4 ms·

It may be easy enough to identify someone as Richard Spencer as a white nationalist, but the issue is with knowing where to draw the line. That line is not clea

It may be easy enough to identify someone as Richard Spencer as a white nationalist, but the issue is with knowing where to draw the line. That line is not clearly drawn right now.

maym86 8y ago
It's easy to start drawing the line at the low hanging fruit. Let's start with holocaust denial which Zuckerberg raised last week. This argument that it's complex doesn't mean we can't do something and act in the most agregious and obvious cases. Facebook already censors for business reasons and draws lines. Why can't they do it in other places and make it clear where they are. Their objections are based on free speech but are likely really about cost - they don't want to spend money to do it.
prolepunk 8y ago
How about we start with whoever is calling for extermination of people with identifiable characteristics such race/religion/etc or using a number of well known dog whistles against those groups, should be banned. The sarcasm/satire/meme defense is not a real thing. It's not that it's hard identify Nazis, it's that they make Facebook money and that's why Facebook is not willing to deal with them.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- mistermann 8y ago
  > How about we start with whoever is calling for extermination of people with identifiable characteristics such race/religion/etc or using a number of well known dog whistles against those groups The issue with this approach is what constitutes a dog whistle seems to be growing rapidly, and largely relies upon the imagination of the person judging. On a related note, I'm curious where you are encountering all these nazis you speak so passionately about, and what definition you're using for nazi.....might the deciding factor be the detection of a dog whistle, which is why you seem to encounter so many? Or for a more concrete approach to the question: I an an unambiguous opponent of open borders - does that make me a nazi?
  - jessaustin 8y ago
    The only exception would be if you're a NIMBY talking about the "borders" of your neighborhood. Social media critics have to worry about home values, too.
    - mistermann 8y ago
      Just to confirm I'm not misunderstanding you (and the downvoters, presumably).....if I am opposed to the complete removal of my nation's borders, you consider me to generally support: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism Is that correct? If so, do you realize the implications of that belief?
      - jessaustin 8y ago
        See irony, dude. My comment highlighted the hypocrisy of your downvoters, in an amusing way. They're happy to have immigrants in the county, because fast food. They're much less happy to have them in the neighborhood, because racism. That isn't to say that I agree with you. Although it's true that immigrants as a percentage of overall population have increased since the 1960s, that increase is slowing and we're only now approaching the percentages we had at the turn of the century. Immigration back then has been a long-term benefit to the nation, and immigration now will probably be the same.
        mistermann 8y ago
        > See irony, dude. More likely a misunderstanding on my part, and now on yours if you believe this is irony. > That isn't to say that I agree with you.....< immigrants as a percentage of overall population have increased since the 1960s, that increase is slowing> I'm not saying anything about immigration levels, I am talking about this increasingly popular idea that a lack of support for open borders is inherently racist. It is lazy, stupid thinking, and the prevalence of this sort of thinking seems to be growing, even on relatively highly objective and intellectual sites like HN. This sort of thinking has consequences.
vkou 8y ago
The same can be said about pornography, and Facebook has no issue with drawing a wobbly line on that subject. They ban porn, they ban maybe-porn, and they sometimes ban things-that-are-probably-not-porn-but-let's-be-safe-and-ban-it-anyways. They don't want pornography on their website. That's all there is to it. It speaks a lot about their position on it: "Not on our platform." That they refuse to draw a line about holocaust deniers speaks volumes. Specifically, it speaks that they are perfectly fine with being a platform for white nationalism.
- brandonmenc 8y ago
  > That they refuse to draw a line about holocaust deniers speaks volumes. Specifically, it speaks that they are perfectly fine with being a platform for white nationalism. Whites are far from being the only people who deny the Holocaust.
  - vkou 8y ago
    White nationalist groups are not the only ones who do, but they are the most popular, influential, and scariest ones.
    - drak0n1c 8y ago
      Please cite sources on popularity, influence, and scariness before you ascribe total responsibility to a single sub-group. The fact that multiple governments and millions of people around the world endorse Holocaust denial ranks higher on the threat scale to me, as a Jewish American, than the far fewer and less locally-popular white nationalists here in the west. https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/05/the-world-is-full-of-holocaust-deniers/370870/ https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/05/th...
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
      - vkou 8y ago
        As a Jewish American, you have very little to worry about, when Lin Cheng, in rural China has not heard of the Holocaust. He almost certainly doesn't care very much about it, one way or another. You probably haven't heard about the genocide in Equatorial Guinea. You probably don't care much about the particulars of your knowledge of that atrocity, either. It's not key to his value system. He doesn't live next door. He isn't marching with the Proud Boys, who want to make America white again.

