6 ms·

There is no such thing as a politics-free network, only one that only allows politics you agree with.

fwxwi 7y ago
That is false. TikTok is a platform where people upload videos of themselves doing things like lip syncing, dancing, etc. That does not have to turn political at all. Unless you use the good ol' argument that "banning all political discussion is supporting the status quo which is also political"
- thisone 7y ago
  ferrets seems to be having a good time on tiktok at the moment. So cute and so wholesome. Not political right? Ferrets are a weirdly political issue in some areas of the USA. It's pretty hard to have anything be politics free when the world we live in is political
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    > Ferrets are a weirdly political issue in some areas of the USA. They're not political except for a select group people who want to make it political. They should not be encouraged or appreciated for trying to push that outlook on others.
    - fzeroracer 7y ago
      I mean, that's literally how politics work. Something isn't political unless people make it political, otherwise it's just the norm of the time. You could replace [ferrets are] with [gay marriage is] and get the description for any political argument ever. People argue X is political, others argue it isn't political and create a political argument trying to argue it is/is not political. Repeat as nauseam for topic of your choice.
      - TeMPOraL 7y ago
        Agreed, but you forget about the (large) group of people who are indifferent to an issue either way and want to be left alone, and the (sometimes even larger) group of people who may have some opinion one way or the other, but don't want to join the fight.
  - oefrha 7y ago
    If you just post some ferrets being cute clips instead of a documentary on why ferrets should/should not be illegal, I’m sure everyone (except those looking to be offended) can have a good time. Saying this is on the same level as protest videos or political commentary is absurd. Now, I don’t deny that some people would try to make political statements with plausible deniability. However, if it’s not their intent and their one video gets shadow banned, who cares? If it is, well, they deserved it.
- icebraining 7y ago
  Tell that to Elnaz Ghasemi, who has been arrested for posting videos on Instagram of her dancing.
oefrha 7y ago
Not true. For instance it’s pretty easy to create a programming language forum that bans all off-topic content, including identity politics in programming, workplace politics, etc. Unless you believe in the bullshit that is the absence of X == automatically siding what whatever X considers its opponent (usually “the establishment” or “the status quo”) at that moment in time.
- fzeroracer 7y ago
  So let's say you have a forum that completely bans all off-topic discussion. What happens when a prominent user experiences something negative? Like for example they die, or face harassment from people either inside or outside the community. Do you ban them for breaking the cardinal rule, or allow your forum to become political? It's not at all easy to create a forum that bans all off topic discussion. I've ran smaller forums before. If you honestly think you can do better then by all means, give it a try. You'll quickly realize that your users are human, and you'll be forced to make decisions that are intrinsically political. Thee is no such thing as a forum that can avoid political discussion. Just one that aligns with your beliefs.
  - Lewton 7y ago
    https://www.reddit.com/r/CatsStandingUp/ https://www.reddit.com/r/CatsStandingUp/
    - icebraining 7y ago
      /r/CatsStandingUp is a political affirmation against the banning of pet cats: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-45347136 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-45347136
      - Lewton 7y ago
        nope You can disagree with having cats as pets and still post pictures of cats standing up
  - 7y ago
simion314 7y ago
Why do you think so, I am thinking for example of some on topic subreddits like r/DaystromInstitute , any post that would try to go offtopic and politicise stuff will be removed. As a non US citizen it is a breath of fresh air not to have all topics devolve into republicans vs democrats. IMO if you have rules that current politics is off topic and moderators that can enforce the rules, a community that respects the rules and polices them themselves you can get a clean , on topic, meme free forum.
- CriticalCathed 7y ago
  I believe the idea underlying what he said is that everything is political. If I am wrong I apologize. It's an extension of the 1960s revolution of "the personal is political." To expound: everything is political in the sense that any action we take or decision we make or conclusion we reach rests on assumptions, norms, and values not everyone would affirm. That is, everything we do is rooted in a contestable point of origin; and since the realm of the contestable is the realm of politics, everything is political.
  - pgeorgi 7y ago
    > any action we take or decision we make or conclusion we reach rests on assumptions, norms, and values not everyone would affirm. That is, everything we do is rooted in a contestable point of origin; and since the realm of the contestable is the realm of politics, everything is political. The theory that everything is political may be right on a global scale but it only works locally if you let it: Have house rules that ban contesting and the contestable realm is elsewhere (even if it might debate what's going on at your place) and with it the political. Seems like TikTok is aiming for precisely that. Let's see how it goes.
  - simion314 7y ago
    Even if everything is political I would still ban in my forum topics related to current or recent political events/people. 1
- Faark 7y ago
  I also like single issue communities. They are indeed a great escape from broader conflicts and focus on specific interesting stuff. But calling them non-political just because it's not the place to argue about e.g. what politics this community reinforces seems wrong. People should understand those are not places to find a balanced view of the world. But creating a general virtual spaces for people to "live" in while banning discussing on one of the most important aspect of coexisting? This will hardly result in a free society of equally empowered individuals.
TeMPOraL 7y ago
The "there's no such thing as apolitical, apolitical = supporting status quo" meme needs to die. It's just a slightly smarter-sounding variant of "if you're not with us, you're against us". It purposefully conflates two groups of people - people who don't engage with an issue because they like the status quo, and people who don't engage with an issue because (within reasonable bounds) they don't care which side wins. For any given issue, the latter group is usually the majority of the population - and conflating them with status quo supporters is just a malicious attempt at recruiting people for your cause. Think of it this way: under this view, McDonald's is supporting the status quo on $whatever-issue, because it does not give out political pamphlets with Big Macs. Sitting in a toilet alone and thinking is supporting the status quo, because it does not enable others to voice their view. Etc.
- flomble 7y ago
  I think the problem here is that you're not seeing that 'politics' encompasses an incredibly broad spectrum of things, and the only time that something is labeled 'political' is when it reaches a certain level of controversial for the relevant society. For example, selling a hamburger would have been an obviously political act in the Soviet Union. We don't see it as such because vanishingly few people believe that commercial transactions between private parties should be forbidden. But whenever someone advertises a hamburger, depicts the purchase of one, or leaves a review of one on a website, they are engaging in an act that we only view as apolitical because of the status quo that we inhabit.
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    I do see "that 'politics' encompasses an incredibly broad spectrum of things", but I also see the motte-and-bailey argument being presented. The "politics" of everyday life is quite a different thing from the "politics" we're talking here. RE your hamburger example, yes, it's apolitical within the context of society where hamburgers aren't political. Free trade or democracy isn't required, a hypothetical restaurant in the Soviet Union wouldn't have a problem selling grilled chicken breast. And if ever the Party decided that grilled chicken is a symbol of capitalism and therefore banned, the restaurant would just switch to serving fried chicken, or something else. Living in the status quo is not the same as endorsing it. To me, the "not fighting status quo = supporting status quo" view is anathema to civilization. It's the peace-time equivalent of treating civilians as enemy combatants just because they live in the country you're at war with. It's an attempt to get other people to fight in your war, and suffer the collateral damage for you, and most people rightfully oppose it. If you want someone to support your cause, your strategy should be arguing that your cause is just - and not trying to get them to switch by making them believe not supporting you means supporting the enemy.
cheez 7y ago
Well said. I like Twitter but god forbid I say anything against anything on the mainstream media networks, I get banned. On my 4th banned account now. 99% of what I tweet is completely technical. 1% gets me banned, no matter how reasonable or unemotional language is used. Like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiyfwZVAzGw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiyfwZVAzGw

That is false. TikTok is a platform where people upload videos of themselves doing things like lip syncing, dancing, etc. That does not have to turn political at all. Unless you use the good ol' argument that "banning all political discussion is supporting the status quo which is also political"

thisone 7y ago
ferrets seems to be having a good time on tiktok at the moment. So cute and so wholesome. Not political right? Ferrets are a weirdly political issue in some areas of the USA. It's pretty hard to have anything be politics free when the world we live in is political
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  > Ferrets are a weirdly political issue in some areas of the USA. They're not political except for a select group people who want to make it political. They should not be encouraged or appreciated for trying to push that outlook on others.
  - fzeroracer 7y ago
    I mean, that's literally how politics work. Something isn't political unless people make it political, otherwise it's just the norm of the time. You could replace [ferrets are] with [gay marriage is] and get the description for any political argument ever. People argue X is political, others argue it isn't political and create a political argument trying to argue it is/is not political. Repeat as nauseam for topic of your choice.
    - TeMPOraL 7y ago
      Agreed, but you forget about the (large) group of people who are indifferent to an issue either way and want to be left alone, and the (sometimes even larger) group of people who may have some opinion one way or the other, but don't want to join the fight.
- oefrha 7y ago
  If you just post some ferrets being cute clips instead of a documentary on why ferrets should/should not be illegal, I’m sure everyone (except those looking to be offended) can have a good time. Saying this is on the same level as protest videos or political commentary is absurd. Now, I don’t deny that some people would try to make political statements with plausible deniability. However, if it’s not their intent and their one video gets shadow banned, who cares? If it is, well, they deserved it.
icebraining 7y ago
Tell that to Elnaz Ghasemi, who has been arrested for posting videos on Instagram of her dancing.

oefrha 7y ago

Not true. For instance it’s pretty easy to create a programming language forum that bans all off-topic content, including identity politics in programming, workplace politics, etc. Unless you believe in the bullshit that is the absence of X == automatically siding what whatever X considers its opponent (usually “the establishment” or “the status quo”) at that moment in time.

fzeroracer 7y ago
So let's say you have a forum that completely bans all off-topic discussion. What happens when a prominent user experiences something negative? Like for example they die, or face harassment from people either inside or outside the community. Do you ban them for breaking the cardinal rule, or allow your forum to become political? It's not at all easy to create a forum that bans all off topic discussion. I've ran smaller forums before. If you honestly think you can do better then by all means, give it a try. You'll quickly realize that your users are human, and you'll be forced to make decisions that are intrinsically political. Thee is no such thing as a forum that can avoid political discussion. Just one that aligns with your beliefs.
- Lewton 7y ago
  https://www.reddit.com/r/CatsStandingUp/ https://www.reddit.com/r/CatsStandingUp/
  - icebraining 7y ago
    /r/CatsStandingUp is a political affirmation against the banning of pet cats: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-45347136 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-45347136
    - Lewton 7y ago
      nope You can disagree with having cats as pets and still post pictures of cats standing up
- 7y ago

simion314 7y ago

Why do you think so, I am thinking for example of some on topic subreddits like r/DaystromInstitute , any post that would try to go offtopic and politicise stuff will be removed. As a non US citizen it is a breath of fresh air not to have all topics devolve into republicans vs democrats. IMO if you have rules that current politics is off topic and moderators that can enforce the rules, a community that respects the rules and polices them themselves you can get a clean , on topic, meme free forum.

CriticalCathed 7y ago
I believe the idea underlying what he said is that everything is political. If I am wrong I apologize. It's an extension of the 1960s revolution of "the personal is political." To expound: everything is political in the sense that any action we take or decision we make or conclusion we reach rests on assumptions, norms, and values not everyone would affirm. That is, everything we do is rooted in a contestable point of origin; and since the realm of the contestable is the realm of politics, everything is political.
- pgeorgi 7y ago
  > any action we take or decision we make or conclusion we reach rests on assumptions, norms, and values not everyone would affirm. That is, everything we do is rooted in a contestable point of origin; and since the realm of the contestable is the realm of politics, everything is political. The theory that everything is political may be right on a global scale but it only works locally if you let it: Have house rules that ban contesting and the contestable realm is elsewhere (even if it might debate what's going on at your place) and with it the political. Seems like TikTok is aiming for precisely that. Let's see how it goes.
- simion314 7y ago
  Even if everything is political I would still ban in my forum topics related to current or recent political events/people. 1
Faark 7y ago
I also like single issue communities. They are indeed a great escape from broader conflicts and focus on specific interesting stuff. But calling them non-political just because it's not the place to argue about e.g. what politics this community reinforces seems wrong. People should understand those are not places to find a balanced view of the world. But creating a general virtual spaces for people to "live" in while banning discussing on one of the most important aspect of coexisting? This will hardly result in a free society of equally empowered individuals.

TeMPOraL 7y ago

The "there's no such thing as apolitical, apolitical = supporting status quo" meme needs to die. It's just a slightly smarter-sounding variant of "if you're not with us, you're against us". It purposefully conflates two groups of people - people who don't engage with an issue because they like the status quo, and people who don't engage with an issue because (within reasonable bounds) they don't care which side wins. For any given issue, the latter group is usually the majority of the population - and conflating them with status quo supporters is just a malicious attempt at recruiting people for your cause. Think of it this way: under this view, McDonald's is supporting the status quo on $whatever-issue, because it does not give out political pamphlets with Big Macs. Sitting in a toilet alone and thinking is supporting the status quo, because it does not enable others to voice their view. Etc.

flomble 7y ago
I think the problem here is that you're not seeing that 'politics' encompasses an incredibly broad spectrum of things, and the only time that something is labeled 'political' is when it reaches a certain level of controversial for the relevant society. For example, selling a hamburger would have been an obviously political act in the Soviet Union. We don't see it as such because vanishingly few people believe that commercial transactions between private parties should be forbidden. But whenever someone advertises a hamburger, depicts the purchase of one, or leaves a review of one on a website, they are engaging in an act that we only view as apolitical because of the status quo that we inhabit.
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  I do see "that 'politics' encompasses an incredibly broad spectrum of things", but I also see the motte-and-bailey argument being presented. The "politics" of everyday life is quite a different thing from the "politics" we're talking here. RE your hamburger example, yes, it's apolitical within the context of society where hamburgers aren't political. Free trade or democracy isn't required, a hypothetical restaurant in the Soviet Union wouldn't have a problem selling grilled chicken breast. And if ever the Party decided that grilled chicken is a symbol of capitalism and therefore banned, the restaurant would just switch to serving fried chicken, or something else. Living in the status quo is not the same as endorsing it. To me, the "not fighting status quo = supporting status quo" view is anathema to civilization. It's the peace-time equivalent of treating civilians as enemy combatants just because they live in the country you're at war with. It's an attempt to get other people to fight in your war, and suffer the collateral damage for you, and most people rightfully oppose it. If you want someone to support your cause, your strategy should be arguing that your cause is just - and not trying to get them to switch by making them believe not supporting you means supporting the enemy.

cheez 7y ago

Well said. I like Twitter but god forbid I say anything against anything on the mainstream media networks, I get banned. On my 4th banned account now. 99% of what I tweet is completely technical. 1% gets me banned, no matter how reasonable or unemotional language is used. Like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiyfwZVAzGw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiyfwZVAzGw