9 ms·
Censorship is a step in the direction of fascism. You have become what you hate most.
by goodfight 7y ago
Censorship is a step in the direction of fascism. You have become what you hate most.
- ssalazar 7y agoHow is a business censoring their own networks related to fascism? Is the downvote button fascist? This is the classic "paradox of tolerance."
- leereeves 7y agoWhy is it more acceptable when a business does it than when a government does it?
- locopati 7y agoBecause if you live in a country there's only one government. Business provide a service and you can find another service that meets your needs.
- ssalazar 7y agoThe same reason if I go to a stranger's house and start debating with them about my own political opinions they are free to kick me out. Free enterprise and private property are generally considered fundaments of modern civil society. Im all ears if you have an argument to the contrary.
- leereeves 7y agoWe're not talking about people's houses. In the context of business, California has already made that argument for me, making it illegal to discriminate based on political views.
- ssalazar 7y ago> We're not talking about people's houses. I'm talking about private property and the right to do with it as one pleases so long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of others. When a group of people create a business this doesn't magically go away. > In the context of business, California has already made that argument for me, making it illegal to discriminate based on political views. Certain protected classes are legally protected from discrimination, yes. To my knowledge "advocating violence" is not a political view; this is what the r/The_Donald is being quarantined for.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- leereeves 7y agoHere's the original story accusing TD of advocating violence: https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2019/06/24/A-pro-Trump-subreddit-is-full-of-calls-for-violence-in-support-of-Oregon-Republicans/224018 https://www.mediamatters.org/research/2019/06/24/A-pro-Trump... Featuring comments with as few as 1 point. Those are just an excuse to further restrict a community they've restricted several times in the past, without admitting it's for political reasons.
- bduerst 7y agoOkay, you've signalled that they do do it, but now there are not enough points of data. How many points of data is your burden of proof, before you agree?
- leereeves 7y ago"They"? Those are comments from a few fringe users, buried so deep that most people never saw them. Is that a reason to punish a community of hundreds of thousands of people? That's like quarantining an entire city because a few people there are violent. That's not a good solution in the real world or online.
- 7y ago
- otterley 7y agoThat's not entirely correct. California makes it illegal for an _employer_ to discriminate against an _employee_ based on their political views. It does not make it illegal for businesses to discriminate against _customers_ based on their political views.
- xyzzyz 7y agoCompanies are not free to choose with whom they do business. There are many constraints, not the least of which is it being illegal to refuse to do business with someone because of their race, sex, sexual orientation, and, in California, political opinions. Free enterprise and private property might have been fundamentals of civil society in the past, but that ship has long sailed since then.
- ssalazar 7y ago> Companies are not free to choose with whom they do business. For the most part, yes they are. For instance, every online business has a Terms of Service detailing many situations in which they will or will not do business with you. Race, gender, sexual orientation, disability, age, etc. are specific situations in which governments/society have decided that its worth restricting this freedom for the greater good. The existence of these relatively few exceptions does not negate their overall freedom to do business with whomever they please.
- root_axis 7y agoThe quarantine isn't based off of political orientation though, otherwise r/republican and r/conservative would also be quarantined.
- leereeves 7y agoAllegedly it's based off a few fringe comments that Media Matters found, with mostly single digit points: https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/c5sbpm/reddit_quarantines_us_claiming_we_threaten/ https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/c5sbpm/reddit_q... Those aren't representative of the sub. What's the real reason?
- root_axis 7y agoI don't think anyone has a scientific answer on what is "representative" of the sub besides it's clear support for the president, but honestly it doesn't seem out of line with my experiences of the_donald.
- awinder 7y agoWouldn’t it be invasive to demand that anyone handle anyone else’s business? There’s two freedoms being negotiated there, and the law origins basically boil down to — by emphasizing the business owners freedom the market should be able to support a solution for the other (or you go build that business, if it is needed). Total freedom in that system is higher than in the one that demands anyone do business with anyone. R_TheDonald is a forum on someone’s product, there’s a low barrier erected here, they could go buy a url and some servers and continue their speech.
- leereeves 7y ago> Wouldn’t it be invasive to demand that anyone handle anyone else’s business? Maybe, but it's a very common demand.
- BubRoss 7y agoBecause the business is choosing who they use their resources to rebroadcast under their name and the government has a monopoly on violence. The government is not guaranteeing that they will rebroadcast whatever you want to say, they are just not giving you consequences for saying it. Businesses aren't imposing consequences of violence on speech, they just are choosing not to be a part of it. Someone not listening to you is not censorship.
- goodfight 7y agoIt's a step in the direction to fascism, that doesn't mean it is fascist. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. The downvote button is part of a ranking algorithm from the userbase, deboosting is part of the ranking algorithm from the host. Would you like it if a "platform" tied an anchor on your success/views because they didn't agree with your opinions? Since you believe in the paradox of tolerance do you agree that the US shouldn't let Islamic migrants come due to their belief in vile things such as throwing gays off roofs?
- bduerst 7y agoThe USSR heavily censored content, were they stepping closer to fascism? I don't think you're using facism in the right context here, maybe you meant something else?
- goodfight 7y agoWhen you start from democracy, censorship becoming prevalent is a step towards fascism, authoritarianism, socialism, communism, technocracy, etc.
- bduerst 7y agoAs someone else pointed out, Reddit's not a democracy so they're not starting as one either. Unless you count their private corporation as a democracy of sorts, but then they're most likely acting in their shareholders' interests. Maybe you meant the word authoritarian instead of fascist?
- omegaworks 7y agoDeplatforming is not censorship. Twisting definitions to suit your impotence in the face of actual rising authoritarianism does not help anyone.
- MRD85 7y agoCensorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information, on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient".[2][3][4] Censorship can be conducted by a government[5], private institutions, and corporations. That's the first definition I found when I googled the word. Reddit, a private institution, considered the content harmful. Seems to fit the definition.
- root_axis 7y agoBased on that definition it cannot be assumed that censorship is always wrong. For example, removing a post that was doxxing an individual would be considered censorship but could also be the moral thing to do. I would also point out that the_donald has a very aggressive moderation policy where most comments critical of the president are removed, so I don't think there is much room for them to complain about censorship.
- goodfight 7y agoDeplatforming, shadow banning, deboosting, demonetization are all modern forms of censorship. It might not be exactly like the Chinese or other types of censorships we have seen in the past but it is a valid form of censorship. Definitions aren't everything, context matters. If you want to see a rising power filled with authoritarianism, look towards Google.
- hnBansByDefault 7y agoBut HN would never do such a thing, right?
- dang 7y ago
- asdfgasd 7y agoNot necessarily. The Soviet government was engaged in significant censorship and was not fascist. Same with the CCP currently. Fascism implies censorship, but censorship does not imply fascism.
- AnimalMuppet 7y agoYou are correct that fascists aren't the only ones who censor. But that doesn't make it something that should be a normal part of a free, democratic society. (Your Soviet and CCP examples highlight that, which may have been your point.)
- goodfight 7y agoI said a step in the direction to fascism. I never asserted that censorship itself requires fascism. They usually come hand in hand though.
- egypturnash 7y agoDeplatforming is to toxic mindsets as an immune system is to disease.
- goodfight 7y agoThat's a good parallel actually. There are immune system diseases where the system kills the good cells too because it can't discriminate correctly. You're right!
- BubRoss 7y agoYou do realize that /r/the_donald immediately bans anyone that isn't 100% on board with the agressive propoganda right?
- AngryData 7y agoI disagree completely. This is the same thing as the paradox of tolerance. If you want a tolerant society, you have to be intolerant against intolerance. If you want a non-fascist society you need to be fascist against fascism. Otherwise the intolerant/fascist side gains a platform and turns the community intolerant or fascist overall.
- goodfight 7y ago"If you want a non-fascist society you need to be fascist against fascism." This statement says it all, the ends justify the means. Sounds like every terrible dictator or authoritarian society that has existed on the Earth so far.
- AngryData 7y agoRead about "the paradox of tolerance" and maybe you will understand what im talking about a bit better. What parts of fascism are acceptable to society? The intolerance of other groups? The claimed superiority over others? The militarization of civilians and their forced involvement into the military and war? The forced labor of captured civilians to feed the war machine? They literally believe democracy is obsolete and that the government should be run under a single party via totalitarian rule. That is there literal stated goal. They cheer on political violence and imperialism as a goal to 'rejuvenating' their state. They literally want to dismantle democracy and put us under dictatorial rule.
- archagon 7y agoYou could also say that “not listening to speech you despise is a step in the direction of fascism,” and it’s an equally empty statement. I mean, I guess it’s technically true. But it also means that literally everybody is a virulent and unrepentant fascist in their social lives.
- goodfight 7y agoRemaining unbiased in the secular/science domain is critical to the future of humanity. If you are going to be biased, please at least do your research. Don't just browse twitter and think you are informed.