4 ms·

sounds great to me to until I turned my brain on and realized that if you can purge one ideology, you can justify purging any other ideology.

Daishiman 6y ago
The German state has been banning and imprisoning sympathizers of white supremacist groups for a few decades by now. I'm not seeing a mass censorship of non-hate-based ideologies there. I'm not seeing the slippery slope. To say that purging one ideology is the same as all means that you see no difference between hateful supremacist positions and any other types of ideas. Which is ridiculous.
sweetheart 6y ago
This is a fallacy, I'm sorry. It's true that it can be impossible to determine what the specific characteristics of a belief that make it okay to silence, but that _doesn't mean there aren't differences_. We don't know when an acorn becomes a tree, but we know there is a difference. We can safely say that a tree is not an acorn, even though we don't know when that transition occurs. We _know_ it's wrong to advocate for the ethnic cleansing of people. We _know_ it's wrong to talk about how Blacks are genetically inferior. We _know_ it's wrong to spread lies about how Jews control mass media. We can silence these evil, ignorant beliefs without being afraid that all other beliefs are at risk of being silenced.
appleflaxen 6y ago
A "purge" sounds so scary. But this is a purge like being asked not to come back to target is a purge. And it's just as much of an infringement on your rights: none.
rickbutton 6y ago
I can't argue in good faith with someone who believes that white supremacists should continue to have a platform. I hope you do some research and look back on this comment with shame. White supremacists do not deserve a platform, flat out. Disagreeing with this is explicitly agreeing with white supremacy.
- chrischattin 6y ago
  You don't have to agree with someone to think it's wrong to censor them.
  - rickbutton 6y ago
    Do you think it is correct or incorrect to deplatform white supremacists? Do you think white supremacists deserve a platform? Edit: I've asked variants of this question several times in this thread, all without response. I can safely assume that those who won't freely answer this question are (attempting) to hide their bias.
    - golf1052 6y ago
      Yeah it's kind of shocking to see people defend white nationalist speech on private platforms. Of all the marginalized groups out there why does the group that advocates for the discrimination, removal, or even genocide of historically discriminated and murdered people (black people, indigenous people, Jewish people) need defending?
      - rickbutton 6y ago
        While those who defend them may disagree, defending white supremacy is in itself white supremacy. They defend it because they believe it. The thing that still continues to shock me is that there are people here that argue on behalf of white supremacists but still argue that they themselves are not, instead they are playing "devils advocate". At some point, let's call a duck a duck.
      - chrischattin 6y ago
        This same line of reasoning was used against people who stood up for the Jews in Nazi Germany. How soon we forget the lessons of the 20th century... Edit for reply: No. Not even close. I'm comparing your reaction to people standing up for free speech to how Nazi's treated the people who defended the Jews. Edit 2: Yes, YOU are acting like a Nazi (the real, historical version). I deleted it b/c it wasn't productive to the convo and you missed my point anyway. Either way, it's disturbing that you don't see the parallel. Edit 3: I'm not calling you a Nazi for attacking white nationalists. You totally missed the point. Edit 4: Where did you get that I'm defending white nationalists? I'm not. Not even in the slightest. I despise any ideology that treats people differently based on immutable characteristics that they have no control over (like skin color). I'm defending free speech and arguing that ideas should stand on their own. I'm saying YOU are acting like a Nazi for attacking anyone who isn't also aligned with censoring a socially outcast group. You are also misreading my comments, misrepresenting what I said, and you still don't get my point (even though you think you do).
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
AgentME 6y ago
if you can justify one argument, then you can justify any argument, so all arguments are wrong This is total slippery slope. Zooming out to the point that you ignore all the specifics isn't useful.

Daishiman 6y ago

The German state has been banning and imprisoning sympathizers of white supremacist groups for a few decades by now. I'm not seeing a mass censorship of non-hate-based ideologies there. I'm not seeing the slippery slope. To say that purging one ideology is the same as all means that you see no difference between hateful supremacist positions and any other types of ideas. Which is ridiculous.

sweetheart 6y ago

This is a fallacy, I'm sorry. It's true that it can be impossible to determine what the specific characteristics of a belief that make it okay to silence, but that _doesn't mean there aren't differences_. We don't know when an acorn becomes a tree, but we know there is a difference. We can safely say that a tree is not an acorn, even though we don't know when that transition occurs. We _know_ it's wrong to advocate for the ethnic cleansing of people. We _know_ it's wrong to talk about how Blacks are genetically inferior. We _know_ it's wrong to spread lies about how Jews control mass media. We can silence these evil, ignorant beliefs without being afraid that all other beliefs are at risk of being silenced.

appleflaxen 6y ago

A "purge" sounds so scary. But this is a purge like being asked not to come back to target is a purge. And it's just as much of an infringement on your rights: none.

rickbutton 6y ago

I can't argue in good faith with someone who believes that white supremacists should continue to have a platform. I hope you do some research and look back on this comment with shame. White supremacists do not deserve a platform, flat out. Disagreeing with this is explicitly agreeing with white supremacy.

chrischattin 6y ago
You don't have to agree with someone to think it's wrong to censor them.
- rickbutton 6y ago
  Do you think it is correct or incorrect to deplatform white supremacists? Do you think white supremacists deserve a platform? Edit: I've asked variants of this question several times in this thread, all without response. I can safely assume that those who won't freely answer this question are (attempting) to hide their bias.
  - golf1052 6y ago
    Yeah it's kind of shocking to see people defend white nationalist speech on private platforms. Of all the marginalized groups out there why does the group that advocates for the discrimination, removal, or even genocide of historically discriminated and murdered people (black people, indigenous people, Jewish people) need defending?
    - rickbutton 6y ago
      While those who defend them may disagree, defending white supremacy is in itself white supremacy. They defend it because they believe it. The thing that still continues to shock me is that there are people here that argue on behalf of white supremacists but still argue that they themselves are not, instead they are playing "devils advocate". At some point, let's call a duck a duck.
    - chrischattin 6y ago
      This same line of reasoning was used against people who stood up for the Jews in Nazi Germany. How soon we forget the lessons of the 20th century... Edit for reply: No. Not even close. I'm comparing your reaction to people standing up for free speech to how Nazi's treated the people who defended the Jews. Edit 2: Yes, YOU are acting like a Nazi (the real, historical version). I deleted it b/c it wasn't productive to the convo and you missed my point anyway. Either way, it's disturbing that you don't see the parallel. Edit 3: I'm not calling you a Nazi for attacking white nationalists. You totally missed the point. Edit 4: Where did you get that I'm defending white nationalists? I'm not. Not even in the slightest. I despise any ideology that treats people differently based on immutable characteristics that they have no control over (like skin color). I'm defending free speech and arguing that ideas should stand on their own. I'm saying YOU are acting like a Nazi for attacking anyone who isn't also aligned with censoring a socially outcast group. You are also misreading my comments, misrepresenting what I said, and you still don't get my point (even though you think you do).

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

AgentME 6y ago

if you can justify one argument, then you can justify any argument, so all arguments are wrong This is total slippery slope. Zooming out to the point that you ignore all the specifics isn't useful.