9 ms·

There neither is any 'scandal' or 'censorship'. Patreon's decision was a textbook application of John Stuart Mill's "Harm Principle".

by yedava 9y ago

wsrGoWkWeJ3i7w 9y ago
hate speech is free speech
almonj 9y ago
They banned a middle of the road conservative blogger, it has nothing to do with preventing harm. They got pressured by hardcore pro-government pro-mass immigration groups and caved. Very shameful and terribly stupid business decision making.
- paulgb 9y ago
  Which blogger are you referring to?
  - nostrebored 9y ago
    Lauren Southern. She was banned after throwing flares and attempting to block a ship (with no refugees on board) from leaving port to pick up refugees who she believes are being trafficked into Italy with the government's assistance. She was arrested for participation in this act of protest and then Patreon made the claim that her activities could have caused loss of life (which is ridiculous).
    - eropple 9y ago
      The alt-right is not "middle-of-the-road conservative". The alt-right is literal-not-figurative fascism with memes and, occasionally, good dress sense. If you consider white supremacists (oh, sorry, white nationalists (oh, sorry, ethno-nationalists)) to be "middle of the road conservatives," there is a profoundly deeper problem in your calculus.
      - mrkrabo 9y ago
        I'm not a fan of the alt-right but the fact is that it's here to stay.
        eropple 9y ago
        Probably true. So we fight them. It stinks and it sucks, but it's on all of us to do so to the best of our ability and those of us who were dealt a more fortunate set of life's lottery balls (and I say this as an affluent, straight, white, cis American) have a duty to use our good fortune to help others.
        biggerbistro 9y ago
        Isn't considering yourself lucky for being white a somewhat racist viewpoint? Perhaps you have more in common than you thought.
        s73ver 9y ago
        The "if you acknowledge racism exists, then you're the real racist!" argument has never held water before.
        bluthru 9y ago
        I want to help others. I also don't think it's a prerequisite to turn every majority white country minority white to help others.
      - nostrebored 9y ago
        I didn't say that they are middle-of-the-road conservative. The alt-right is a meaningless catch all that currently means "conservatives or nationalists with strong opinions who I disagree with". For reference, I don't belong to the alt right, and I am economically conservative, socially moderately liberal. What makes you think that Lauren Southern is a white supremacist? Do you think that someone should be allowed to try to impede human trafficking operations? Do you think that in the absence of these NGO ships going out to sea that so many people would be drowning on rafts in the middle of the ocean? Because if Lauren is right, then you are suggesting that incentivizing a life-endangering risk for the purposes of being taken in to human trafficking is an ethical action.
    - fweespeech 9y ago
      > She was arrested for participation in this act of protest and then Patreon made the claim that her activities could have caused loss of life (which is ridiculous). You don't get to go into other countries, break their laws, and expect private corporations to back you to the hilt. They are under no obligation to put themselves at risk for your beliefs. That isn't a reasonable expectation by any stretch of the imagination. Using the logic you are applying, you believe Patreon should be compelled to support the sales of "software" in the US even if its malware on the basis of free speech.
      - nostrebored 9y ago
        Patreon had no liability in this situation. Patreon doesn't support the sale of software, and software as speech is a much murkier area than... actual, literal speech. This is effectively saying that investigative journalists shouldn't get too political in unpopular causes, lest they have their livelihood taken away from them. This is a suppression of free speech (not legally ofc) on a platform that syndicates political news and opinions. “it appears that you are currently raising funds in order to take part in activities that are likely to cause loss of life." This is taking a political stance; anyone on either side of rescue missions for refugees is funding something that is likely to cause loss of life. One is just politically en vogue.
        fweespeech 9y ago
        > This is effectively saying that investigative journalists shouldn't get too political in unpopular causes, lest they have their livelihood taken away from them. This is a suppression of free speech (not legally ofc) on a platform that syndicates political news and opinions. 1) You are arguing now that journalists should have legal immunity. > Patreon had no liability in this situation. Patreon doesn't support the sale of software, and software as speech is a much murkier area than... actual, literal speech. 2) She was taking actions that physically prevented other people from taking actions. That isn't literal speech and is much further from speech than software is. > This is taking a political stance; anyone on either side of rescue missions for refugees is funding something that is likely to cause loss of life. One is just politically en vogue. 3) No. This is you attempting to frame outrageous criminal acts as "politics".
jblow 9y ago
For this to be the case, they would have to be applying the principle to everyone equally, which they apparently don't. This has given pause to some people -- for example, Sam Harris, one of the top artists on Patreon, is evacuating the service (even though this is likely to cost him a fair bit of money) to avoid the future potential to be financially pressured over ideology.
- eropple 9y ago
  Patreon's pretty down-the-line: don't advocate that people break the law and don't harass people. They've thrown antifa off their site. They throw alt-right shitheads off their site. We've met a couple times, Jon, and I've heard you speak; despite your public persona being prickly, I kind of got the feeling you were wiser than this.
  - lr4444lr 9y ago
    So those people advocating for those non-violent but illegal sit-ins during the Civil Rights era would've been marked for expulsion too?
    - nostrebored 9y ago
      The thing is, the reason they gave her for banning in the initial letter they sent her is actually consistent with international law -- she was raising funds to send out a search and rescue ship which returns refugees to Libya.
      - azernik 9y ago
        The reason they gave was fundraising for a ship that was blocking SAR ships taking refugees to Italy. They included footage of her actions blocking such a ship in the past, together with her actual fundraising appeal in which she referred to stopping boats. Not sure if it's against international law when conducted in international waters, but that's definitely against Patreon's content policy of fundraising for activities that endanger human life.

