3 ms·

And we can also use Germany as an example demonstrating the ineffectiveness of suppression: the Nazi party members were repeatedly imprisoned, yet this only rei

And we can also use Germany as an example demonstrating the ineffectiveness of suppression: the Nazi party members were repeatedly imprisoned, yet this only reinforced their movement. The primary Nazi party newsletter was raided by police over 30 times. The attempt to shut Nazis down did not work and was likely counterproductive. The Allies may have reinforced aversion to Nazism after it was defeated. But political suppression did not successfully stop Nazism in Germany. > The idea is not to change their minds. The idea is to prevent them from talking, and changing the minds of others. They'll still be talking to others, you fundamentally cannot stop that. The only difference is that we are depriving ourselves of the chance to challenge them on their bigoted and hateful beliefs. And lastly, you're making the dangerous assumption that the people deciding which views are getting suppressed agree with you. There's a good chance many of the views you hold dear are ones that a significant portion of the population want to get rid of.

dragontamer 7y ago
Hampering is sufficient. Forcing them to rebuild newspapers and reform their membership over and over again means they are spending less time recruiting members. In the most extreme cases: killing works too. Bin Laden / Anwar Al-Awlaki. Both were more "inspirational" figures than actual day-to-day management, but their ability to spread and inspire others was still better than the typical ISIS / Al Qaeda member. Destroying the mouthpiece works. Full on killing / murder is only condoned in war-like situations, but there are "softer powers" like knocking websites offline. Sure, they are tenacious and spring up again (and will continue to do so unless we actually kill them), but every hour those websites are down is another hour where they fail to recruit members into their philosophy. Considering that we refuse to utilize the ultimate solution (assassination / killing) vs these people, the best we can hope for is to just inconvenience them over-and-over again. Its just like banning troll accounts at a highly-moderated forum. The trolls inevitably pickup a new VPN and get to post again for a few hours. The idea isn't to stop the troll from talking, its to hamper the troll from talking. > They'll still be talking to others, you fundamentally cannot stop that. The only difference is that we are depriving ourselves of the chance to challenge them on their bigoted and hateful beliefs. Nah, we can totally do that. You and I can talk about white-nationalism right now. Do you believe that white people are "being replaced" by immigrants? And if so, do you think its a long-term negative for this country? Bam. Now we can talk about the subject. And I trust you (and most random strangers) to have decent opinions on the subject. The issue is that a large group of white-nationalists are working to recruit young people into their hateful philosophy, and to grow their base. And this growth includes violent action (with them cheering the actions of El Paso shooter + New Zealand's shooter). I'm not against intelligent discussion of these subjects. I'm against the recruitment and growth of power of hate-groups.
- manfredo 7y ago
  Hampering the troll from talking had been thoroughly demonstrated to be ineffective, or even counterproductive. Again, what evidence do you have that deplatforming works? Deplatforming gathered momentum starting around 2013 and 2014. Since then, white nationalists and other bigoted groups have only become an even bigger problem. Not only can I not see how this supports your assumption that suppression works, it actually demonstrates a positive relationship between suppression and these sorts of movements. Especially when these groups allege a conspiracy to suppress them, the the last thing we should be doing is the exact thing that hate groups allege. When we start banning white nationalists sites, it makes lots of people think "oh shit, there really is a {Jewish | Globalist | Muslim} conspiracy out to get us."
  - dragontamer 7y ago
    > Not only can I not see how this supports your assumption that suppression works, it actually demonstrates a positive relationship between suppression and these sorts of movements. You've got cause-and-effect backwards. More and more people are deplatforming as they realize that white-nationalism is a bigger problem than they once thought. ------- Deplatforming works. Lets not look at white-nationalism, but lets look at "Elsa-gate" instead. Children were watching creepy "Elsa" videos (from Disney's "Frozen"). How do you stop this? You ban them from the site. Bam. Children don't watch them anymore, cause those videos are banned. ----- How do you solve the problem of white-nationalists recruiting on this webpage? Well, you ban hate-speech. The problem is that White-Nationalists can simply... go to Facebook... or Youtube... as recruitment grounds. The big websites aren't cooperating yet. This needs to be a systemic top-down effort, unified across the major websites.
    - manfredo 7y ago
      > You've got cause-and-effect backwards. More and more people are deplatforming as they realize that white-nationalism is a bigger problem than they once thought. And yet, despite (or perhaps because of) increased deplatforming, these groups are stronger than ever and are committing more attacks. If what you say is true, we should have been seeing a decrease in white nationalism since 2014 when deplatforming started to accelerate. We've seen the opposite. > Deplatforming works. Lets not look at white-nationalism, but lets look at "Elsa-gate" instead. Children were watching creepy "Elsa" videos (from Disney's "Frozen"). How do you stop this? You ban them from the site Elsagate wasn't a political movement, it was a group of trolls gaming the YouTube algorithm for views and lulz. > The problem is that White-Nationalists can simply... go to Facebook... or Youtube... as recruitment grounds. The big websites aren't cooperating yet. This needs to be a systemic top-down effort, unified across the major websites. Both of those websites ban white nationalism. Facebook even bans praise and any forms of "representation" of white nationalism explicitly: https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2019/03/standing-against-hate/ https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2019/03/standing-against-hate/ We keep cutting off the heads of the Hydra of white nationalism and it keeps getting stronger. Bans and suppression is useless at best, counterproductive at worst.

