4 ms·
You seem to assume deplatforming is not effective, is that true? Or do you disagree with it on moral grounds? I mean, 'we' (as in 'the west') try to deplatform
by Lutger 6y ago
You seem to assume deplatforming is not effective, is that true? Or do you disagree with it on moral grounds?
I mean, 'we' (as in 'the west') try to deplatform Jihad based terrorism. I think it's a pretty effective strategy, just not complete. Why should we _not_ deplatform far right white supremacy violence and terror?
Of course you also need a deradicalization approach, but that doesn't scale to the current levels of extremism. We need to stop this massive rise of fascist violence rooted in conspiracy thinking from spreading, which was amplified by social media in the first place, only then can a targeted deradicalization approach be effective.
- m-p-3 6y agoI'm not saying it's ineffective, I'm worried about unintended consequences that deplatforming could bring if they constantly feel silenced and how the violence could escalate from the resentment it can foster in these individuals.
- ttt0 6y agoForget about the social media for a second, just wait until people will come after their employment and PayPal or even banks will shut down their accounts.
- FabHK 6y agoFor now, I am not worried that the president of the United States has no platform to express his opinion.
- joshstrange 6y agoExcept, of course, he still has the biggest bully pulpit in the nation and could hold a press conference or rally whenever he wanted. Of all the people butt-hurt about being deplatformed the president has no leg to stand on being mad about it.
- FabHK 6y agoRight. By "I am not worried that X", I didn't mean that X is the case, yet I am not worried about it. I meant that I am not concerned that X could occur.
- jrs235 6y agoI understand there may be a large number of people on HN that don't share my beliefs and the beliefs of many Trump supporters, but the reality is we have a huge swath of the population that claim to be Christians that are following Trump instead of Christ... almost literally following Trump. Chasing him to his rallies and even following him on social media and whatever social platform he goes to. I believe Trump is exposing, and will assist in separating, the chaff from the wheat. I'm praying for everyone.
- whateveracct 6y agohe can hold a press conference whenever he wants and get covered everywhere
- AnthonyMouse 6y agohttps://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1348985598116323334 https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1348985598116323334
- whateveracct 6y agoi don't see the problem? he isn't getting on the news because he isn't doing anything newsworthy - the appearances mentioned are all fluff. if he has something actually important to talk about, it will be reported on and covered. in fact, i would say by now Trump has lost the benefit of being aired live and uncut. you can't spout untruths constantly and expect people to just keep mainlining your BS to every TV in the country. it sounds to me that you think that if Trump doesn't get full, unrestricted, on-demand use of american companies' broadcast facilities, he's being censored and oppressed. Sadly, he's President not King. Just because he's President doesn't mean anything that he says has value to anyone any more than anything i have to say.
- AnthonyMouse 6y agoYou're moving the goalposts. The transition from a situation in which public officials can speak to the public directly to one in which they can only do so at the whim of corporate titans is not a safe precedent.
- whateveracct 6y agopretty sure the white house has a self-hosted stream he can use and his proper press conferences still get aired. this is despite the nonsense spewed during them. what isn't being aired live is more a rally than a government briefing. the President doesn't get to stump on national TV whenever he wants. if he were a King he could ofc.
- joshstrange 6y ago> I'm worried about unintended consequences that deplatforming could bring if they constantly feel silenced and how the violence could escalate from the resentment it can foster in these individuals. I understand where you are coming from but that's pretty much textbook "negotiating with terrorists". It's coddling a group of violent (or at least violent-speech) people out of fear that if we don't give them a space to be horrible then they might act out.
- mikkergp 6y agoIt’s not like the idea that countries shouldn’t negotiate with terrorists is universal. Some countries do choose to negotiate with terrorists. I think there’s two frameworks to evaluate how we should act, one based on Justice and one based on Power. It’s idealistic to assume that we should approach everything from a “because it’s the right thing to do” perspective, as that can lead to more harm. Sometimes you have to acknowledge a groups power to do harm, and work to mitigate that harm. Not everything is going to have a clean solution. I don’t know how much power the far right has at this point. We may be about to find out, and if so we’ll see how long it takes for the country to get weary of a terrorist insurgency.
- jrs235 6y agoWe need to get off the internet and civilly talk to our actual neighbors. For these aggrieved folks it's likely best to just listen and not push back on things yet. Let them vent their frustrations verbally.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]