3 ms·

Gab is not a free speech social network. Gab is a white supremacy social network. Gab has actively courted white supramcists[0], white supremacists make up the

Gab is not a free speech social network. Gab is a white supremacy social network. Gab has actively courted white supramcists[0], white supremacists make up the vast majority of their userbase[1]. I understand and respect your deep support of free speech. But please, take a step back here and think about what you are saying you are glad about. Are you really glad a group of people decided to roll up their sleeves and build a platform for white supremacists? Is that really an admirable use of someone's time, energy, and expertise? [0] https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/30/tech/gab-anti-semitic-speech-invs https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/30/tech/gab-anti-semitic-speech-... [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2018/10/31/silicon-valley-elite-social-media-hate-radicalization-that-led-gab/?utm_term=.1405a8351d26 https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2018/10/31/silicon...

ThrowawayR2 7y ago
If those people become the majority (which, terrifyingly, no longer seems outside of the realm of possibility), you and those who share your beliefs might become the ones needing the protections of free speech and the ability to circumvent deplatforming. _Now_ do you see why maintaining free speech protections is important?
- objectivetruth 7y ago
  No, your strawman collapsed when I realized that if/when the new Nazis DO take over society to the point where anti-Nazis get kicked off Twitter, I'll probably already be in a prison camp or mass grave.
- graenxa 7y ago
  I have no faith that those people would respect my rights of free speech at all. It is explicitly not part of their ideology. In my view, believing that if you defend free speech hard enough the forces of fascism and hate will become interested in "hearing all perspectives" is incredibly naive. To be clear, I do not think it should be illegal or impossible to express hateful views. I don't think there needs to be some effort to block their forking of Mastedon (if it were even possible). I think it _is_ wrong to celebrate a company which trades in hate and has provided a platform for radicalization which has contributed to at least two major terrorist attacks. I take issue with the sentiment that it is somehow good they are > "standing up to their principles of being a truly free speech social network" It's not true that they are a "free speech social network," they are a platform deliberately cultivating hate. And I think it's wrong to give anyone working to promote hate a pat on the back. Don't hold up Gab as some free speech hero, you're just playing into their narrative.
  - rmtech 7y ago
    > have no faith that those people would respect my rights of free speech at all. This sounds like a defect-defect equilibrium taking shape.
  - ThrowawayR2 7y ago
    > I have no faith that those people would respect my rights of free speech at all. It is explicitly not part of their ideology. Sure, that isn't unlikely. However, does that make it okay for the left to be the first to disrespect their free speech rights? "Our opponents would oppress at us as soon as they get the chance so we'll do our best to oppress them first"? Clearly, that's not right. > In my view, believing that if you defend free speech hard enough the forces of fascism and hate will become interested in "hearing all perspectives" is incredibly naive. Again, true, the true believers will never be convinced by any amount of debate or evidence. But that tends to be a relatively small group in any movement. It's the undecided silent majority that needs to be kept on your side and taking the moral low road is sure to alienate them, with disastrous consequences.

ThrowawayR2 7y ago

If those people become the majority (which, terrifyingly, no longer seems outside of the realm of possibility), you and those who share your beliefs might become the ones needing the protections of free speech and the ability to circumvent deplatforming. _Now_ do you see why maintaining free speech protections is important?

objectivetruth 7y ago
No, your strawman collapsed when I realized that if/when the new Nazis DO take over society to the point where anti-Nazis get kicked off Twitter, I'll probably already be in a prison camp or mass grave.
graenxa 7y ago
I have no faith that those people would respect my rights of free speech at all. It is explicitly not part of their ideology. In my view, believing that if you defend free speech hard enough the forces of fascism and hate will become interested in "hearing all perspectives" is incredibly naive. To be clear, I do not think it should be illegal or impossible to express hateful views. I don't think there needs to be some effort to block their forking of Mastedon (if it were even possible). I think it _is_ wrong to celebrate a company which trades in hate and has provided a platform for radicalization which has contributed to at least two major terrorist attacks. I take issue with the sentiment that it is somehow good they are > "standing up to their principles of being a truly free speech social network" It's not true that they are a "free speech social network," they are a platform deliberately cultivating hate. And I think it's wrong to give anyone working to promote hate a pat on the back. Don't hold up Gab as some free speech hero, you're just playing into their narrative.
- rmtech 7y ago
  > have no faith that those people would respect my rights of free speech at all. This sounds like a defect-defect equilibrium taking shape.
- ThrowawayR2 7y ago
  > I have no faith that those people would respect my rights of free speech at all. It is explicitly not part of their ideology. Sure, that isn't unlikely. However, does that make it okay for the left to be the first to disrespect their free speech rights? "Our opponents would oppress at us as soon as they get the chance so we'll do our best to oppress them first"? Clearly, that's not right. > In my view, believing that if you defend free speech hard enough the forces of fascism and hate will become interested in "hearing all perspectives" is incredibly naive. Again, true, the true believers will never be convinced by any amount of debate or evidence. But that tends to be a relatively small group in any movement. It's the undecided silent majority that needs to be kept on your side and taking the moral low road is sure to alienate them, with disastrous consequences.