5 ms·

No. But would take a stand against Patreon, and only Patreon, if such a thing were to occur. Patreon is "free" to cultivate their public image as they see fit a

No. But would take a stand against Patreon, and only Patreon, if such a thing were to occur. Patreon is "free" to cultivate their public image as they see fit and I am free to stop using them, discourage others from using it, etc. Nothing to do with their take on free speech.

stcredzero 8y ago
I think the lesson of the past, is that people who do the kind of suppression which Patreon is engaging in, which Pay Pal is engaging in, which people who ran "restricted" clubs engaged in -- the people doing these things are the ones who have decided that certain people are "undesirables" and are motivated by the darker side of human emotion. It's those who are on the wrong side of history. The right side is the side that would engage ideas. Instead, people with power are suppressing ideas and hoping they'll go away. If you need to suppress and cannot engage, then you are on the wrong side of history.
- bjourne 8y ago
  That is not the same thing. The white supremacists are thrown off Patreon because of what they do not because of who they are. Their ideas aren't being suppressed.
  - Sacho 8y ago
    Your statement is ironic as the person being discussed here was banned for denigrating the alt-right during his long-standing vendetta with them. Was he banned for "what he is"?
  - stcredzero 8y ago
    The white supremacists are thrown off Patreon because of what they do not because of who they are. The problem is this: The power you talk of is arbitrary. People like Sargon of Akkad, who are not white supremacists, are being thrown off Patreon, while the media are giving them cover by spinning a narrative. This is the classic pattern of oppression. You vilify people with a label, which becomes meaningless as the label is expanded to conveniently cover everyone who isn't toeing the line. This is exactly what happened with "counter-revolutionaries" and those who engaged in "economic sabotage" under the iron curtain. Their ideas aren't being suppressed. Lots of people want to fund Sargon of Akkad, who is a center-left classical liberal. Patreon, though it is a "funding platform," refuses. That is not only an example of suppression, it's an example of this kind of dishonest "expansion" of labels with media cover through inaccurate and convenient narratives. It's an example of the kind of dishonesty which happens when people in power think they can control speech and thought.
    - bjourne 8y ago
      I have no idea what your point is. Sargon of Akkad is ostensibly being kicked of Patreon because of what he has said not because of who he are. Comparing that to business refusing to serve customers because they are black is completely delusional. I'm as much in favor of free speech as you are, but I'm also in favor of property rights. "MY site, MY rules" is an old adage that has never been truer.
      - stcredzero 8y ago
        I have no idea what your point is This whole pattern of behavior with de-platforming and un-personing -- I recognize it from my past. In my personal history, it's the behavior of people who are toxic with a tribal outlook. In my youth, it was the homophobes and racists who acted like this towards me -- coercing and silencing, instead of applying universal principles and engaging in arguments. "MY site, MY rules" is an old adage that has never been truer. A company owned a company mining town, right down to the sidewalks and streets, then tried to apply that logic to prevent people they didn't like from distributing pamphlets. The 1st amendment should take precedence over property rights. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBozijndSLc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBozijndSLc If you have freedom of commerce, but no individual freedoms outside of that, like freedom of speech, then you basically have China. So it's a very reasonable trade off to make: give up a little freedom of commerce to ensure more basic personal freedoms.

stcredzero 8y ago

I think the lesson of the past, is that people who do the kind of suppression which Patreon is engaging in, which Pay Pal is engaging in, which people who ran "restricted" clubs engaged in -- the people doing these things are the ones who have decided that certain people are "undesirables" and are motivated by the darker side of human emotion. It's those who are on the wrong side of history. The right side is the side that would engage ideas. Instead, people with power are suppressing ideas and hoping they'll go away. If you need to suppress and cannot engage, then you are on the wrong side of history.

bjourne 8y ago
That is not the same thing. The white supremacists are thrown off Patreon because of what they do not because of who they are. Their ideas aren't being suppressed.
- Sacho 8y ago
  Your statement is ironic as the person being discussed here was banned for denigrating the alt-right during his long-standing vendetta with them. Was he banned for "what he is"?
- stcredzero 8y ago
  The white supremacists are thrown off Patreon because of what they do not because of who they are. The problem is this: The power you talk of is arbitrary. People like Sargon of Akkad, who are not white supremacists, are being thrown off Patreon, while the media are giving them cover by spinning a narrative. This is the classic pattern of oppression. You vilify people with a label, which becomes meaningless as the label is expanded to conveniently cover everyone who isn't toeing the line. This is exactly what happened with "counter-revolutionaries" and those who engaged in "economic sabotage" under the iron curtain. Their ideas aren't being suppressed. Lots of people want to fund Sargon of Akkad, who is a center-left classical liberal. Patreon, though it is a "funding platform," refuses. That is not only an example of suppression, it's an example of this kind of dishonest "expansion" of labels with media cover through inaccurate and convenient narratives. It's an example of the kind of dishonesty which happens when people in power think they can control speech and thought.
  - bjourne 8y ago
    I have no idea what your point is. Sargon of Akkad is ostensibly being kicked of Patreon because of what he has said not because of who he are. Comparing that to business refusing to serve customers because they are black is completely delusional. I'm as much in favor of free speech as you are, but I'm also in favor of property rights. "MY site, MY rules" is an old adage that has never been truer.
    - stcredzero 8y ago
      I have no idea what your point is This whole pattern of behavior with de-platforming and un-personing -- I recognize it from my past. In my personal history, it's the behavior of people who are toxic with a tribal outlook. In my youth, it was the homophobes and racists who acted like this towards me -- coercing and silencing, instead of applying universal principles and engaging in arguments. "MY site, MY rules" is an old adage that has never been truer. A company owned a company mining town, right down to the sidewalks and streets, then tried to apply that logic to prevent people they didn't like from distributing pamphlets. The 1st amendment should take precedence over property rights. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBozijndSLc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBozijndSLc If you have freedom of commerce, but no individual freedoms outside of that, like freedom of speech, then you basically have China. So it's a very reasonable trade off to make: give up a little freedom of commerce to ensure more basic personal freedoms.