6 ms·

You're proposing to remove a very large, very alienated group's last public channel to express themselves peacefully. This risks further escalation. This is c

You're proposing to remove a very large, very alienated group's last public channel to express themselves peacefully. This risks further escalation. This is compounded with the stark contrast to how the protests were handled this summer.

lovecg 6y ago
s/express themselves peacefully/spread lies and coordinate attacks with impunity/
Spooky23 6y ago
Huh? Its being used to organize insurrection.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
abraae 6y ago
Organizing an insurrection is expressing yourself peacefully?
Traster 6y ago
Further escalation beyond storming the capitol? Becuase that's what tolerance has resulted in.
- Karunamon 6y ago
  You call the past few years "tolerance"? Just about any and every application that attempts to support a fully free-speech network that isn't literally a web browser has been kicked off every app store out there.
- mudil 6y ago
  Exactly. Remember when this was OK? https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1047935416182235136?s=19 https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1047935416182235136?s=19
  - benmaraschino 6y ago
    Aside from the fact that this demonstration was limited to the semi-public atrium of the Hart Senate Office Building—historically, a location where many such demonstrations have been held, and all peacefully, to my knowledge—I'm willing to bet you that none of those demonstrators are armed. Nor did they arrive with zip ties to take hostages—didn't you see the footage of those armed thugs sweeping the Senate chamber looking for potential hostages? Nor did they rampage through the building, with the intent of targeting specific politicians for violence. They didn't damage property, either. Nor did they impede the democratic process which we all put so much stock in. There's just absolutely no equivalence between these two events. I don't know if that was your intent or not, but there's absolutely no comparison.
  - LukeShu 6y ago
    I just want to make sure I'm understanding you correctly. Are you saying that: - What the pro-Trump crowd did on 2021-01-06 at the capitol building is essentially the same as what the anti-Kavanaugh crowd did on 2018-10-04 at the Hart Senate Office Building. - And so, the actions themselves have not escalated; what has escalated is our sensitivity to them in that we no longer deem them as "OK". ? Or am I totally misreading you? Because if I understood you correctly, um, see what 'benmaraschino wrote.
- whatshisface 6y ago
  There are a lot of higher steps, just look at US history. For example, the mob could murder someone. In the bad old days of civil rights resistance, the mob would regularly engage in homicide against targets they thought were upsetting their power.
  - AshleyGrant 6y ago
    They DID murder someone. US Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick.
    - abernard1 6y ago
      He died of a stroke. That's not exactly murder. On the other hand, Capitol police killed 4 unarmed citizens. If this were a BLM rally, and those people were black, we would never hear the end of it. We'd have to "say their name," irrespective of the circumstances of their death. The woman who was killed on video is effectively nameless. She won't receive any encomiums or major press coverage.
      - icebraining 6y ago
        I'm not even American and followed the events with idle curiosity, and I already know her name is Babbitt. NPR, The Guardian, NYTimes, etc all have headlines with it.
      - ben_w 6y ago
        """Officer Sicknick was responding to the riots on Wednesday, January 6, 2021, at the U.S. Capitol and was injured while physically engaging with protesters. He returned to his division office and collapsed. He was taken to a local hospital where he succumbed to his injuries. The death of Officer Sicknick will be investigated by the Metropolitan Police Department’s Homicide Branch, the USCP, and our federal partners.""" - https://www.uscp.gov/media-center/press-releases/loss-uscp-colleague-brian-d-sicknick https://www.uscp.gov/media-center/press-releases/loss-uscp-c...
    - whatshisface 6y ago
- mnouquet 6y ago
  Antifa had plans to storm the white house after election day...
- abernard1 6y ago
  This is extraordinarily tame in the scheme of American history. And as someone who lives in one of those areas of the country constantly scorned, belittled, and caricatured, I can say with confidence that you do not want those people to act in kind to Antifa. There's been a lot of living vicariously through Antifa/BLM lately with portions of society that want to "stand for something." It's the same mentality as people who wear Che Guevara t-shirts but complain when the wifi on their plane isn't available. On the other side of that is a enormous, peaceful, patriotic section of U.S. society that is heavily armed and competent with those armaments. If you make this segment of society feel as if they are the enemy of the country they love, it will be a disaster. If there is ever armed conflict between urban areas vs everyone else, "everyone else" in the U.S. will win overwhelmingly.
  - AshleyGrant 6y ago
    There is nothing at all patriotic about what these people did. There is nothing peaceful about what happened this week. These people demand Constitutional rights while trampling all over that very document. They are not “patriots,” they are traitors.
    - abernard1 6y ago
