5 ms·

> you only have to look at how Trump behaves towards Putin to see something is not right Look at how she dresses, she must be a witch! That's basically your

> you only have to look at how Trump behaves towards Putin to see something is not right Look at how she dresses, she must be a witch! That's basically your argument. Trump loves authoritarians, he has deep authoritarian instincts. But as someone on the left, am not at all happy with all the hysteria and censorship frenzy all this has resulted in, because it will ultimately be used against things I care about too. Seems too many don't have the foresight to see that.

take_a_breath 6y ago
==Seems too many don't have the foresight to see that.== Or they see things different than you, no need to insult. Perhaps they see the QAnon movement, which led a man to carry a rifle into an open pizza restaurant, as more of a danger than censorship? Maybe they are more worried about elected officials believing a politically-motivated conspiracy theory with zero evidence?
- AsyncAwait 6y ago
  > Perhaps they see the QAnon movement, which led a man to carry a rifle into an open pizza restaurant, as more of a danger than censorship? I agree regarding QAnon, where there are direct, credible threats of violence, of course that should be taken down. I was responding to Russiagate, not QAnon. Russiagate has resulted in downranking anti-war voices that don't necessarily align with cable TV takes on foreign policy. Basically the equivalent of saying going into Iraq is a mistake or support for BDS.
  - take_a_breath 6y ago
    By “Russiagate” are you referring to the FBI investing on of the Trump campaign’s communication with Russians? I’m not sure how investigating that was a bad idea. We also have a documented report that shows considerable coordination and a bunch of people pleaded guilty to crimes. Should we have not investigated crimes because people find it too political?
    - AsyncAwait 6y ago
      > By “Russiagate” are you referring to the FBI investing on of the Trump campaign’s communication with Russians? No. The FBI investigation I have no problem with. The surrounding hysteria that led to Twitter banning real people as bots for expressing skepticism over foreign policy in i.e. the Middle East and the birth of various shady companies that promised to deal with the "bot problem", but were in fact using bots for spamming themselves[1]. > I’m not sure how investigating that was a bad idea. Investigating that wasn't. The various leaks that provided unnecessary fuel to the fire before the media storm before the investigators had their conclusions was not helpful however. > and a bunch of people pleaded guilty to crimes Yes. However these were usually for something they have done prior to working for Trump or for lying about certain details to the FBI, as far as I know no Americans were actually charged with conspiring with Russia during the election to benefit Trump, (whom I dislike BTW, but there's plenty of more substantial crimes that weren't looked at for some reason, like his dealings in Saudi Arabia even during the campaign or him using his hotels etc. for state business). > Should we have not investigated crimes because people find it too political? As I said above, the investigation I have no problem with. 1 - https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/26/us/reid-hoffman-alabama-election-disinformation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/26/us/reid-hoffman-alabama-e...
      - take_a_breath 6y ago
        “Russiagate” is now about foreign policy in the Middle East? It sounds like your connecting a bunch of dots that aren’t there. People get banned from Twitter every day, on both sides of the aisle. A Wired article from October 2018 about people connected to the Occupy movement being banned [1]: Twitter has purged left-wing accounts with no explanation. [1] https://www.wired.co.uk/article/twitter-political-account-ban-us-mid-term-elections https://www.wired.co.uk/article/twitter-political-account-ba...
        AsyncAwait 6y ago
        > “Russiagate” is now about foreign policy in the Middle East? I don't think you get my point at all. It's about any non-mainstream opinion on a political topic now. Specifically, Russiagate led to increased censhorship by social media companies out of fear of being accused of hosting Russian bots. As a result, they overacted and are now banning everything in sight that's not mainstream enough. That means the next Iraq War, which all mainstream media were for, is going to have marginalized position on social media as these sorts of opinions are 'fringe' and banned. For example were this implemented back then, if you said Iraq did not have WMDs, you'd get a 'fact check' saying it did, even as that was false. Anything with words like 'military-industrial complex' etc. > People get banned from Twitter every day, on both sides of the aisle. A Wired article from October 2018 about people connected to the Occupy movement being banned Right. That's exactly my point. They weren't banning people as aggressively prior to Russiagate, however that whole frenzy led them to be a lot more proactive about banning than before. Furthermore, all this sets a precedent that I am certain the Republicans are going to be happy to take masterful advantage of once Biden is president. All I am really saying is that while the FBI investigations themselves were fine in my opinion, the media frenzy and the resulting pressure on social media companies to ban everything in sight that's not NYT, (which does spread misinformation from time to time btw), so that they don't spread 'misinformation' was a short-sighted strategy that is very likely long-term going to be used against the left, which am not at all happy about.
- magnusmagnusson 6y ago
  Yet they don't see danger when Berniebro opens fire on Republican congressmembers because he believes Trump is a traitor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Congressional_baseball_shooting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Congressional_baseball_sh... I am merely noting the asymmetries involved.
  - take_a_breath 6y ago
    Who is “they” in your comment and who gets to speak on “their” behalf?
- dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago
  > Perhaps they see the QAnon movement, which led a man to carry a rifle into an open pizza restaurant, as more of a danger than censorship? Maybe it was because the mainstream media decided to completely disregard the crux of the matter and instead of debunking it piece by piece (which actually happened to a limited degree, but waaay too late) they either ignored or ridiculed it. Most people read the leaked emails, looked at strange instagram images of children and wondered what all this means and why nobody is investigating that.
  - take_a_breath 6y ago
    Must be a nice tidy world where everything is just the media’s fault, except where you admit that they did the thing you are criticizing them for not doing. Why hasn’t Fox cracked the case, they are a mainstream media company?
    - dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago
      A colleague of mine sent me a link to a subreddit when it all started. I completely dismissed it but he insisted I read it. So I had a look and some content of the leaked emails made me feel quite uncomfortable. Of course I didn't believe the code they used actually refered to children, but I couldn't explain what it meant. Also, at that time I had no idea the accompanying instagram images were fake (at laeast some of them), and the people involved deleted/disabled their instagram accounts and suddenly became reticent. I thought I'd just refer my colleague to an online article debunking all this as bs, but I couldn't find any. The whole thing developed over several months, but nobody bothered to treat it seriously. It changed only after the gun incident.
      - take_a_breath 6y ago
        The conspiracy grows faster than the claims can be fact-checked. This isn’t the media’s fault. In fact, conspiracies often use the media de-bunking as more evidence they are correct. If I invent a claim that I am an alien, it isn’t the media’s fault if a bunch of people believe me. By the time the media can de-bunk my story, I’ve already pivoted to how other aliens have taken over the media and they can’t be trusted.
- mansion7 6y ago
  Oh man, you're gonna freak when you learn what the antifa movement has led people to do
stillbourne 6y ago
Content moderation and editorial oversight is not censorship.
blisseyGo 6y ago
> Trump loves authoritarians, he has deep authoritarian instincts The left keeps saying that but I have never understood why. Why would an "authoritarian" be defending people's right to bear arms (2A), their freedom of speech (1A), States rights (federalism 10A) etc. I would even go as far as to say that the left is the one which is authoritarian and simply enjoys name calling assigning labels to the right as described as a tactic by Saul Alinsky which also happens to be loved by Hillary and Obama.

take_a_breath 6y ago

==Seems too many don't have the foresight to see that.== Or they see things different than you, no need to insult. Perhaps they see the QAnon movement, which led a man to carry a rifle into an open pizza restaurant, as more of a danger than censorship? Maybe they are more worried about elected officials believing a politically-motivated conspiracy theory with zero evidence?

AsyncAwait 6y ago
> Perhaps they see the QAnon movement, which led a man to carry a rifle into an open pizza restaurant, as more of a danger than censorship? I agree regarding QAnon, where there are direct, credible threats of violence, of course that should be taken down. I was responding to Russiagate, not QAnon. Russiagate has resulted in downranking anti-war voices that don't necessarily align with cable TV takes on foreign policy. Basically the equivalent of saying going into Iraq is a mistake or support for BDS.
- take_a_breath 6y ago
  By “Russiagate” are you referring to the FBI investing on of the Trump campaign’s communication with Russians? I’m not sure how investigating that was a bad idea. We also have a documented report that shows considerable coordination and a bunch of people pleaded guilty to crimes. Should we have not investigated crimes because people find it too political?
  - AsyncAwait 6y ago
    > By “Russiagate” are you referring to the FBI investing on of the Trump campaign’s communication with Russians? No. The FBI investigation I have no problem with. The surrounding hysteria that led to Twitter banning real people as bots for expressing skepticism over foreign policy in i.e. the Middle East and the birth of various shady companies that promised to deal with the "bot problem", but were in fact using bots for spamming themselves[1]. > I’m not sure how investigating that was a bad idea. Investigating that wasn't. The various leaks that provided unnecessary fuel to the fire before the media storm before the investigators had their conclusions was not helpful however. > and a bunch of people pleaded guilty to crimes Yes. However these were usually for something they have done prior to working for Trump or for lying about certain details to the FBI, as far as I know no Americans were actually charged with conspiring with Russia during the election to benefit Trump, (whom I dislike BTW, but there's plenty of more substantial crimes that weren't looked at for some reason, like his dealings in Saudi Arabia even during the campaign or him using his hotels etc. for state business). > Should we have not investigated crimes because people find it too political? As I said above, the investigation I have no problem with. 1 - https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/26/us/reid-hoffman-alabama-election-disinformation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/26/us/reid-hoffman-alabama-e...
    - take_a_breath 6y ago
      “Russiagate” is now about foreign policy in the Middle East? It sounds like your connecting a bunch of dots that aren’t there. People get banned from Twitter every day, on both sides of the aisle. A Wired article from October 2018 about people connected to the Occupy movement being banned [1]: Twitter has purged left-wing accounts with no explanation. [1] https://www.wired.co.uk/article/twitter-political-account-ban-us-mid-term-elections https://www.wired.co.uk/article/twitter-political-account-ba...
      - AsyncAwait 6y ago
        > “Russiagate” is now about foreign policy in the Middle East? I don't think you get my point at all. It's about any non-mainstream opinion on a political topic now. Specifically, Russiagate led to increased censhorship by social media companies out of fear of being accused of hosting Russian bots. As a result, they overacted and are now banning everything in sight that's not mainstream enough. That means the next Iraq War, which all mainstream media were for, is going to have marginalized position on social media as these sorts of opinions are 'fringe' and banned. For example were this implemented back then, if you said Iraq did not have WMDs, you'd get a 'fact check' saying it did, even as that was false. Anything with words like 'military-industrial complex' etc. > People get banned from Twitter every day, on both sides of the aisle. A Wired article from October 2018 about people connected to the Occupy movement being banned Right. That's exactly my point. They weren't banning people as aggressively prior to Russiagate, however that whole frenzy led them to be a lot more proactive about banning than before. Furthermore, all this sets a precedent that I am certain the Republicans are going to be happy to take masterful advantage of once Biden is president. All I am really saying is that while the FBI investigations themselves were fine in my opinion, the media frenzy and the resulting pressure on social media companies to ban everything in sight that's not NYT, (which does spread misinformation from time to time btw), so that they don't spread 'misinformation' was a short-sighted strategy that is very likely long-term going to be used against the left, which am not at all happy about.
magnusmagnusson 6y ago
Yet they don't see danger when Berniebro opens fire on Republican congressmembers because he believes Trump is a traitor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Congressional_baseball_shooting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Congressional_baseball_sh... I am merely noting the asymmetries involved.
- take_a_breath 6y ago
  Who is “they” in your comment and who gets to speak on “their” behalf?
dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago
> Perhaps they see the QAnon movement, which led a man to carry a rifle into an open pizza restaurant, as more of a danger than censorship? Maybe it was because the mainstream media decided to completely disregard the crux of the matter and instead of debunking it piece by piece (which actually happened to a limited degree, but waaay too late) they either ignored or ridiculed it. Most people read the leaked emails, looked at strange instagram images of children and wondered what all this means and why nobody is investigating that.
- take_a_breath 6y ago
  Must be a nice tidy world where everything is just the media’s fault, except where you admit that they did the thing you are criticizing them for not doing. Why hasn’t Fox cracked the case, they are a mainstream media company?
  - dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago
    A colleague of mine sent me a link to a subreddit when it all started. I completely dismissed it but he insisted I read it. So I had a look and some content of the leaked emails made me feel quite uncomfortable. Of course I didn't believe the code they used actually refered to children, but I couldn't explain what it meant. Also, at that time I had no idea the accompanying instagram images were fake (at laeast some of them), and the people involved deleted/disabled their instagram accounts and suddenly became reticent. I thought I'd just refer my colleague to an online article debunking all this as bs, but I couldn't find any. The whole thing developed over several months, but nobody bothered to treat it seriously. It changed only after the gun incident.
    - take_a_breath 6y ago
      The conspiracy grows faster than the claims can be fact-checked. This isn’t the media’s fault. In fact, conspiracies often use the media de-bunking as more evidence they are correct. If I invent a claim that I am an alien, it isn’t the media’s fault if a bunch of people believe me. By the time the media can de-bunk my story, I’ve already pivoted to how other aliens have taken over the media and they can’t be trusted.
mansion7 6y ago
Oh man, you're gonna freak when you learn what the antifa movement has led people to do

stillbourne 6y ago

Content moderation and editorial oversight is not censorship.

blisseyGo 6y ago

> Trump loves authoritarians, he has deep authoritarian instincts The left keeps saying that but I have never understood why. Why would an "authoritarian" be defending people's right to bear arms (2A), their freedom of speech (1A), States rights (federalism 10A) etc. I would even go as far as to say that the left is the one which is authoritarian and simply enjoys name calling assigning labels to the right as described as a tactic by Saul Alinsky which also happens to be loved by Hillary and Obama.