Censoring White Supremacy
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-08-2017, 10:25 AM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(23-08-2017 10:06 AM)outtathereligioncloset Wrote:  Censorship is a slippery slope. Who gets to decide what's allowed and what's not? There are people offended by sales of things like vibrators online. And books like Fifty Shades of Gray. Do they get to put a stop to those sales? Using that as a measure, do they get to shut down this site because they find it offensive? Because we sometimes mock and yes, even slam their god and Jesus?

I remember an episode of the TV show WKRP in Cincinnati where the radio station caved and agreed to not use a list of words considered profanity on the air. Having given that inch, the group going after censorship then came back to them with songs they demanded they stop playing as well. None of which contained any of the swear words. The Beatles "Imagine" was at the top of the list. So having censored words, they now wanted to censor ideas.

"Imagine there's no heaven. It's easy if you try. No hell below us. Above us only sky."

This of course was a fictional radio station on a fictional sitcom. But bowing to censorship is opening the door to having our freedoms disappear.

The radio station told them to go to hell. Maybe not in those exact words but still. The thing about freedom of speech whether it's on TV or the internet or wherever, is that you don't have to listen. We know how to change the channel. And in person, you are not a tree, you can move away from it. We can choose not to watch religious shows. We can choose not to watch channels that support hate. We can tell their sponsors we won't buy their products because we are disgusted with the shows on which they advertise.

Censoring free speech? No. Not beyond the fact that you can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater. Incite a riot? The police should obviously step in.

Does pretty much every word Trump says fill me with disgust? Yes. But I know how to turn the channel. Not censoring is not the same thing as supporting. Not by a long shop.

Not playing this bullshit game.

We had at one point in our history back in the early 1900s a congress that was a majority KKK members. It took the sane to stand up to that fascism and it took the civil rights movement too. And since then laws have been RIGHTFULLY in place to arrest those who incite violence and sue the organizations who promote those evil vile organizations.

The KKK and Neo Nazis are not about merely being "offensive", they promote the ideology of destroying the protection of pluralism.

Bill Maher would be an example of being "offensive", but he has never and will never promote the idea of destroying pluralism.

I am hardly politically correct being a liberal myself. I do want my own right to criticize and even blaspheme religion. But, I have never, and will never advocate political vilification to do those things. That is the difference between blasphemy and promoting fascism. One is blasphemy and the other is an attack on the institutions that protect pluralism.

We are not talking about protecting things like South Park or Dave Shapel or George Carlin. We are talking about preventing a rise to a monochromatic fascist state.

If you cannot see the difference, then I cannot help you. But do not dare pull this bullshit slippery slope with me.

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
[+] 3 users Like Brian37's post
23-08-2017, 10:36 AM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(23-08-2017 10:20 AM)onlinebiker Wrote:  
(23-08-2017 10:14 AM)ResidentEvilFan Wrote:  Google and PayPal can do whatever they want to restrict that to anyone using their sites, they are private companies.

It can be argued that as these companies exist to serve the public's greater good, that they should be regulated for fairness, like TV stations - which are also private companies.

Besides, suppressing ideas doesn't make them go away. If anything it makes them more powerful. Ban them from Google they'll move to Yahoo. Ban them from Yahoo they'll move to Bing. Ban them from Bing they'll move to Internet Explorer. Ban them from Internet Explorer? Congratulations! You've just given them complete and utter vindication for their narrative that the Jewish establishment are trying to censor Good Ol' Wite Crischin Folk and thus violence is an imperative in their minds to effect their sense of 'justice.'

[Image: giphy.webp]

More Min Gee Ziss
[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TSG's post
23-08-2017, 10:40 AM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(23-08-2017 10:36 AM)TSG Wrote:  
(23-08-2017 10:20 AM)onlinebiker Wrote:  It can be argued that as these companies exist to serve the public's greater good, that they should be regulated for fairness, like TV stations - which are also private companies.

Besides, suppressing ideas doesn't make them go away. If anything it makes them more powerful. Ban them from Google they'll move to Yahoo. Ban them from Yahoo they'll move to Bing. Ban them from Bing they'll move to Internet Explorer. Ban them from Internet Explorer? Congratulations! You've just given them complete and utter vindication for their narrative that the Jewish establishment are trying to censor Good Ol' Wite Crischin Folk and thus violence is an imperative in their minds to effect their sense of 'justice.'

[Image: giphy.webp]

I've not seen anyone yet claim that ignoring ideologies will make them go away. That is a straw man of what some of us are actually saying.

You certainly can't take the teeth away from such violent and bigoted ideologies by allowing them free reign over shared public spaces where they can and have erected monuments to their bigotry (and/or later adopted them as such)

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
23-08-2017, 10:44 AM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(23-08-2017 10:36 AM)TSG Wrote:  
(23-08-2017 10:20 AM)onlinebiker Wrote:  It can be argued that as these companies exist to serve the public's greater good, that they should be regulated for fairness, like TV stations - which are also private companies.