      I'm not saying these people who stormed the Capitol did the right thing. Far from it. What we're seeing is this being used as a blunt instrument to suppress the non-extremist components of that disagreement. That "non-extremist" component is patriotic. It is extremely large and also very angry. Treating them as if they are the same as the people who did this is ill-advised.
  - pqhwan 6y ago
    > “If there is ever armed conflict between urban areas vs everyone else, "everyone else" in the U.S. will win overwhelmingly.” I remember back in third grade when kids would argue about how their dad would beat the others’. As I grew up, I realized that that’s not how conflicts work, and certainly not how they’re won.
    - 6y ago
- vimy 6y ago
  Tolerance? Remember when the left taught America it's okay to use violence if it is for the greater good? > The elite media class of academics, influencers, celebrities, and journalists who make up the #resistence, spent all summer saying "riots are the language of the unheard," as a way of excusing and justifying violence, vandalism, and riots in the streets This thread will help you remember: https://twitter.com/wokal_distance/status/1346937852970483714 https://twitter.com/wokal_distance/status/134693785297048371...
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
sj3k 6y ago
Somebody think of the white people !!
Barrin92 6y ago
people are straight up calling for murder on that website, it's insane. There's no negotiating. "Let me call for violence on the internet, or I'll go out and actually shoot someone" is nuts. That's not someone you negotiate with, that's a person that belongs into a mental ward. Authority does not need to back down because someone threatens terrorism. And yes before other events are invoked, that goes for all form of violence advocacy no matter from which group.
- throwaway45349 6y ago
  You know, if these people weren't pushed off the mainstream platforms they may have been de-radicalized by regular people before things got worse. Just look at how QAnon festered underground until it was too late to get rid of.
- snomad 6y ago
  People regularly threaten NFL players on twitter... what is a real solution? It has been going on since at least 2012... 2020 - https://foxsportsradio.iheart.com/content/2020-11-23-nfl-player-receives-death-threats-after-his-lost-fumble-decides-game/ https://foxsportsradio.iheart.com/content/2020-11-23-nfl-pla... 2012 - https://www.nfl.com/news/david-akers-closes-twitter-account-because-of-death-threats-0ap1000000121681 https://www.nfl.com/news/david-akers-closes-twitter-account-...
- TheAceOfHearts 6y ago
  Are you claiming nobody has ever called for murder on Facebook or Twitter? By your line of reasoning those apps should be taken down too. We know for a fact that Facebook and Twitter have been the direct causes of far more numerous deaths than Parler. How do you reconcile this view?
  - vladTheInhaler 6y ago
    Because Twitter and Facebook have policies against doing those things, and they enforce them. That's why so many right-wing extremists complain about being "de-platformed" - they're mad that Facebook isn't letting them agitate for martial law, the kidnapping of governors, etc.
ProfessorLayton 6y ago
there is absolutely nothing peaceful about this https://twitter.com/slpng_giants/status/1347609631527489537 https://twitter.com/slpng_giants/status/1347609631527489537
- bladefire 6y ago
  For those of us who refuse to submit to Twitter terms of service, what is the link?
  - throw0101a 6y ago
    Copy-paste: > UPDATE: The calls for violence over on Parler are getting much, much worse. > There are now open calls for the murder of police officers and planning for violence on January 20th > This obviously severely violates the law, much less the @AppStore and @GooglePlay rules.
war1025 6y ago
Unfortunately, I think this is only the beginning. The Trump era was just a warm-up.
- _euac 6y ago
  The only chance in hell this country has of surviving is if Republicans widely condemn Trump's behavior and make an example of other agitators like Rudy Giuliani and Alex Jones who whipped these people into a frenzy. If there are no consequences, they'll only get the message that they can do whatever they want and things will only get worse.
  - mnouquet 6y ago
    > The only chance in hell this country has of surviving is if Republicans widely condemn It won't change a single thing, at best, those elected official will be considered traitors / pussies.
    - _euac 6y ago
      It will. Plenty of people in my own family who've been Trump staunch Trump supporters through thick and thin were appalled by what happened on Wednesday. If the Republicans want to heal the country, they have to reassure these people that there is a path to normalcy and it involves rejecting this kind of extremism. The worst thing Republicans can do is pretend it's all business as usual and force these people to choose between 'the evil Democrats' (who they won't support, ever) or 'our guy who might try a coup here and there but at least is on our side'.
      - war1025 6y ago
        Unfortunately the non-Trump wings of the Republican party get you people like Mitt Romney. I'd vote Democrat before I backed that guy. Really just planning to excuse myself from politics for the next few years.
      - mnouquet 6y ago
        > it involves rejecting this kind of extremism It's not "extremism" if, from the point of view of History, you're on the winning side, in that case, it's "heroism".
FireBeyond 6y ago
> very alienated You're going to need to explain exactly how the right is "alienated". > last public channel You're going to need to explain what right they have to an audience or for other entities to provide time/effort/money giving them a voice. > This risks further escalatation Oh good. "More violence if we don't get our way"? You're literally saying "deplatforming them in response to incitements and planning of violence will lead to further violence" as an argument why we should allow that to continue? > This compounded with the stark contrast to how the protests were handled this summer. I'm sure Trump will be pushing for "10 YEARS FEDERAL PRISON" for protests at this federal building, any minute now.
dguaraglia 6y ago
This is a completely flawed premise. The idea that 'if we don't let them talk to each other to organize insurrections, they'll somehow will do something worse' is ridiculous.
varjag 6y ago
People with authoritarian mindset have a great respect for force.
- varjag 6y ago
  Case in point: the Republican support for putsch has dropped from 47% to 18% mere hours after the first FBI raids.
loudin 6y ago
They are not expressing themselves peacefully is the issue. They are calling for armed insurrection.
- mnouquet 6y ago
  Can you remind me how long ago has antifa / BLM started its owned armed insurrection (especially in Seattle & Portland) ?
  - burnthrow 6y ago
    00:00:00
  - jonnycomputer 6y ago
    Were these people attempting to directly attack a legislative body as it performed its constitutional duty? I thought not.
    - mnouquet 6y ago
      They did, on another occasion https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1047935416182235136?s=19 https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1047935416182235136?s=19 Also, Antifa was planning an attack on the white house after election day.
      - jonnycomputer 6y ago
        You can't wake someone up who is only pretending to be asleep.
    - themgt 6y ago
      May 31, 2020 attempting to breach White House perimeter: "More than 60 Secret Service officers and agents were injured near the White House ... when protesters threw “projectiles such as bricks, rocks, bottles, fireworks and other items,” according to the statement. “Personnel were also directly physically assaulted as they were kicked, punched and exposed to bodily fluids."[1] July 22, 2020: "As they have for the past 53 days, violent anarchists continue to riot on the streets of Portland as federal law enforcement officers work diligently and honorably to enforce federal law by defending federal property and the lives of their fellow officers. Attacks on federal personnel and property overnight have included attacks on Law Enforcement officers with commercial grade fireworks, hard projectiles, and lasers – which can cause permanent blindness. Last night violence was even more aggressive than previous nights as rioters once again tried to set fire to the federal courthouse and actively tried to breach the entrance of the courthouse. Rioters are also employing tactics that force federal officers to leave the Hatfield Federal Courthouse, setting them up to be attacked with lasers and projectiles."[2] Perhaps these do not meet your narrow definition, yet violent attacks on our other branches of federal government seem fairly analogous if not of the same magnitude as Wednesday's assault. Are you suggesting Apple would/should allow apps where users organized violent assaults such as these on the executive and judiciary - just not against the Capitol building as Congress is in session? [1] https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/george-floyd-protests-05-31-20/h_cb459ab077b164295d8d61d80987e3fb https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/george-floyd-protests-05-31... [2] https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/07/22/portland-riots-read-out-july-22 https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/07/22/portland-riots-read-out-...
Fauntleroy 6y ago
Things are much less likely to escalate when these groups aren't able to communicate.
- Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
  Its the opposite.
twiceaday 6y ago
They are a minority. You can argue that putting them closer to the general public will normalize them, but there has been no sign of this. In fact quite the opposite. Putting them closer to the general public only simplifies recruiting. I think it is naive to assume their bubble can be forcefully diluted; at best we can take steps to stop promoting it.
- nackerhewz 6y ago
  Recruiting is simple because many moderate voices are labeled as "nazi" and consequently deplatformed and censored, that creates massive polarization and resentment.
bjtitus 6y ago
It is really not Apple or any private company's responsibility to make all information accessible. They can use an Android phone, they can use a website, they can create their own Android based platform. I am an advocate for Apple allowing side loading, but that is a different argument than requiring the App Store to host specific software.
throw0101a 6y ago
You have to draw a line somewhere: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance * 5 months ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24082241 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24082241
- nackerhewz 6y ago
  Popper's paradox of tolerance is flawed reasoning IMO. Who decides what is tolerant and what is not? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quis_custodiet_ipsos_custodes%3F https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quis_custodiet_ipsos_custodes%...
  - ben_w 6y ago
    That’s why it’s called a paradox.
- Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
  Paradox of tolerance is nonsense. If you are intolerant "only to the intolerant", you are intolerant, period. If you want to have some moral higher ground, win them over with your virtue. Yes, it's incredibly hard. But it is not a hypocritical bullshit like this 'paradox'.
anigbrowl 6y ago
You can always go on Gab. At least they don't ask users to submit copies of their driver's licenses and social security numbers.
andy_ppp 6y ago
It’s the opposite, before the Internet groups of nutcases could not organise themselves around fascist ideas as easily as today. We have the president suggesting crazy conspiracy theories that half the US population believe. Half the US population don’t wear masks as a political statement. I think someone made a wise connection between the downward spiral of public education standards and where we are today. These people unfortunately are screwed unless welfare in America helps them... they are going to get poorer and angrier. I wonder if the GOP are starting to realise a lot like tea party playing with the Trump nationalist agenda can create something you won’t necessarily be able to control.
- gwright 6y ago
  > Half the US population don’t wear masks as a political statement This is just wrong and a sloppy way to insult "half the US population". This sort of attitude contributes to the tribalism that is creating so much division. https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20201022/mask-use-by-americans-now-tops-90-poll-finds#1 https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20201022/mask-use-by-america...
  - andy_ppp 6y ago
    Half the people around here think half always means exactly 50%...
    - gwright 6y ago
      But in this case it was clearly a slam against anyone who didn't vote a particular way. It wasn't just some sloppy use of language to mean "many".
      - andy_ppp 6y ago
        You are right, the comment I made on the Internet late at night was not perfectly formulated. I think there is a better wording here, I was trying to say there is a political aspect to how people view everything nowadays (before an edit I compared to taking a knee on the other side, but again it’s too complicated a point to get across right now). Good night Gwright.
rubyn00bie 6y ago
They attempted a coup yesterday. There is no "peaceful protest." They surely would've taken hostages had there been any available to make examples out of... They're nazi and facist scumbag fuckos using the banner of "free speech" to disguise and hide their intentions. This is far from free speech at this point... They only want to "use it," to take it away from others. Fuck that. Hitler performed a similar failed coup, where was put in jail for a few months, laughed at publicly, and then got out and we all know how the rest went. Escalation at this point is the rest of escalating our actions against fascist fuckos by any and all means necessary. Removing their ability to broadcast bullshit is but one of many steps that must immediately be taken.
bob33212 6y ago
The hope is that they will go back to watching sports, wrestling, nascar, porn, and whatever else these idiots watch. I feel bad that they got scammed by Trump, but they really should do something other than echo chamber themselves into a deadly mob again.
tw04 6y ago
I'd posit two things: Who on earth says they need or deserve a "public channel to express themselves"? The world seemed to get by just fine before social media existed, and I have no doubt we'd all be perfectly fine if it were gone tomorrow. If the white supremacists are stuck going back to physically mailing letters around and struggling to organize that's a net win for society... Where exactly did you come to the conclusion they're expressing themselves peacefully? So far we've had the Capitol stormed, and a thwarted attempt at kidnapping and murdering a state governor. Neither of those two events are anything resembling "peaceful".
- disruptalot 6y ago
  > Who on earth says they need or deserve a "public channel to express themselves"? This is prime "Free Speech for Me - But Not for Thee". You're making a very easy generalization. Not any significant portion of people expressing themselves contributed to any of the events you are mentioning. It's funny because you can read the exact same thought process from the opposite side, against say the BLM protests.
  - tw04 6y ago
    >This is prime "Free Speech for Me - But Not for Thee". That was a pretty bold assumption on your part, and couldn't be any further from the truth. I don't participate on Twitter or Facebook, and I'm getting by just fine. Somehow I don't feel my freedom of speech has been in any way limited. So I can tell you with 100% certainty that you can in fact get by just fine without having a "public channel to express yourself". >You're making a very easy generalization. Not any significant portion of people expressing themselves contributed to any of the events you are mentioning. It's funny because you can read the exact same thought process from the opposite side, against say the BLM protests. It doesn't actually matter if it was "a significant portion" - they allowed the organization of what became a violent protest and will likely be de-platformed as a result. Freedom of speech doesn't apply to private companies. I have literally no idea what BLM has to do with any of this other than you're making another poor assumption that I'm OK with violent protests if it's by a certain group. You'd be wrong.

lovecg 6y ago

s/express themselves peacefully/spread lies and coordinate attacks with impunity/

Spooky23 6y ago

Huh? Its being used to organize insurrection.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

abraae 6y ago

Organizing an insurrection is expressing yourself peacefully?

Traster 6y ago

Further escalation beyond storming the capitol? Becuase that's what tolerance has resulted in.

Karunamon 6y ago
You call the past few years "tolerance"? Just about any and every application that attempts to support a fully free-speech network that isn't literally a web browser has been kicked off every app store out there.
mudil 6y ago
Exactly. Remember when this was OK? https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1047935416182235136?s=19 https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1047935416182235136?s=19
- benmaraschino 6y ago
  Aside from the fact that this demonstration was limited to the semi-public atrium of the Hart Senate Office Building—historically, a location where many such demonstrations have been held, and all peacefully, to my knowledge—I'm willing to bet you that none of those demonstrators are armed. Nor did they arrive with zip ties to take hostages—didn't you see the footage of those armed thugs sweeping the Senate chamber looking for potential hostages? Nor did they rampage through the building, with the intent of targeting specific politicians for violence. They didn't damage property, either. Nor did they impede the democratic process which we all put so much stock in. There's just absolutely no equivalence between these two events. I don't know if that was your intent or not, but there's absolutely no comparison.
- LukeShu 6y ago
  I just want to make sure I'm understanding you correctly. Are you saying that: - What the pro-Trump crowd did on 2021-01-06 at the capitol building is essentially the same as what the anti-Kavanaugh crowd did on 2018-10-04 at the Hart Senate Office Building. - And so, the actions themselves have not escalated; what has escalated is our sensitivity to them in that we no longer deem them as "OK". ? Or am I totally misreading you? Because if I understood you correctly, um, see what 'benmaraschino wrote.
whatshisface 6y ago
There are a lot of higher steps, just look at US history. For example, the mob could murder someone. In the bad old days of civil rights resistance, the mob would regularly engage in homicide against targets they thought were upsetting their power.
- AshleyGrant 6y ago
  They DID murder someone. US Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick.
  - abernard1 6y ago
    He died of a stroke. That's not exactly murder. On the other hand, Capitol police killed 4 unarmed citizens. If this were a BLM rally, and those people were black, we would never hear the end of it. We'd have to "say their name," irrespective of the circumstances of their death. The woman who was killed on video is effectively nameless. She won't receive any encomiums or major press coverage.
    - icebraining 6y ago
      I'm not even American and followed the events with idle curiosity, and I already know her name is Babbitt. NPR, The Guardian, NYTimes, etc all have headlines with it.
    - ben_w 6y ago
      """Officer Sicknick was responding to the riots on Wednesday, January 6, 2021, at the U.S. Capitol and was injured while physically engaging with protesters. He returned to his division office and collapsed. He was taken to a local hospital where he succumbed to his injuries. The death of Officer Sicknick will be investigated by the Metropolitan Police Department’s Homicide Branch, the USCP, and our federal partners.""" - https://www.uscp.gov/media-center/press-releases/loss-uscp-colleague-brian-d-sicknick https://www.uscp.gov/media-center/press-releases/loss-uscp-c...
  - whatshisface 6y ago
mnouquet 6y ago
Antifa had plans to storm the white house after election day...
abernard1 6y ago
This is extraordinarily tame in the scheme of American history. And as someone who lives in one of those areas of the country constantly scorned, belittled, and caricatured, I can say with confidence that you do not want those people to act in kind to Antifa. There's been a lot of living vicariously through Antifa/BLM lately with portions of society that want to "stand for something." It's the same mentality as people who wear Che Guevara t-shirts but complain when the wifi on their plane isn't available. On the other side of that is a enormous, peaceful, patriotic section of U.S. society that is heavily armed and competent with those armaments. If you make this segment of society feel as if they are the enemy of the country they love, it will be a disaster. If there is ever armed conflict between urban areas vs everyone else, "everyone else" in the U.S. will win overwhelmingly.
- AshleyGrant 6y ago
  There is nothing at all patriotic about what these people did. There is nothing peaceful about what happened this week. These people demand Constitutional rights while trampling all over that very document. They are not “patriots,” they are traitors.
  - abernard1 6y ago
    I'm not saying these people who stormed the Capitol did the right thing. Far from it. What we're seeing is this being used as a blunt instrument to suppress the non-extremist components of that disagreement. That "non-extremist" component is patriotic. It is extremely large and also very angry. Treating them as if they are the same as the people who did this is ill-advised.
- pqhwan 6y ago
  > “If there is ever armed conflict between urban areas vs everyone else, "everyone else" in the U.S. will win overwhelmingly.” I remember back in third grade when kids would argue about how their dad would beat the others’. As I grew up, I realized that that’s not how conflicts work, and certainly not how they’re won.
  - 6y ago
vimy 6y ago
Tolerance? Remember when the left taught America it's okay to use violence if it is for the greater good? > The elite media class of academics, influencers, celebrities, and journalists who make up the #resistence, spent all summer saying "riots are the language of the unheard," as a way of excusing and justifying violence, vandalism, and riots in the streets This thread will help you remember: https://twitter.com/wokal_distance/status/1346937852970483714 https://twitter.com/wokal_distance/status/134693785297048371...

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

sj3k 6y ago

Somebody think of the white people !!

Barrin92 6y ago

people are straight up calling for murder on that website, it's insane. There's no negotiating. "Let me call for violence on the internet, or I'll go out and actually shoot someone" is nuts. That's not someone you negotiate with, that's a person that belongs into a mental ward. Authority does not need to back down because someone threatens terrorism. And yes before other events are invoked, that goes for all form of violence advocacy no matter from which group.

throwaway45349 6y ago
You know, if these people weren't pushed off the mainstream platforms they may have been de-radicalized by regular people before things got worse. Just look at how QAnon festered underground until it was too late to get rid of.
snomad 6y ago
People regularly threaten NFL players on twitter... what is a real solution? It has been going on since at least 2012... 2020 - https://foxsportsradio.iheart.com/content/2020-11-23-nfl-player-receives-death-threats-after-his-lost-fumble-decides-game/ https://foxsportsradio.iheart.com/content/2020-11-23-nfl-pla... 2012 - https://www.nfl.com/news/david-akers-closes-twitter-account-because-of-death-threats-0ap1000000121681 https://www.nfl.com/news/david-akers-closes-twitter-account-...
TheAceOfHearts 6y ago
Are you claiming nobody has ever called for murder on Facebook or Twitter? By your line of reasoning those apps should be taken down too. We know for a fact that Facebook and Twitter have been the direct causes of far more numerous deaths than Parler. How do you reconcile this view?
- vladTheInhaler 6y ago
  Because Twitter and Facebook have policies against doing those things, and they enforce them. That's why so many right-wing extremists complain about being "de-platformed" - they're mad that Facebook isn't letting them agitate for martial law, the kidnapping of governors, etc.

ProfessorLayton 6y ago

there is absolutely nothing peaceful about this https://twitter.com/slpng_giants/status/1347609631527489537 https://twitter.com/slpng_giants/status/1347609631527489537

bladefire 6y ago
For those of us who refuse to submit to Twitter terms of service, what is the link?
- throw0101a 6y ago
  Copy-paste: > UPDATE: The calls for violence over on Parler are getting much, much worse. > There are now open calls for the murder of police officers and planning for violence on January 20th > This obviously severely violates the law, much less the @AppStore and @GooglePlay rules.

war1025 6y ago

Unfortunately, I think this is only the beginning. The Trump era was just a warm-up.

_euac 6y ago
The only chance in hell this country has of surviving is if Republicans widely condemn Trump's behavior and make an example of other agitators like Rudy Giuliani and Alex Jones who whipped these people into a frenzy. If there are no consequences, they'll only get the message that they can do whatever they want and things will only get worse.
- mnouquet 6y ago
  > The only chance in hell this country has of surviving is if Republicans widely condemn It won't change a single thing, at best, those elected official will be considered traitors / pussies.
  - _euac 6y ago
    It will. Plenty of people in my own family who've been Trump staunch Trump supporters through thick and thin were appalled by what happened on Wednesday. If the Republicans want to heal the country, they have to reassure these people that there is a path to normalcy and it involves rejecting this kind of extremism. The worst thing Republicans can do is pretend it's all business as usual and force these people to choose between 'the evil Democrats' (who they won't support, ever) or 'our guy who might try a coup here and there but at least is on our side'.
    - war1025 6y ago
      Unfortunately the non-Trump wings of the Republican party get you people like Mitt Romney. I'd vote Democrat before I backed that guy. Really just planning to excuse myself from politics for the next few years.
    - mnouquet 6y ago
      > it involves rejecting this kind of extremism It's not "extremism" if, from the point of view of History, you're on the winning side, in that case, it's "heroism".

FireBeyond 6y ago

> very alienated You're going to need to explain exactly how the right is "alienated". > last public channel You're going to need to explain what right they have to an audience or for other entities to provide time/effort/money giving them a voice. > This risks further escalatation Oh good. "More violence if we don't get our way"? You're literally saying "deplatforming them in response to incitements and planning of violence will lead to further violence" as an argument why we should allow that to continue? > This compounded with the stark contrast to how the protests were handled this summer. I'm sure Trump will be pushing for "10 YEARS FEDERAL PRISON" for protests at this federal building, any minute now.

dguaraglia 6y ago

This is a completely flawed premise. The idea that 'if we don't let them talk to each other to organize insurrections, they'll somehow will do something worse' is ridiculous.

varjag 6y ago

People with authoritarian mindset have a great respect for force.

varjag 6y ago
Case in point: the Republican support for putsch has dropped from 47% to 18% mere hours after the first FBI raids.

loudin 6y ago

They are not expressing themselves peacefully is the issue. They are calling for armed insurrection.

mnouquet 6y ago
Can you remind me how long ago has antifa / BLM started its owned armed insurrection (especially in Seattle & Portland) ?
- burnthrow 6y ago
  00:00:00
- jonnycomputer 6y ago
  Were these people attempting to directly attack a legislative body as it performed its constitutional duty? I thought not.
  - mnouquet 6y ago
    They did, on another occasion https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1047935416182235136?s=19 https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1047935416182235136?s=19 Also, Antifa was planning an attack on the white house after election day.
    - jonnycomputer 6y ago
      You can't wake someone up who is only pretending to be asleep.
  - themgt 6y ago
    May 31, 2020 attempting to breach White House perimeter: "More than 60 Secret Service officers and agents were injured near the White House ... when protesters threw “projectiles such as bricks, rocks, bottles, fireworks and other items,” according to the statement. “Personnel were also directly physically assaulted as they were kicked, punched and exposed to bodily fluids."[1] July 22, 2020: "As they have for the past 53 days, violent anarchists continue to riot on the streets of Portland as federal law enforcement officers work diligently and honorably to enforce federal law by defending federal property and the lives of their fellow officers. Attacks on federal personnel and property overnight have included attacks on Law Enforcement officers with commercial grade fireworks, hard projectiles, and lasers – which can cause permanent blindness. Last night violence was even more aggressive than previous nights as rioters once again tried to set fire to the federal courthouse and actively tried to breach the entrance of the courthouse. Rioters are also employing tactics that force federal officers to leave the Hatfield Federal Courthouse, setting them up to be attacked with lasers and projectiles."[2] Perhaps these do not meet your narrow definition, yet violent attacks on our other branches of federal government seem fairly analogous if not of the same magnitude as Wednesday's assault. Are you suggesting Apple would/should allow apps where users organized violent assaults such as these on the executive and judiciary - just not against the Capitol building as Congress is in session? [1] https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/george-floyd-protests-05-31-20/h_cb459ab077b164295d8d61d80987e3fb https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/george-floyd-protests-05-31... [2] https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/07/22/portland-riots-read-out-july-22 https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/07/22/portland-riots-read-out-...

Fauntleroy 6y ago

Things are much less likely to escalate when these groups aren't able to communicate.

Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
Its the opposite.

twiceaday 6y ago

They are a minority. You can argue that putting them closer to the general public will normalize them, but there has been no sign of this. In fact quite the opposite. Putting them closer to the general public only simplifies recruiting. I think it is naive to assume their bubble can be forcefully diluted; at best we can take steps to stop promoting it.

nackerhewz 6y ago
Recruiting is simple because many moderate voices are labeled as "nazi" and consequently deplatformed and censored, that creates massive polarization and resentment.

bjtitus 6y ago

It is really not Apple or any private company's responsibility to make all information accessible. They can use an Android phone, they can use a website, they can create their own Android based platform. I am an advocate for Apple allowing side loading, but that is a different argument than requiring the App Store to host specific software.

throw0101a 6y ago

You have to draw a line somewhere: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance * 5 months ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24082241 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24082241

nackerhewz 6y ago
Popper's paradox of tolerance is flawed reasoning IMO. Who decides what is tolerant and what is not? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quis_custodiet_ipsos_custodes%3F https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quis_custodiet_ipsos_custodes%...
- ben_w 6y ago
  That’s why it’s called a paradox.
Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
Paradox of tolerance is nonsense. If you are intolerant "only to the intolerant", you are intolerant, period. If you want to have some moral higher ground, win them over with your virtue. Yes, it's incredibly hard. But it is not a hypocritical bullshit like this 'paradox'.

anigbrowl 6y ago

You can always go on Gab. At least they don't ask users to submit copies of their driver's licenses and social security numbers.

andy_ppp 6y ago

It’s the opposite, before the Internet groups of nutcases could not organise themselves around fascist ideas as easily as today. We have the president suggesting crazy conspiracy theories that half the US population believe. Half the US population don’t wear masks as a political statement. I think someone made a wise connection between the downward spiral of public education standards and where we are today. These people unfortunately are screwed unless welfare in America helps them... they are going to get poorer and angrier. I wonder if the GOP are starting to realise a lot like tea party playing with the Trump nationalist agenda can create something you won’t necessarily be able to control.

gwright 6y ago
> Half the US population don’t wear masks as a political statement This is just wrong and a sloppy way to insult "half the US population". This sort of attitude contributes to the tribalism that is creating so much division. https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20201022/mask-use-by-americans-now-tops-90-poll-finds#1 https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20201022/mask-use-by-america...
- andy_ppp 6y ago
  Half the people around here think half always means exactly 50%...
  - gwright 6y ago
    But in this case it was clearly a slam against anyone who didn't vote a particular way. It wasn't just some sloppy use of language to mean "many".
    - andy_ppp 6y ago
      You are right, the comment I made on the Internet late at night was not perfectly formulated. I think there is a better wording here, I was trying to say there is a political aspect to how people view everything nowadays (before an edit I compared to taking a knee on the other side, but again it’s too complicated a point to get across right now). Good night Gwright.

rubyn00bie 6y ago

They attempted a coup yesterday. There is no "peaceful protest." They surely would've taken hostages had there been any available to make examples out of... They're nazi and facist scumbag fuckos using the banner of "free speech" to disguise and hide their intentions. This is far from free speech at this point... They only want to "use it," to take it away from others. Fuck that. Hitler performed a similar failed coup, where was put in jail for a few months, laughed at publicly, and then got out and we all know how the rest went. Escalation at this point is the rest of escalating our actions against fascist fuckos by any and all means necessary. Removing their ability to broadcast bullshit is but one of many steps that must immediately be taken.

bob33212 6y ago

The hope is that they will go back to watching sports, wrestling, nascar, porn, and whatever else these idiots watch. I feel bad that they got scammed by Trump, but they really should do something other than echo chamber themselves into a deadly mob again.

tw04 6y ago

I'd posit two things: Who on earth says they need or deserve a "public channel to express themselves"? The world seemed to get by just fine before social media existed, and I have no doubt we'd all be perfectly fine if it were gone tomorrow. If the white supremacists are stuck going back to physically mailing letters around and struggling to organize that's a net win for society... Where exactly did you come to the conclusion they're expressing themselves peacefully? So far we've had the Capitol stormed, and a thwarted attempt at kidnapping and murdering a state governor. Neither of those two events are anything resembling "peaceful".

disruptalot 6y ago
> Who on earth says they need or deserve a "public channel to express themselves"? This is prime "Free Speech for Me - But Not for Thee". You're making a very easy generalization. Not any significant portion of people expressing themselves contributed to any of the events you are mentioning. It's funny because you can read the exact same thought process from the opposite side, against say the BLM protests.
- tw04 6y ago
  >This is prime "Free Speech for Me - But Not for Thee". That was a pretty bold assumption on your part, and couldn't be any further from the truth. I don't participate on Twitter or Facebook, and I'm getting by just fine. Somehow I don't feel my freedom of speech has been in any way limited. So I can tell you with 100% certainty that you can in fact get by just fine without having a "public channel to express yourself". >You're making a very easy generalization. Not any significant portion of people expressing themselves contributed to any of the events you are mentioning. It's funny because you can read the exact same thought process from the opposite side, against say the BLM protests. It doesn't actually matter if it was "a significant portion" - they allowed the organization of what became a violent protest and will likely be de-platformed as a result. Freedom of speech doesn't apply to private companies. I have literally no idea what BLM has to do with any of this other than you're making another poor assumption that I'm OK with violent protests if it's by a certain group. You'd be wrong.