Censoring White Supremacy
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-08-2017, 02:51 PM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(25-08-2017 01:32 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(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....

I don't think censorship is ever the answer to obnoxious speech -- but a business has every right to host only that content it wishes to host.

Here is my point.

I agree. But there is still a HUGE difference between a private citizen and a politician holding office.

Even in the private sector, there is a huge difference between a famous person and an unknown person.

I hate Limpdork and Coulter, as much as they hate Bill Maher, but the key is they are not in political office.

You can say things in the private sector that are offensive in any direction that if you use as a political tactic BY EITHER PARTY SET UP the erosion of pluralism.

Right now, 45 isn't simply "telling it like it is". He is using his position to vilify any and all dissent. He isn't offending to point out reality, he isn't offending to defend the weak. He his scapegoating and vilifying and has done so to members of his own party. 45 is literally mixing Darth Vader politics with Jerry Springer.

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Brian37's post
25-08-2017, 02:53 PM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(25-08-2017 02:45 PM)onlinebiker Wrote:  
(25-08-2017 02:42 PM)Emma Wrote:  The landlord cannot refuse on the basis of a few protected aspects of an individual- race, gender, religion, etc. Beyond that, the landlord is supposed to be discriminatory in their acceptance of tenants.

So what IS " permitted" discrimination???

This may be a better question for a lawyer if you're speaking about legally acceptable vs. socially acceptable. Some of these issues are still being decided in courts and by law makers.

If you're speaking about socially acceptable- any discrimination is acceptable that doesn't offend your target audience or risk alienation that could negatively impact your business. And society is always changing and evolving.

In my opinion- I feel like you shouldn't discriminate on the basis of something that a person cannot control about themselves- or something that is inherent to a person's being. That is maybe not a full coverage definition of "permitted discrimination" or a final definition, but I think it works well enough for now.

Beyond that, well- dealer's choice, I guess. In any case, there may be fallout for how you decide to proceed.

I feel like we're easily and often conflating legal acceptability and social acceptability in this thread- and they are almost never in alignment.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Emma's post
25-08-2017, 03:14 PM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(25-08-2017 02:53 PM)Emma Wrote:  
(25-08-2017 02:45 PM)onlinebiker Wrote:  So what IS " permitted" discrimination???

This may be a better question for a lawyer if you're speaking about legally acceptable vs. socially acceptable. Some of these issues are still being decided in courts and by law makers.

If you're speaking about socially acceptable- any discrimination is acceptable that doesn't offend your target audience or risk alienation that could negatively impact your business. And society is always changing and evolving.

In my opinion- I feel like you shouldn't discriminate on the basis of something that a person cannot control about themselves- or something that is inherent to a person's being. That is maybe not a full coverage definition of "permitted discrimination" or a final definition, but I think it works well enough for now.

Beyond that, well- dealer's choice, I guess. In any case, there may be fallout for how you decide to proceed.

I feel like we're easily and often conflating legal acceptability and social acceptability in this thread- and they are almost never in alignment.

The reality is, only a LEGAL definition is applicable - as that is what is enforceable.

Unless mob rule is the new new standard.


Personally - I think that anyone who refused another person' s business for any reason ( other than the legality of the transaction) is a moron. I don't care what color they are, who they sleep with, or which made up superhero they pray to - if their money is green, we can deal.

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like onlinebiker's post
25-08-2017, 03:24 PM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
Hi onlinebiker.

I was very interested to read this thread when it began. The OP seemed reasonable.

Then Brian lost his mind.

I stopped reading.

I really don't think Brian "gets" you.

His loss.

Cheers mate. Dale. Smile

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like Banjo's post
25-08-2017, 04:26 PM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(25-08-2017 03:24 PM)Banjo Wrote:  Hi onlinebiker.

I was very interested to read this thread when it began. The OP seemed reasonable.

Then Brian lost his mind.

I stopped reading.

I really don't think Brian "gets" you.

His loss.

Cheers mate. Dale. Smile

Wholeheartedly agree. Dude is off his rocker pissed about Trump and tells everyone as often as possible. Makes it hard to read over and over. I think biker was very reasonable and composed.

It pays to keep an open mind, but not so open your brains fall out.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like reeveseb's post
25-08-2017, 07:32 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....

Well those are private firms and if they don't want to host people using their products for those purposes, that's their prerogative. That's perfectly in line with the terms of the First Amendment. If you don't like that, use another search engine e.g FuhrerCrawler or similar.

"IN THRUST WE TRUST"

"We were conservative Jews and that meant we obeyed God's Commandments until His rules became a royal pain in the ass."

- Joel Chastnoff, The 188th Crybaby Brigade
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-08-2017, 12:17 PM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(25-08-2017 01:14 PM)Brian37 Wrote:  
(25-08-2017 12:20 PM)PaulPablo Wrote:  I think the objection in that case wasn't against people not wanting to shop there but court involvement. Court involvement being against the free market.
I don't know if the person went broke or not though, but they also received death threats and so on.


Oh bullshit, the courts are there for everyone, not one class, not one party not one economic view.

If the courts never got involved we would still have segregation....

What you're saying is technically correct, the courts ended the segregation....the segregation they had previously upheld and enforced by law.

What you're saying about might makes right not making an economy, it pretty much always does. Even if you're talking about government or court coercion the bottom line is always force.
That force will always as far as I can tell be directed for whatever cause the majority of people in powerful positions want, whether it's for segregation or against it.
A free market means that instead of people in the power of government deciding what other people do, based on their decisions, the people who own their business get to decide what they want to do with what they own.

I'm playing devils advocate here slightly because I'm just repeating arguments I've heard from videos I've seen which are pro free market.
I'm really undecided and cautious with my own opinions about the topic.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-08-2017, 02:43 PM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(23-08-2017 10:04 AM)TSG Wrote:  
(23-08-2017 09:19 AM)Brian37 Wrote:  No, I will not apologize for saying FUCK TRUMP, FUCK THE KKK AND FUCK NAZIS.....

Dude. Calm down, drink some tea: you're not getting virtue points for using as many ALL CAPS and fucking swears as possible.

Nobody's saying it's alright to incite violence except the people who want to incite violence. OP's intent was not to do that, obviously. This is about normal speech. At no point did onlinebiker even mention Trump, but suddenly you go off on a mad tirade about the president, completely ignoring the question Biker was asking.

If someone is a White Supremacist, and not inciting violence, should his opinions be censored by companies like Google? I'm pretty sure that's what he was asking.

LOL... poor old Brian seems to have a very short fuse! I've never seen somebody other than this bloke turn nearly every thread in which he posts into an enraged, spittle-laden tirade about his well-known, venomous dislike of Trump.

I'm guessing he's got the uppercase word "FUCK" as a key-combo shortcut—he seems incapable of debating anything and everything without using it multiple times.

And my view on internet censorship mirrors many others here; that only government instrumentalities can or should be able to apply it under exceptional conditions. It's certainly not the purview of corporatists like Google or YouTube or even ISPs.

I'm a creationist... I believe that man created God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like SYZ's post
26-08-2017, 02:45 PM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(25-08-2017 03:24 PM)Banjo Wrote:  ...
Then Brian lost his mind.
...

Again. Drinking Beverage

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Anjele's post
31-08-2017, 08:01 AM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
On the subject of Confederacy / White Supremacy, here's a heap of knowledgy stuff I didn't know...

Memetic conditioning is a powerful tool.





Blink

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: