6 ms·

> To the people that say "Where does it end?" – that's pretty easy. Let's start with curbing speech that encourages harming others. This may come as a surprise

• kevinh 8y ago
  This isn't the first line though–Facebook already bans things like ISIS propaganda. This is in a similar bucket.
  • ThomPete 8y ago
    White nationalism isn't even remotely like ISIS propaganda. I am no fan of that ideology for sure but it's actually about something very different than most people think and most people haven't actually spent the time understanding their argument before they form an opinion about it. Edit: Find it pretty crazy that this can't even be discussed without people accusing me of all sorts of things.
    • rexpop 8y ago
      Stochastic terrorism? It's still a terrorism pipeline. It's all well and good for you to say "white nationalism is very different from what most people think," but that doesn't stop the OP from being right. Nationalism of all kinds root from an insecurity, and white nationalism in particular is proppogated in colonial societies to encourage the alienation of brown colonial workers via, among other acts, stochastic terrorism. It's a lot like ISIS propaganda.
    • bdhe 8y ago
      How so?
    • elliekelly 8y ago
      > it's actually about something very different than most people think Can you explain what you mean by this?
      • pcbro141 8y ago
        Probably something like: "We don't encourage people to commit terrorist attacks, we only encourage them to do what it takes to ensure the survival and dominance of the white race."
      • ThomPete 8y ago
        It's an ideology and it doesn't in it's essence include any form of violent action at least according to ex their US leader. There are however idiots who support that ideology who end up spewing their hateful crap out on the internet and in forums. Those are two very different things and unfortunately people who are otherwise smart people like here on HN aren't able to separate the two which is why I am being downvoted simply suggesting it's not that simple. ISIS ideology is about killing the infidels and actually doing it, White Nationalism as an ideology about the survival of the white race. Look it up on wikipedia and you will find that it's not the same as the idiots who spew their hateful crap.
        • kjdndisneinj 8y ago
          You're doing exactly what literally every expert on white nationalism says that white nationalists do to make their abhorrent views appealing to a wider audience. Either do some self-reflection or admit you're a white nationalist.
        • checkyoursudo 8y ago
          If the theorists and proponents have such a difficult time separating an ideology from attempts at violent implementation of a program based on that ideology, then perhaps the violence is in fact part of the ideology after all? If it quacks like a violent duck ...
        • josefresco 8y ago
          > It's an ideology ... that's wrong, scientifically and morally. Stop trying to gaslight us all into believing this "ideology" is anything other than backwards thinking, ignorant, hate filled nonsense.
    • anigbrowl 8y ago
      Yeah it is. I'd prefer not to post example content here on HN, but like most political movements ISIS/jihadis and white supremacists have both a public and private position, and the public one may often appear innocuous or reasonable at first appearance, although there are differences in recruiting tactics, eg https://cchs.gwu.edu/sites/g/files/zaxdzs2371/f/downloads/Nazis%20v.%20ISIS%20Final_0.pdf https://cchs.gwu.edu/sites/g/files/zaxdzs2371/f/downloads/Na...
    • Dylan16807 8y ago
      > it's actually about something very different than most people think and most people haven't actually spent the time understanding their argument before they form an opinion about it. That was facebook's policy as of yesterday. They changed it for good reason, and it was not a small reason to overcome that much inertia.
    • pcbro141 8y ago
      These recent white supremacist terrorists like the Christchurch attacker all have the same white nationalist memes and talking points on their social media. The Christchurch terrorist said in his own manifesto the white nationalist memes played a part in his radicalization. The white supremacist groups in their guides admit that the their ironic racist memes are propaganda to get people in their funnel and progressively radicalize them. I'm glad that after these white supremacist terror attacks and seeing how these attackers all share the same things on social media, more people are waking up and realizing these memes are like ISIS propaganda.
    • kjdndisneinj 8y ago
      Your comment is an exceptional example of fascist propaganda, and illustrates how it can spread in "polite society". It even includes a cute attempt to hide it by suggesting you're "not a fan". However, you're not even suggesting that they have a right to speech, but white nationalist ideology HAS MERIT and should be researched. Are you kidding? It starts with an appeal to consider differences of opinion. The white nationalists ease in the ignorant by veiling their true beliefs by using dogwhistles like "white replacement" or "white genocide". This is commonly referred to as "hiding your power level" on white nationalist forums. They suggest that people of different races just shouldn't live together, or are somehow inherently incompatible. To people scared of the uncertainty of the future, or who are otherwise downtrodden, this is appealing. Suddenly you have an easy explanation for that fear. In an more internet context, some join "just for the memes" but are gradually radicalized by the ideology. Then, someone acts on the ideology and kills a bunch of people, exactly what the memes were espousing in the first place. The world, for a short time, realizes what happened. But suddenly all of that is a joke, it's not real, it's just a difference of opinion again. All of this ignores that the white nationalist ideology calls for an ethnostate, which inevitably leads to genocide. It's an inherently violent ideology, not just a "difference of opinion". It's exactly what ISIS wants; a state with absolute control by a particular ethnic group on racial or religious lines. If this was just ignorant, take some time to research how hate groups spread propaganda. If it's not, follow your leader.
      • ThomPete 8y ago
        You are damn right I would ask people to research what things actually mean before they go claiming other people spread fascist propaganda. I am perfectly capable of both trying to understand the world I live and why some people think what they think and at the same time disagreeing with them. If you think you are helping fight their ideology by banning it you are going to be sorely disappointed. That will not end well.
        • kjdndisneinj 8y ago
          Based on your other comments, follow your leader.
    • otikik 8y ago
      One dehumanizes people based on religion and the other dehumanizes people based on skin color. They are both cars, one is blue and the other is yellow.
    • Macross8299 8y ago
      >White nationalism isn't even remotely like ISIS propaganda. I don't think so. One wants a caliphate, one wants an ethnostate. The end result is the same for anyone who isn't part of the extremist in-group.
      • CarlSchmitt 8y ago
        > "extremist..." I guess someone who wants to live in a geographic area with people who are similar to them and share a common culture are "extremist" nowadays...this is very odd to me
• QualityReboot 8y ago
  It's a surprisingly comforting response. This ends with decentralization. Let's force all platforms to ban anything even mildly offensive.
  • rexpop 8y ago
    Tell us more about your vision for decentralization? Is it anything like twitter.com/BuyThisPlatform ?
    • QualityReboot 8y ago
      I think email works really well as a federated solution. Mastodon is trying to make a Twitter clone that works more like email. That's the logical evolution here IMO. Eventually, we probably arrive at something truly decentralized on a blockchain governed by smart contracts, but that's not at all needed to replace the major platforms. A federated answer similar to email would be good enough. Then each server in the federation can choose what content to replicate or ban.
• dgacmu 8y ago
  I have genuine concerns about civil liberties, but as others noted, there's a difference between using the power of government to prevent speech and a company refusing to provide a megaphone.
• anigbrowl 8y ago
  Well, we already have a point of comparison in how platforms handle content from groups like ISIS. The thing about groups who adhere to eliminationist positions is that they so obviously don't care about anyone else's civil liberties, so one could argue that respect for the rights of others is the ante required to sit at the social table.
• camelNotation 8y ago
  We always draw a line somewhere when we write a law. Saying "I don't want to draw a line at all" is an attempt to abdicate our responsibility to protect weaker members of society under the guise of some higher ideal that is not threatened by good laws.
  • Kalium 8y ago
    You're absolutely right! We unquestionably have a categorical imperative to protect our vulnerable friends, neighbors, and community members. To those ends, I don't want to not draw lines. I want some kind of clear criteria and process around thw drawing of lines. Perhaps we could consider a system whereby we can make sure that the power to draw lines is not used against weaker members of society under the guise of some higher ideal.
• mcphage 8y ago
  > Avoiding the question of where to draw the final line with the question of where to draw the first one just implies that you intend to draw more lines in the future. No, it just implies that we don't need to have the perfect final answer now. Maybe we'll draw more lines, maybe we'll find out we don't need to, maybe we'll decide that this line was drawn too far and pull it back. We don't need to pretend that we have all the answers yet—we don't even need to pretend we have all the questions yet.
  • Kalium 8y ago
    You are very wise and thoroughly correct! Perhaps people might consider offering such elegant points as yours, instead of making the claim that the current line is correct and that's all that matters.
    • ssully 8y ago
      I would argue that the people who are concerned about "what future lines will be drawn" when the first line being drawn is banning white supremacists are the ones who should be making more elegant points.
• meroes 8y ago
  FB isn't the government though.
• MiscIdeaMaker99 8y ago
  I wouldn't doubt that there are genuine concerns, but what Facebook is doing has nothing to do with actual civil liberties, which isn't something that FB grants or could even take away.