There neither is any 'scandal' or 'censorship'. Patreon's decision was a textbook application of John Stuart Mill's "Harm Principle".

by yedava 9y ago

There neither is any 'scandal' or 'censorship'. Patreon's decision was a textbook application of John Stuart Mill's "Harm Principle".

wsrGoWkWeJ3i7w 9y ago

hate speech is free speech

almonj 9y ago

They banned a middle of the road conservative blogger, it has nothing to do with preventing harm. They got pressured by hardcore pro-government pro-mass immigration groups and caved. Very shameful and terribly stupid business decision making.

paulgb 9y ago
Which blogger are you referring to?
- nostrebored 9y ago
  Lauren Southern. She was banned after throwing flares and attempting to block a ship (with no refugees on board) from leaving port to pick up refugees who she believes are being trafficked into Italy with the government's assistance. She was arrested for participation in this act of protest and then Patreon made the claim that her activities could have caused loss of life (which is ridiculous).
  - eropple 9y ago
    The alt-right is not "middle-of-the-road conservative". The alt-right is literal-not-figurative fascism with memes and, occasionally, good dress sense. If you consider white supremacists (oh, sorry, white nationalists (oh, sorry, ethno-nationalists)) to be "middle of the road conservatives," there is a profoundly deeper problem in your calculus.
    - mrkrabo 9y ago
      I'm not a fan of the alt-right but the fact is that it's here to stay.
      - eropple 9y ago
        Probably true. So we fight them. It stinks and it sucks, but it's on all of us to do so to the best of our ability and those of us who were dealt a more fortunate set of life's lottery balls (and I say this as an affluent, straight, white, cis American) have a duty to use our good fortune to help others.
        biggerbistro 9y ago
        Isn't considering yourself lucky for being white a somewhat racist viewpoint? Perhaps you have more in common than you thought.
        s73ver 9y ago
        The "if you acknowledge racism exists, then you're the real racist!" argument has never held water before.
        bluthru 9y ago
        I want to help others. I also don't think it's a prerequisite to turn every majority white country minority white to help others.
    - nostrebored 9y ago
      I didn't say that they are middle-of-the-road conservative. The alt-right is a meaningless catch all that currently means "conservatives or nationalists with strong opinions who I disagree with". For reference, I don't belong to the alt right, and I am economically conservative, socially moderately liberal. What makes you think that Lauren Southern is a white supremacist? Do you think that someone should be allowed to try to impede human trafficking operations? Do you think that in the absence of these NGO ships going out to sea that so many people would be drowning on rafts in the middle of the ocean? Because if Lauren is right, then you are suggesting that incentivizing a life-endangering risk for the purposes of being taken in to human trafficking is an ethical action.
  - fweespeech 9y ago
    > She was arrested for participation in this act of protest and then Patreon made the claim that her activities could have caused loss of life (which is ridiculous). You don't get to go into other countries, break their laws, and expect private corporations to back you to the hilt. They are under no obligation to put themselves at risk for your beliefs. That isn't a reasonable expectation by any stretch of the imagination. Using the logic you are applying, you believe Patreon should be compelled to support the sales of "software" in the US even if its malware on the basis of free speech.
    - nostrebored 9y ago
      Patreon had no liability in this situation. Patreon doesn't support the sale of software, and software as speech is a much murkier area than... actual, literal speech. This is effectively saying that investigative journalists shouldn't get too political in unpopular causes, lest they have their livelihood taken away from them. This is a suppression of free speech (not legally ofc) on a platform that syndicates political news and opinions. “it appears that you are currently raising funds in order to take part in activities that are likely to cause loss of life." This is taking a political stance; anyone on either side of rescue missions for refugees is funding something that is likely to cause loss of life. One is just politically en vogue.
      - fweespeech 9y ago
        > This is effectively saying that investigative journalists shouldn't get too political in unpopular causes, lest they have their livelihood taken away from them. This is a suppression of free speech (not legally ofc) on a platform that syndicates political news and opinions. 1) You are arguing now that journalists should have legal immunity. > Patreon had no liability in this situation. Patreon doesn't support the sale of software, and software as speech is a much murkier area than... actual, literal speech. 2) She was taking actions that physically prevented other people from taking actions. That isn't literal speech and is much further from speech than software is. > This is taking a political stance; anyone on either side of rescue missions for refugees is funding something that is likely to cause loss of life. One is just politically en vogue. 3) No. This is you attempting to frame outrageous criminal acts as "politics".

jblow 9y ago

For this to be the case, they would have to be applying the principle to everyone equally, which they apparently don't. This has given pause to some people -- for example, Sam Harris, one of the top artists on Patreon, is evacuating the service (even though this is likely to cost him a fair bit of money) to avoid the future potential to be financially pressured over ideology.

eropple 9y ago
Patreon's pretty down-the-line: don't advocate that people break the law and don't harass people. They've thrown antifa off their site. They throw alt-right shitheads off their site. We've met a couple times, Jon, and I've heard you speak; despite your public persona being prickly, I kind of got the feeling you were wiser than this.
- lr4444lr 9y ago
  So those people advocating for those non-violent but illegal sit-ins during the Civil Rights era would've been marked for expulsion too?
  - nostrebored 9y ago
    The thing is, the reason they gave her for banning in the initial letter they sent her is actually consistent with international law -- she was raising funds to send out a search and rescue ship which returns refugees to Libya.
    - azernik 9y ago
      The reason they gave was fundraising for a ship that was blocking SAR ships taking refugees to Italy. They included footage of her actions blocking such a ship in the past, together with her actual fundraising appeal in which she referred to stopping boats. Not sure if it's against international law when conducted in international waters, but that's definitely against Patreon's content policy of fundraising for activities that endanger human life.