Censoring White Supremacy
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-08-2017, 05:07 PM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(23-08-2017 04:58 PM)Szuchow Wrote:  
(23-08-2017 04:47 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Americans do not have the same appreciation of the atrocities the Poles have seen done by the Nazis. 6,000,000 Poles, 20% of your population, 1 in 5 dead. That's what the Nazis did to the Poles. They decimated them. The fact that you display any semblance of politeness at all is very impressive.

Number of Poles death depend on how you count Jews who were killed for being Jews not Poles. Fact that they were Polish citizens mattered not to killers - about 3KK Jews with Polish citizenship perished.

Wiki says 3KK Jewish Polish citizens and 3KK "ethnic" Polish citizens. I'm not sure what qualifies as "ethnic" in Poland but I'm guessing it means "not Aryan".

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
23-08-2017, 05:12 PM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(23-08-2017 05:07 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(23-08-2017 04:58 PM)Szuchow Wrote:  Number of Poles death depend on how you count Jews who were killed for being Jews not Poles. Fact that they were Polish citizens mattered not to killers - about 3KK Jews with Polish citizenship perished.

Wiki says 3KK Jewish Polish citizens and 3KK "ethnic" Polish citizens. I'm not sure what qualifies as "ethnic" in Poland but I'm guessing it means "not Aryan".

Given that Poland was multi national I would say ethnic meant "Polish Poles", that is not Belorussians, Ukrainians or Russians with Polish citizenship.

But this distinction is irrelevant to me as now it mostly serve to show how badly Poland population was mauled - suddenly, when it comes to being victim Jews counts as Poles, whereas their situation in pre-war Poland wasn't pretty.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Szuchow's post
23-08-2017, 05:16 PM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(23-08-2017 05:12 PM)Szuchow Wrote:  
(23-08-2017 05:07 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Wiki says 3KK Jewish Polish citizens and 3KK "ethnic" Polish citizens. I'm not sure what qualifies as "ethnic" in Poland but I'm guessing it means "not Aryan".

Given that Poland was multi national I would say ethnic meant "Polish Poles", that is not Belorussians, Ukrainians or Russians with Polish citizenship.

But this distinction is irrelevant to me as now it mostly serve to show how badly Poland population was mauled - suddenly, when it comes to being victim Jews counts as Poles, whereas their situation in pre-war Poland wasn't pretty.

I have a better understanding now of the books you have on the shelf above your bed. It's personal to you.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
23-08-2017, 06:47 PM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(23-08-2017 04:41 PM)tomilay Wrote:  I am thrilled with white supremacy being starved of the oxygen of a platform. Their first amendment rights are not violated by google or any other private platform.

Yeah, I cannot disagree.





But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Momsurroundedbyboys's post
23-08-2017, 07:58 PM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
[Image: covfefe_statue.jpg]

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like Dom's post
23-08-2017, 08:52 PM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(23-08-2017 07:08 AM)onlinebiker Wrote:  Should internet companies such as Google or PayPal do what they can to restrict groups such as the KKK from access to the Internet??

Are we ready for such censorship???


Before you decide that some groups or individuals ideas are so reprehensible that they should be stifled, consider -

In some countries, the idea of denying the existence of God is one of the most reprehensible ideas there is. Those folks would feel that atheism is a scourge that we need to address.........

Censorship still seem like a great idea???

And forget about half measures. Tools such as censorship just beg to be used, none are immune to their charms....

Can they ? Sure. I would not call a private company's decision to block content censorship. Should they block such content? I am as big of a free speech proponent as there might on this forum when it comes to government involvement. Free speech though is a right to speak, not a right to be heard. I would have no right to force the NY Times to publish a political manifesto of my own making. Requiring such a thing would be tantamount to forced speech, and the first amendment was written first and foremost for the purpose to protect freedom of conscience. What about Google's free speech? To quote Romney, "Corporations are people too, you know" Smile

Google's power to police its own content, though, should be exercised with caution. If they go too far and look like they are silencing political views, they will pay for it in the form of lost users.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like BryanS's post
23-08-2017, 09:07 PM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
Good for Berkely:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volo...fd1dfd56b8

Some choice paragraphs from the UC Berkely's message to campus:

Quote:This fall, the issue of free speech will once more engage our community in powerful and complex ways. Events in Charlottesville, with their racism, bigotry, violence and mayhem, make the issue of free speech even more tense. The law is very clear; public institutions like UC Berkeley must permit speakers invited in accordance with campus policies to speak, without discrimination in regard to point of view. The United States has the strongest free speech protections of any liberal democracy; the First Amendment protects even speech that most of us would find hateful, abhorrent and odious, and the courts have consistently upheld these protections.
Quote:But the most powerful argument for free speech is not one of legal constraint — that we’re required to allow it — but of value. The public expression of many sharply divergent points of view is fundamental both to our democracy and to our mission as a university. The philosophical justification underlying free speech, most powerfully articulated by John Stuart Mill in his book, On Liberty, rests on two basic assumptions. The first is that truth is of such power that it will always ultimately prevail; any abridgement of argument therefore compromises the opportunity of exchanging error for truth. The second is an extreme skepticism about the right of any authority to determine which opinions are noxious or abhorrent. Once you embark on the path to censorship, you make your own speech vulnerable to it.
Quote:We all desire safe space, where we can be ourselves and find support for our identities. You have the right at Berkeley to expect the university to keep you physically safe. But we would be providing students with a less valuable education, preparing them less well for the world after graduation, if we tried to shelter them from ideas that many find wrong, even dangerous. We must show that we can choose what to listen to, that we can cultivate our own arguments and that we can develop inner resilience, which is the surest form of safe space. These are not easy tasks, and we will offer support services for those who desire them.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like BryanS's post
23-08-2017, 09:08 PM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(23-08-2017 05:16 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(23-08-2017 05:12 PM)Szuchow Wrote:  Given that Poland was multi national I would say ethnic meant "Polish Poles", that is not Belorussians, Ukrainians or Russians with Polish citizenship.

But this distinction is irrelevant to me as now it mostly serve to show how badly Poland population was mauled - suddenly, when it comes to being victim Jews counts as Poles, whereas their situation in pre-war Poland wasn't pretty.

I have a better understanding now of the books you have on the shelf above your bed. It's personal to you.
In a way I suppose it may be. Seems I have fascination with "darkness" inherent to humans and studying XX cenury is best way to satisfy it.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2017, 11:28 PM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(23-08-2017 09:07 PM)BryanS Wrote:  Good for Berkely:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volo...fd1dfd56b8

Some choice paragraphs from the UC Berkely's message to campus:

Quote:This fall, the issue of free speech will once more engage our community in powerful and complex ways. Events in Charlottesville, with their racism, bigotry, violence and mayhem, make the issue of free speech even more tense. The law is very clear; public institutions like UC Berkeley must permit speakers invited in accordance with campus policies to speak, without discrimination in regard to point of view. The United States has the strongest free speech protections of any liberal democracy; the First Amendment protects even speech that most of us would find hateful, abhorrent and odious, and the courts have consistently upheld these protections.
Quote:But the most powerful argument for free speech is not one of legal constraint — that we’re required to allow it — but of value. The public expression of many sharply divergent points of view is fundamental both to our democracy and to our mission as a university. The philosophical justification underlying free speech, most powerfully articulated by John Stuart Mill in his book, On Liberty, rests on two basic assumptions. The first is that truth is of such power that it will always ultimately prevail; any abridgement of argument therefore compromises the opportunity of exchanging error for truth. The second is an extreme skepticism about the right of any authority to determine which opinions are noxious or abhorrent. Once you embark on the path to censorship, you make your own speech vulnerable to it.
Quote:We all desire safe space, where we can be ourselves and find support for our identities. You have the right at Berkeley to expect the university to keep you physically safe. But we would be providing students with a less valuable education, preparing them less well for the world after graduation, if we tried to shelter them from ideas that many find wrong, even dangerous. We must show that we can choose what to listen to, that we can cultivate our own arguments and that we can develop inner resilience, which is the surest form of safe space. These are not easy tasks, and we will offer support services for those who desire them.

If it's true good. With the Milo shit, everyone applauded -- but that was a huge mistake for the campus to do that. Colleges are the one place that all kinds of discussion should be allowed and if possible counter arguments presented.

Later, when they said "No thanks your invite is cancelled" to Dawkins (because of his criticism of Islam). I think people took pause. At least that's what I hope happened.


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Momsurroundedbyboys's post
24-08-2017, 12:44 PM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(23-08-2017 11:28 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(23-08-2017 09:07 PM)BryanS Wrote:  Good for Berkely:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volo...fd1dfd56b8

Some choice paragraphs from the UC Berkely's message to campus:

If it's true good. With the Milo shit, everyone applauded -- but that was a huge mistake for the campus to do that. Colleges are the one place that all kinds of discussion should be allowed and if possible counter arguments presented.

Later, when they said "No thanks your invite is cancelled" to Dawkins (because of his criticism of Islam). I think people took pause. At least that's what I hope happened.

I still disagree with this one- with basically the same logic that applies here. Milo intentionally used his platform in a way that created a very real physical threat to marginalized people.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: