor. I don't know the worldview of US liberals or conservatives, besides hearing attitudes to various issues that are contradicting to reality as I see it from the both sides, but the answer to "why" draws from a deep roots in culture, childhood and adult upbringing, religious ideas and simply incorrect information of the state of the world, causes and effects.
As an inhabitant of a country with a common general education and a state church providing "fair and balanced" religious information, I can't explain this difference any other way than by the wide differences in the educational content the communities offer from the early childhood onwards in the US.
See *The Righteous Mind* by Jonathan Haidt, which discusses group behavior and origins of morality from a behavior/cultural/biology perspective. I found the book informative, though I would have edited down a lot. He goes into more details about his research, and unlike what op is implying, does not find liberals are a bunch of clueless morons. I'd also take the AEI blog post with some skepticism, AEI employs other great minds like Charles Murray whose work is frequently cited to support scientific based racism.
They even have terrorist groups like the muslim brotherhood verified
I remember when it was only the Egyptian government that said the organization was such and gave everybody an automatic death sentence just for participating in demonstration, or belonging to it. Just think of how convenient it would have been for the States in the US South to handle civil rights movement in the same way. But maybe they actually tried it indirectly, based on the violence that followed.
You must be really interested to learn, then, that the overwhelming majority of mass shootings in the US have been committed by conservative white males.
So just as a survival mechanism, it is sensible to avoid US conservatives. Because if you're looking for murderous scumbags in America, that's where you're statistically most likely to encounter one.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
If you don't think the internet is a cesspool filled with scum then guess what ... You are also scum.
FTFY
except that is wrong since missiles matter a lot more
Meanwhile, it's the so-called "tolerant" leftists that engage in censorship, whether it's overt censorship through the deletion of content and banning of users/customers, or whether it's causing indirect self-censorship through threats of harm to the reputations or bodies of anyone they disagree with.
It isn't right wingers who want to limit what people can express thanks to "political correctness". It isn't right wingers who want to block content they dislike. It isn't right wingers who want to ban users who they disagree with. It's leftists who engage in such behavior.
The political right promotes free and open discussion of all ideas. The political left tries to shut down all expression that doesn't conform to their very narrow world view and narrative.
The Patriot Act wasn't passed by the Right, it was passed by neo-conserative warmongers. The Left has never believed in the Constitution and it is arguing in bad faith to maintain otherwise. They believe it to be an outdated racist document written by white men. How would they ever defend it? An act of utter cynicism, like a Christian quoting the Koran to try and stop terrorists.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
Well that's your opinion and you're entitled to it.
The *fact* remains that *all* of the most oppressive legislative changes in the last 18 years have been constructed and passed by right wing governments in all western countries. You don't seem to have an explanation why those governments are putting Soviet era criminal codes in western law.
What you call the "Left" and "Right" of politics appear to have the same agenda and it's not just the US, it's all western countries. It's clear your expression of what you think is "free speech" is the rhetoric you have been programmed to think. That's the great thing about free speech, it exposes people locked into low levels of problem solving.
I doubt you've even written a letter to a congresscritter to try to defend your constitution otherwise you would have mentioned it and outlined the nature of your defense. What you have displayed is a bunch of projection onto your "opponents" of what you're upset about in yourself, your own failings. It's not your fault, you've been deceived into thinking that way. Only you can choose to break out of it however comforting you find the illusion.
If you are unable to evolve out of your limited mindset the end of the road you are participating in is neither communism or capitalism, it's feudalism. I encourage you to continue expressing your free speech as it is always funny to look at the attitude of feudalistic peons who choose to show how batshit crazy they are.
All the best to you however I don't see you contributing much more to this conversation.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
I love how you dismiss anyone who comes to a different conclusion as you as "programmed" and "deceived." As if there is only one set of values: your own and everyone else is factually wrong. You people despise our Constitution, especially the First and boy do you hate the Second. Arguing in its favor is fundamentally a bad faith argument, like an American racist (but I repeat myself) pretending to care about black on black violence and using that to make a point. I also love experiencing your contempt calling me a peon. Boy I wonder why nobody is voting for you!
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
it would be pretty bad if banks started booting customers who said things they didn't like.
That may be where we are headed.
I thought it was a standard operating procedure.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://www.nysun.com/new-york...
I love how you dismiss anyone who comes to a different conclusion as you as "programmed" and "deceived."
You demonstrate traits of being emotionally unstable which makes you prone to being manipulated. I'm not blaming you, you didn't consent however only you can choose to step out of that.
As if there is only one set of values: your own and everyone else is factually wrong.
Not really, just that your actions are predictable.
You people despise our Constitution, especially the First and boy do you hate the Second.
You're projecting again. I've actually have a track record of defending free speech, anti-censorship, and democratic issues that goes back to the 1990s. I've got no problem with either of those amendment, though you might want to consider some mental health checks for firearms, especially for teenagers.
Arguing in its favor is fundamentally a bad faith argument, like an American racist (but I repeat myself) pretending to care about black on black violence and using that to make a point.
I don't really understand what that means.
I also love experiencing your contempt calling me a peon.
You're welcome. Maybe it will wake you up to your slavery but I can't do much more to help you, I don't care enough.
Boy I wonder why nobody is voting for you!
Hahaha - you think I have an agenda. I wouldn't make the sacrifice of leading you, it would be easier to trigger and manipulate you. How do you feel knowing deep down inside that I'm right because you've demonstrated you didn't have anything to add to the conversation.
That's your opinion and you're entitled to it.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.