Besides, suppressing ideas doesn't make them go away. If anything it makes them more powerful. Ban them from Google they'll move to Yahoo. Ban them from Yahoo they'll move to Bing. Ban them from Bing they'll move to Internet Explorer. Ban them from Internet Explorer? Congratulations! You've just given them complete and utter vindication for their narrative that the Jewish establishment are trying to censor Good Ol' Wite Crischin Folk and thus violence is an imperative in their minds to effect their sense of 'justice.'

[Image: giphy.webp]

Nope sorry, standing up to intolerant groups who would seek to destroy pluralism is not going to make them more powerful. If it worked like that the Civil Rights movement wouldn't have lead to the end of segregation.

I am getting sick of this fallacy of equivocation.

You are failing to take the climate into account as it stands now. We are not in a time where we can simply ignore them. 45 has used vile demagoguery that those assholes here that has emboldened them. But because the GOP sat and did nothing more than a verbal slap on the wrist, they grew.

The time for talk is over. This is not a fight the left wanted, or started. You are either going to be on the right side of history and stand against 45 or you will be a party to his dangerous rhetoric.

No, hate will never 100% go away, but that cannot be used as an excuse to allow attacks on our institutions that protect pluralism and checks on power. That is exactly what 45 is doing, attempting to undermine our system.

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
23-08-2017, 10:46 AM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
"Condemn them all you want. With words. The second you try to implement laws about thought crimes, you open up an opportunity for the same thing to happen to you the second you have an opinion that the political climate of the day deems 'inappropriate.' I'm not saying you shouldn't condemn the KKK and neo-Nazis (who in their right mind would?), my complaint is that you missed the point of the thread to make points about Trump." (TSG)

EXACTLY!!! (Those explanation points are just for you, Norm D.) [Image: blow-a-kiss-smiley-emoticon.gif]

Where are we going and why am I in this hand basket?
"Life is not all lovely thorns and singing vultures, you know." ~ Morticia Addams
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like outtathereligioncloset's post
23-08-2017, 10:46 AM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(23-08-2017 10:40 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  I've not seen anyone yet claim that ignoring ideologies will make them go away. That is a straw man of what some of us are actually saying.
I wasn't representing anyone's specific argument, I was following the internet censorship rabbit-hole. If anything it's a strawman to say I was making a strawman.

More Min Gee Ziss
[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TSG's post
23-08-2017, 10:48 AM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(23-08-2017 10:46 AM)TSG Wrote:  
(23-08-2017 10:40 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  I've not seen anyone yet claim that ignoring ideologies will make them go away. That is a straw man of what some of us are actually saying.
I wasn't representing anyone's specific argument, I was following the internet censorship rabbit-hole. If anything it's a strawman to say I was making a strawman.

I don't think you understand what it means to construct a straw man. Following the "internet censorship rabbit-hole" to presume that those opposed to the white supremacists and their views want to simply ignore them under the assumption that they will go away, is an admitted straw man. It would be much better to engage with what people are actually advocating for instead of creating absurd arguments on our behalf that we don't support.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
23-08-2017, 10:57 AM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(23-08-2017 10:48 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  I don't think you understand what it means to construct a straw man. Following the "internet censorship rabbit-hole" to presume that those opposed to the white supremacists and their views want to simply ignore them under the assumption that they will go away, is an admitted straw man. It would be much better to engage with what people are actually advocating for instead of creating absurd arguments on our behalf that we don't support.

Onlinebiker asked if White Supremacist websites should be censored by private companies. I went down the list of what would happen if individual companies actually went through with that course of action. There. The end. What's the problem?

More Min Gee Ziss
[Image: giphy.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TSG's post
23-08-2017, 10:58 AM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
(23-08-2017 09:35 AM)Emma Wrote:  ...
And they prepare for violence at rallies and protest events. And they do use small perceived aggression as an excuse to become violent.

I'm confused.

Are you talking about the normal police in Phoenix or the militarised police at Standing Rock?

Or both?

Huh

Angel

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-08-2017, 10:59 AM
RE: Censoring White Supremacy
Hatred is hatred. Censorship is censorship. Blocking any group from internet access is giving someone the power to decide which groups that happens to, based (inevitably) on their own personal beliefs. "If you cannot see the difference, then I cannot help you."

Giving someone the power to block/prevent all hate speech on the internet would also, of course, mean somebody taking away Trump's twitter account... Which certainly wouldn't be a bad thing. But at what cost?

Where are we going and why am I in this hand basket?
"Life is not all lovely thorns and singing vultures, you know." ~ Morticia Addams
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like outtathereligioncloset's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: