6 ms·

The Proud Boys might be an interesting case study. Creator Gavin McInnes along with the group was de-platformed a couple years ago. I remember them at the time

The Proud Boys might be an interesting case study. Creator Gavin McInnes along with the group was de-platformed a couple years ago. I remember them at the time seeming like a dangerous group of hipsters, nerds and meatheads. Today they appear to be a bunch of navy seal white power dudes with guns. Scary. That culture kept growing outside of the spotlight in a creepy dark corner.

sebmellen 6y ago
Right, dangerous hipster nerds, but they were on the fringes of the mainstream. If I remember correctly, Joe Rogan had Gavin McInnes on his show around that time. He was not by any means "center-right", but at least "acceptable" in the way that Ben Shapiro is today. There's an adage that sunlight is the best disinfectant, and that's obviously been missing in the long winter of the past few years.
- jakelazaroff 6y ago
  There are good reasons to believe that adage is apocryphal. How do you square that with e.g. the mere exposure theory, in which the very act of seeing something makes you more accepting of it? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere-exposure_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere-exposure_effect
  - nl 6y ago
    > apocryphal Apocryphal means that the origin of the story is doubtful. I think you might mean "the adage is incorrect" here.
  - sebmellen 6y ago
    Interesting question. I don't think these two concepts are in opposition. Of course, exposure to a toxic ideological viewpoint is poisonous for the recipient, and may in fact entice them to become more toxic themselves (if they are swayed by said reasoning). But a crucial part of the societal contract is to tolerate such toxic viewpoints so as to have the opportunity to redeem those who hold them. In other words, by eating a little bit of the poison ourselves, we are granted the opportunity to save that person from their own poison, by showing compassion and empathy towards them. People who have hate in their hearts are not entirely bad people. Everyone was once a child, everyone has experienced the mystery of simply existing, almost everyone has experienced love (whether from their parents or someone else), most people enjoy art and music. Evoking our shared humanity and showing compassion for others allows us to break down their toxic ideologies and even reform them to be beacons of compassion themselves. Perhaps the best and most compelling anecdote to promulgate this way of thinking is Daryl Davis, who, through his talents and love of music, has reformed many of the most hateful people in our country — members of the KKK. I would recommend this TED talk by him, titled "Why I, as a black man, attend KKK rallies": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORp3q1Oaezw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORp3q1Oaezw. It really encapsulates the power of this viewpoint. The crucial element here is ensuring that we have channels of communication that allow for this sort of compassionate understanding... I fear that the compression of thought foisted upon us by social media platforms and online communication tools obscures the basic reality of our shared suffering, joy, intrigue, and humanity. These important facets of communication can be lost to the aether of technology, and our true intentions are thereby belied by the incorrigibly weak substrate of written language. As a note, I think we have discussed the topic of free speech in another thread before. It's good to "see" you again :)
  - hippich 6y ago
    exposure is happening both ways
    - jakelazaroff 6y ago
      What violent conspiracy theories is the left exposing people to?
      - hippich 6y ago
        I meant something else. When groups are not in their own respective bubbles, indeed, non-extremists might be exposed to extremists' propaganda and potentially can adopt such ideas, and as a result, increase the amount of overall extremism. On the other hand, similarly, an extremist exposed to non-extremists' propaganda potentially may be affected by it as well, decreasing the amount of overall extremism. Or perhaps the total amount of extremism stays the same and instead it is spread out over large number of people, removing "spikes". I do not know if it is true. But just an idea to consider - the discussed process of de-platforming removes _two-way_ communication method.
- mudil 6y ago
  Try bringing "acceptable" Ben Shapiro on your campus, and left is going to have a fit and "peaceful" riots.
  - war1025 6y ago
    It's only insurrection if the right does it. Most people seem to be taking this like kids complaining to mommy that their sibling did the mean thing first. That will get nowhere. The only path forward for the right is to accept that the tables are tilted and learn to operate in that context. It's not "fair", but it's also not game over.
    - aegis4244 6y ago
      The right threw a pre planned riot because they didn't like the outcome of an election. The left threw riots over unarmed black men being killed with impunity for generations. One of those groups has a moral right to riot.
      - war1025 6y ago
        > One of those groups has a moral right to riot. The trouble with morality is that if you ask someone if what they are doing is morally justified, they will pretty much always say yes. It very quickly devolves into might makes right, which is more or less where we're headed.
        wyclif 6y ago
        Do people also have a moral right to not have their business burned to the ground, even when they had nothing to do with George Floyd's death? Asking for a friend.
        hackpert 6y ago
        I disagree heavily. The focus of this conversation seems misdirected, whether intentionally or not. It’s not about the fragility of morality as a system at all, which it of course is because it’s based on consensus. It’s about fundamental principles and upholding them, and how you prioritize those principles. You seem to believe in upholding right to free speech, which, surely is crucial to the country. However, this other group you speak of is protesting their rights to life and liberty, which they are being actively deprived of by an oppressive regime. Isn’t it slightly unfair? What rights is the right being deprived of? Entitlement to a certain election result or a certain office? That opposes the very definition of this democracy. They have means for their voices to be heard and their issues to be heard, still, by the right’s representatives in Congress. Black people didn’t/don’t because law enforcement was/is being racist and oppressive in unfairly killing them.
j8hn 6y ago
Back around the debates when the Proud Boys were in the news, I watched a Vice segment about them. Apparently their current leader is of Cuban descent as was most of the people in the segment. Out of the eight members in the video, six of them previously voted for Obama. I don't know too much about them except from what I saw on Vice. Is it really a group of white supremacists? edit: Reference: The Right-Wing Latinos of Miami: Proud Boys and Refugees https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9Qa1f29diE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9Qa1f29diE
- NE2z2T9qi 6y ago
  Are you suggesting that the mainstream media would lie to you? BANNED!
- isoskeles 6y ago
  I think they call themselves Western chauvinists (meaning something about Western culture being superior), not white supremacists.
- MrMan 6y ago
  Latino culture has lots of super right-wing adherents, and many of them are in South Florida.
postingawayonhn 6y ago
> The Proud Boys Sounds like a gay nightclub.
bleah1000 6y ago
They are definitely becoming more and more radicalized, but I don't know where you get this white power stuff. Their leader is a minority and many of their members are black, and other minorities. However, I think deplatforming them has made them more radical. I think that we are going to see this more and more, by isolating people and forcing them to go into places where there are no public postings, nobody is going to see how radical they get. You are going to lose some people but the really dangerous people will wind up reinforced in their belief that they are being persecuted, and if they think they have nowhere to go and nothing to hope for, I think we are going to start seeing some real ugly violence.
- flycaliguy 6y ago
  I think you are right regarding white power.
boltzmann_brain 6y ago
Deplatforming like this will always lead to more radicalization. I'm not sure why people think that removing Parlar will somehow magically make all that group dissappear and find another hobby. Hold on to your butts!

sebmellen 6y ago

Right, dangerous hipster nerds, but they were on the fringes of the mainstream. If I remember correctly, Joe Rogan had Gavin McInnes on his show around that time. He was not by any means "center-right", but at least "acceptable" in the way that Ben Shapiro is today. There's an adage that sunlight is the best disinfectant, and that's obviously been missing in the long winter of the past few years.

jakelazaroff 6y ago
There are good reasons to believe that adage is apocryphal. How do you square that with e.g. the mere exposure theory, in which the very act of seeing something makes you more accepting of it? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere-exposure_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mere-exposure_effect
- nl 6y ago
  > apocryphal Apocryphal means that the origin of the story is doubtful. I think you might mean "the adage is incorrect" here.
- sebmellen 6y ago
  Interesting question. I don't think these two concepts are in opposition. Of course, exposure to a toxic ideological viewpoint is poisonous for the recipient, and may in fact entice them to become more toxic themselves (if they are swayed by said reasoning). But a crucial part of the societal contract is to tolerate such toxic viewpoints so as to have the opportunity to redeem those who hold them. In other words, by eating a little bit of the poison ourselves, we are granted the opportunity to save that person from their own poison, by showing compassion and empathy towards them. People who have hate in their hearts are not entirely bad people. Everyone was once a child, everyone has experienced the mystery of simply existing, almost everyone has experienced love (whether from their parents or someone else), most people enjoy art and music. Evoking our shared humanity and showing compassion for others allows us to break down their toxic ideologies and even reform them to be beacons of compassion themselves. Perhaps the best and most compelling anecdote to promulgate this way of thinking is Daryl Davis, who, through his talents and love of music, has reformed many of the most hateful people in our country — members of the KKK. I would recommend this TED talk by him, titled "Why I, as a black man, attend KKK rallies": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORp3q1Oaezw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORp3q1Oaezw. It really encapsulates the power of this viewpoint. The crucial element here is ensuring that we have channels of communication that allow for this sort of compassionate understanding... I fear that the compression of thought foisted upon us by social media platforms and online communication tools obscures the basic reality of our shared suffering, joy, intrigue, and humanity. These important facets of communication can be lost to the aether of technology, and our true intentions are thereby belied by the incorrigibly weak substrate of written language. As a note, I think we have discussed the topic of free speech in another thread before. It's good to "see" you again :)
- hippich 6y ago
  exposure is happening both ways
  - jakelazaroff 6y ago
    What violent conspiracy theories is the left exposing people to?
    - hippich 6y ago
      I meant something else. When groups are not in their own respective bubbles, indeed, non-extremists might be exposed to extremists' propaganda and potentially can adopt such ideas, and as a result, increase the amount of overall extremism. On the other hand, similarly, an extremist exposed to non-extremists' propaganda potentially may be affected by it as well, decreasing the amount of overall extremism. Or perhaps the total amount of extremism stays the same and instead it is spread out over large number of people, removing "spikes". I do not know if it is true. But just an idea to consider - the discussed process of de-platforming removes _two-way_ communication method.
mudil 6y ago
Try bringing "acceptable" Ben Shapiro on your campus, and left is going to have a fit and "peaceful" riots.
- war1025 6y ago
  It's only insurrection if the right does it. Most people seem to be taking this like kids complaining to mommy that their sibling did the mean thing first. That will get nowhere. The only path forward for the right is to accept that the tables are tilted and learn to operate in that context. It's not "fair", but it's also not game over.
  - aegis4244 6y ago
    The right threw a pre planned riot because they didn't like the outcome of an election. The left threw riots over unarmed black men being killed with impunity for generations. One of those groups has a moral right to riot.
    - war1025 6y ago
      > One of those groups has a moral right to riot. The trouble with morality is that if you ask someone if what they are doing is morally justified, they will pretty much always say yes. It very quickly devolves into might makes right, which is more or less where we're headed.
      - wyclif 6y ago
        Do people also have a moral right to not have their business burned to the ground, even when they had nothing to do with George Floyd's death? Asking for a friend.
      - hackpert 6y ago
        I disagree heavily. The focus of this conversation seems misdirected, whether intentionally or not. It’s not about the fragility of morality as a system at all, which it of course is because it’s based on consensus. It’s about fundamental principles and upholding them, and how you prioritize those principles. You seem to believe in upholding right to free speech, which, surely is crucial to the country. However, this other group you speak of is protesting their rights to life and liberty, which they are being actively deprived of by an oppressive regime. Isn’t it slightly unfair? What rights is the right being deprived of? Entitlement to a certain election result or a certain office? That opposes the very definition of this democracy. They have means for their voices to be heard and their issues to be heard, still, by the right’s representatives in Congress. Black people didn’t/don’t because law enforcement was/is being racist and oppressive in unfairly killing them.

j8hn 6y ago

Back around the debates when the Proud Boys were in the news, I watched a Vice segment about them. Apparently their current leader is of Cuban descent as was most of the people in the segment. Out of the eight members in the video, six of them previously voted for Obama. I don't know too much about them except from what I saw on Vice. Is it really a group of white supremacists? edit: Reference: The Right-Wing Latinos of Miami: Proud Boys and Refugees https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9Qa1f29diE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9Qa1f29diE

NE2z2T9qi 6y ago
Are you suggesting that the mainstream media would lie to you? BANNED!
isoskeles 6y ago
I think they call themselves Western chauvinists (meaning something about Western culture being superior), not white supremacists.
MrMan 6y ago
Latino culture has lots of super right-wing adherents, and many of them are in South Florida.

postingawayonhn 6y ago

> The Proud Boys Sounds like a gay nightclub.

bleah1000 6y ago

They are definitely becoming more and more radicalized, but I don't know where you get this white power stuff. Their leader is a minority and many of their members are black, and other minorities. However, I think deplatforming them has made them more radical. I think that we are going to see this more and more, by isolating people and forcing them to go into places where there are no public postings, nobody is going to see how radical they get. You are going to lose some people but the really dangerous people will wind up reinforced in their belief that they are being persecuted, and if they think they have nowhere to go and nothing to hope for, I think we are going to start seeing some real ugly violence.

flycaliguy 6y ago
I think you are right regarding white power.

boltzmann_brain 6y ago

Deplatforming like this will always lead to more radicalization. I'm not sure why people think that removing Parlar will somehow magically make all that group dissappear and find another hobby. Hold on to your butts!