It may be easy enough to identify someone as Richard Spencer as a white nationalist, but the issue is with knowing where to draw the line. That line is not clearly drawn right now.

maym86 8y ago

It's easy to start drawing the line at the low hanging fruit. Let's start with holocaust denial which Zuckerberg raised last week. This argument that it's complex doesn't mean we can't do something and act in the most agregious and obvious cases. Facebook already censors for business reasons and draws lines. Why can't they do it in other places and make it clear where they are. Their objections are based on free speech but are likely really about cost - they don't want to spend money to do it.

prolepunk 8y ago

How about we start with whoever is calling for extermination of people with identifiable characteristics such race/religion/etc or using a number of well known dog whistles against those groups, should be banned. The sarcasm/satire/meme defense is not a real thing. It's not that it's hard identify Nazis, it's that they make Facebook money and that's why Facebook is not willing to deal with them.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
mistermann 8y ago
> How about we start with whoever is calling for extermination of people with identifiable characteristics such race/religion/etc or using a number of well known dog whistles against those groups The issue with this approach is what constitutes a dog whistle seems to be growing rapidly, and largely relies upon the imagination of the person judging. On a related note, I'm curious where you are encountering all these nazis you speak so passionately about, and what definition you're using for nazi.....might the deciding factor be the detection of a dog whistle, which is why you seem to encounter so many? Or for a more concrete approach to the question: I an an unambiguous opponent of open borders - does that make me a nazi?
- jessaustin 8y ago
  The only exception would be if you're a NIMBY talking about the "borders" of your neighborhood. Social media critics have to worry about home values, too.
  - mistermann 8y ago
    Just to confirm I'm not misunderstanding you (and the downvoters, presumably).....if I am opposed to the complete removal of my nation's borders, you consider me to generally support: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazism Is that correct? If so, do you realize the implications of that belief?
    - jessaustin 8y ago
      See irony, dude. My comment highlighted the hypocrisy of your downvoters, in an amusing way. They're happy to have immigrants in the county, because fast food. They're much less happy to have them in the neighborhood, because racism. That isn't to say that I agree with you. Although it's true that immigrants as a percentage of overall population have increased since the 1960s, that increase is slowing and we're only now approaching the percentages we had at the turn of the century. Immigration back then has been a long-term benefit to the nation, and immigration now will probably be the same.
      - mistermann 8y ago
        > See irony, dude. More likely a misunderstanding on my part, and now on yours if you believe this is irony. > That isn't to say that I agree with you.....< immigrants as a percentage of overall population have increased since the 1960s, that increase is slowing> I'm not saying anything about immigration levels, I am talking about this increasingly popular idea that a lack of support for open borders is inherently racist. It is lazy, stupid thinking, and the prevalence of this sort of thinking seems to be growing, even on relatively highly objective and intellectual sites like HN. This sort of thinking has consequences.

vkou 8y ago

The same can be said about pornography, and Facebook has no issue with drawing a wobbly line on that subject. They ban porn, they ban maybe-porn, and they sometimes ban things-that-are-probably-not-porn-but-let's-be-safe-and-ban-it-anyways. They don't want pornography on their website. That's all there is to it. It speaks a lot about their position on it: "Not on our platform." That they refuse to draw a line about holocaust deniers speaks volumes. Specifically, it speaks that they are perfectly fine with being a platform for white nationalism.

brandonmenc 8y ago
> That they refuse to draw a line about holocaust deniers speaks volumes. Specifically, it speaks that they are perfectly fine with being a platform for white nationalism. Whites are far from being the only people who deny the Holocaust.
- vkou 8y ago
  White nationalist groups are not the only ones who do, but they are the most popular, influential, and scariest ones.
  - drak0n1c 8y ago
    Please cite sources on popularity, influence, and scariness before you ascribe total responsibility to a single sub-group. The fact that multiple governments and millions of people around the world endorse Holocaust denial ranks higher on the threat scale to me, as a Jewish American, than the far fewer and less locally-popular white nationalists here in the west. https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/05/the-world-is-full-of-holocaust-deniers/370870/ https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/05/th...
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - vkou 8y ago
      As a Jewish American, you have very little to worry about, when Lin Cheng, in rural China has not heard of the Holocaust. He almost certainly doesn't care very much about it, one way or another. You probably haven't heard about the genocide in Equatorial Guinea. You probably don't care much about the particulars of your knowledge of that atrocity, either. It's not key to his value system. He doesn't live next door. He isn't marching with the Proud Boys, who want to make America white again.