4 ms·

I never watched infowars or read anything Jones said or wrote. But to think there are people who believe his crazy sh*t is really scary. Like the guy shooting

I never watched infowars or read anything Jones said or wrote. But to think there are people who believe his crazy sh*t is really scary. Like the guy shooting up a pizza shop because of Pizzagate. I compare him to the World Weekly News (next to the People magazines) from way back where they'd show a picture of space aliens shaking hands with the president. Why does anyone believe this crap?

colpabar 8y ago
Your first statement may give you a clue towards your closing question.
godzillabrennus 8y ago
There are a lot of people who have lost faith in the system of government that has largely forgotten them. Their kids are drug addicts. Their towns look like war zones. They have no ability to earn a living. They seek to be recognized and valued. They seek to matter to someone. In Alex Jones they find a leader who understands their issues and makes it easy to understand who to blame. If we want to disarm Alex we need to recognize there are real problems in America outside of the coastal areas.
- noobermin 8y ago
  The more people conflate the working class with Trump supporters, the more it feels like a plot to further discredit them. Not all of the rural areas or working class whites care about Alex Jones or even know who he is.
- shredprez 8y ago
  > If we want to disarm Alex we need to recognize there are real problems in America outside of the coastal areas. And inside the coastal areas as well. Still, none of this stress and anxiety condemns a reasonable human being to become a psychotic racist caricature (or a follower of the same). Desperation just turns up the dial on a person's fundamental system of values. It exposes the prejudice; it doesn't create it. Solving the problems listed would calm their rage to the benefit of all, but let's not kid ourselves that it would change any hearts or minds.
- hnisgroupthink 8y ago
  The government didn't forget about them. They stole their money through inflation and stole their kids through corporations and prison. They created massively scalable surveillance that watches everyone all over the world. Most people wish government would forget about them.
dsfasfsdfff 8y ago
And yet, you seem to have managed to use the internet for years without ever having to read his stuff. So what exactly is the case for banning him? It seems the standard tools (follow/unfollow/mute/block) are sufficient for people being able to avoid him. Do we really want social media monopolists and search engines to decide on what is truth and what isn't? What makes them the authority? Obviously Twitter, as a private company, is allowed to ban whoever they want. I just find it sad that people don't find it grounds enough to switch to a more open network. Maybe in part because such networks don't really exist atm, perhaps in part because of government regulation?
- atonse 8y ago
  Can you name me a single government regulation that would prevent a decentralized twitter from forming? Let's not just hand-wave our blame for the government. There have been many, many, many attempts to create a more open, decentralized version of Twitter, Facebook, and various Blogs. But they've all failed because there just simply wasn't enough incentive for people to leave these popular sites to go to a random site, for a value proposition that most don't really care to understand (open and federated vs run by one company)
  - dsfasfsdfff 8y ago
    I live in Germany. Here, for example, the government threatens to fine companies who don't censor "hate speech" - with no way to appeal and no exact definitions. So even if you just operate your own node, you might be liable for fines if you don't censor at the whim of the government. Maybe a decentralized Twitter, with some kind of magic anonymization that is usable for normal people, could work around that. But then I guess decentralized approaches never achieved a good performance so far? A decentralized alternative seems like the only hope, but it might be very difficult or impossible to implement.
- anigbrowl 8y ago
  I just find it sad that people don't find it grounds enough to switch to a more open network. Not having to see Alex Jones as often is a feature, not a bug.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

colpabar 8y ago

Your first statement may give you a clue towards your closing question.

godzillabrennus 8y ago

There are a lot of people who have lost faith in the system of government that has largely forgotten them. Their kids are drug addicts. Their towns look like war zones. They have no ability to earn a living. They seek to be recognized and valued. They seek to matter to someone. In Alex Jones they find a leader who understands their issues and makes it easy to understand who to blame. If we want to disarm Alex we need to recognize there are real problems in America outside of the coastal areas.

noobermin 8y ago
The more people conflate the working class with Trump supporters, the more it feels like a plot to further discredit them. Not all of the rural areas or working class whites care about Alex Jones or even know who he is.
shredprez 8y ago
> If we want to disarm Alex we need to recognize there are real problems in America outside of the coastal areas. And inside the coastal areas as well. Still, none of this stress and anxiety condemns a reasonable human being to become a psychotic racist caricature (or a follower of the same). Desperation just turns up the dial on a person's fundamental system of values. It exposes the prejudice; it doesn't create it. Solving the problems listed would calm their rage to the benefit of all, but let's not kid ourselves that it would change any hearts or minds.
hnisgroupthink 8y ago
The government didn't forget about them. They stole their money through inflation and stole their kids through corporations and prison. They created massively scalable surveillance that watches everyone all over the world. Most people wish government would forget about them.

dsfasfsdfff 8y ago

And yet, you seem to have managed to use the internet for years without ever having to read his stuff. So what exactly is the case for banning him? It seems the standard tools (follow/unfollow/mute/block) are sufficient for people being able to avoid him. Do we really want social media monopolists and search engines to decide on what is truth and what isn't? What makes them the authority? Obviously Twitter, as a private company, is allowed to ban whoever they want. I just find it sad that people don't find it grounds enough to switch to a more open network. Maybe in part because such networks don't really exist atm, perhaps in part because of government regulation?

atonse 8y ago
Can you name me a single government regulation that would prevent a decentralized twitter from forming? Let's not just hand-wave our blame for the government. There have been many, many, many attempts to create a more open, decentralized version of Twitter, Facebook, and various Blogs. But they've all failed because there just simply wasn't enough incentive for people to leave these popular sites to go to a random site, for a value proposition that most don't really care to understand (open and federated vs run by one company)
- dsfasfsdfff 8y ago
  I live in Germany. Here, for example, the government threatens to fine companies who don't censor "hate speech" - with no way to appeal and no exact definitions. So even if you just operate your own node, you might be liable for fines if you don't censor at the whim of the government. Maybe a decentralized Twitter, with some kind of magic anonymization that is usable for normal people, could work around that. But then I guess decentralized approaches never achieved a good performance so far? A decentralized alternative seems like the only hope, but it might be very difficult or impossible to implement.
anigbrowl 8y ago
I just find it sad that people don't find it grounds enough to switch to a more open network. Not having to see Alex Jones as often is a feature, not a bug.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]