dragontamer 7y ago

Hampering is sufficient. Forcing them to rebuild newspapers and reform their membership over and over again means they are spending less time recruiting members. In the most extreme cases: killing works too. Bin Laden / Anwar Al-Awlaki. Both were more "inspirational" figures than actual day-to-day management, but their ability to spread and inspire others was still better than the typical ISIS / Al Qaeda member. Destroying the mouthpiece works. Full on killing / murder is only condoned in war-like situations, but there are "softer powers" like knocking websites offline. Sure, they are tenacious and spring up again (and will continue to do so unless we actually kill them), but every hour those websites are down is another hour where they fail to recruit members into their philosophy. Considering that we refuse to utilize the ultimate solution (assassination / killing) vs these people, the best we can hope for is to just inconvenience them over-and-over again. Its just like banning troll accounts at a highly-moderated forum. The trolls inevitably pickup a new VPN and get to post again for a few hours. The idea isn't to stop the troll from talking, its to hamper the troll from talking. > They'll still be talking to others, you fundamentally cannot stop that. The only difference is that we are depriving ourselves of the chance to challenge them on their bigoted and hateful beliefs. Nah, we can totally do that. You and I can talk about white-nationalism right now. Do you believe that white people are "being replaced" by immigrants? And if so, do you think its a long-term negative for this country? Bam. Now we can talk about the subject. And I trust you (and most random strangers) to have decent opinions on the subject. The issue is that a large group of white-nationalists are working to recruit young people into their hateful philosophy, and to grow their base. And this growth includes violent action (with them cheering the actions of El Paso shooter + New Zealand's shooter). I'm not against intelligent discussion of these subjects. I'm against the recruitment and growth of power of hate-groups.

manfredo 7y ago
Hampering the troll from talking had been thoroughly demonstrated to be ineffective, or even counterproductive. Again, what evidence do you have that deplatforming works? Deplatforming gathered momentum starting around 2013 and 2014. Since then, white nationalists and other bigoted groups have only become an even bigger problem. Not only can I not see how this supports your assumption that suppression works, it actually demonstrates a positive relationship between suppression and these sorts of movements. Especially when these groups allege a conspiracy to suppress them, the the last thing we should be doing is the exact thing that hate groups allege. When we start banning white nationalists sites, it makes lots of people think "oh shit, there really is a {Jewish | Globalist | Muslim} conspiracy out to get us."
- dragontamer 7y ago
  > Not only can I not see how this supports your assumption that suppression works, it actually demonstrates a positive relationship between suppression and these sorts of movements. You've got cause-and-effect backwards. More and more people are deplatforming as they realize that white-nationalism is a bigger problem than they once thought. ------- Deplatforming works. Lets not look at white-nationalism, but lets look at "Elsa-gate" instead. Children were watching creepy "Elsa" videos (from Disney's "Frozen"). How do you stop this? You ban them from the site. Bam. Children don't watch them anymore, cause those videos are banned. ----- How do you solve the problem of white-nationalists recruiting on this webpage? Well, you ban hate-speech. The problem is that White-Nationalists can simply... go to Facebook... or Youtube... as recruitment grounds. The big websites aren't cooperating yet. This needs to be a systemic top-down effort, unified across the major websites.
  - manfredo 7y ago
    > You've got cause-and-effect backwards. More and more people are deplatforming as they realize that white-nationalism is a bigger problem than they once thought. And yet, despite (or perhaps because of) increased deplatforming, these groups are stronger than ever and are committing more attacks. If what you say is true, we should have been seeing a decrease in white nationalism since 2014 when deplatforming started to accelerate. We've seen the opposite. > Deplatforming works. Lets not look at white-nationalism, but lets look at "Elsa-gate" instead. Children were watching creepy "Elsa" videos (from Disney's "Frozen"). How do you stop this? You ban them from the site Elsagate wasn't a political movement, it was a group of trolls gaming the YouTube algorithm for views and lulz. > The problem is that White-Nationalists can simply... go to Facebook... or Youtube... as recruitment grounds. The big websites aren't cooperating yet. This needs to be a systemic top-down effort, unified across the major websites. Both of those websites ban white nationalism. Facebook even bans praise and any forms of "representation" of white nationalism explicitly: https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2019/03/standing-against-hate/ https://newsroom.fb.com/news/2019/03/standing-against-hate/ We keep cutting off the heads of the Hydra of white nationalism and it keeps getting stronger. Bans and suppression is useless at best, counterproductive at worst.