5 ms·

Considering the current target of deplatforming is the far-right, and given Germany's history specifically, they have a lot of reasons not to trust local hardwa

Considering the current target of deplatforming is the far-right, and given Germany's history specifically, they have a lot of reasons not to trust local hardware and software. The same goes for the Le Pen crowd in France, a somewhat adversarial government on the other side of the globe is often less risky than the status quo across the pond allied to the current French establishment.

walrus01 6y ago
I was wondering how long it would take until we got to the argument of "oh no, won't somebody please think of the unfortunate oppressed fascists! it's a good thing that xiaomi has phones and software for them, because their own local european government is against them". The paradox of tolerance and an open society is that if you allow actual fascism to flourish (and Le Pen is absolutely a fascist, in my opinion), you risk ending up with something much worse in the long run.
- ampdepolymerase 6y ago
  That's not a very valid argument in a thread about information security.
- robertlagrant 6y ago
  The paradox of oppressing in the name of opposing oppression is that it is already something much worse.
- Chris2048 6y ago
  "oh no, won't somebody please think of the unfortunate oppressed fascists!.. Except anyone that you want to oppress will retroactively be labelled "fascist", or "far-right" by whatever loose system serves that purpose. The latest version of "terrorist", "activist" or "heretic". and Le Pen is absolutely a fascist, in my opinion But whose opinion is canon in matters of censorship? Le Pen is also a valid political candidate with fair support in her electorate. Consider this - If a "fascist" is democratically elected, what wins: anti-fascism (presumably from the perspective of an opposing 3rd party, as Le Pen doesn't describe herself as a fascist); or democracy? so you say "if you allow actual fascism to flourish.. something much worse in the long run" - who gets to decide what is "allowed", and what isn't? Seems to me the basis for such stability would have nothing to do with subjective judgements of what constitutes "fascism" - and more to do with principles of democracy - i.e. a fascist entity can be democratically elected - it just can't be given powers that would allow it to override democracy, or escape legal oversight. Perhaps the key word is "extralegal"? The problem is that too many political entities (not just far-right) seek extralegal, overreaching powers; believing it OK so long as "they can be trusted"; but if the king of today is a good king, his heir might still be bad. And the good government that allows for overreach enables the bad government that does the same.
  - amaccuish 6y ago
    > Consider this - If a "fascist" is democratically elected, what wins: anti-fascism (presumably from the perspective of an opposing 3rd party, as Le Pen doesn't describe herself as a fascist); or democracy? This actually happened in recent history. Just because Hitler (and yes I must unfortunately rely on such a reference, and no, Le Pen is not Hitler, but it provides a good example of far-right vs democracy) was elected doesn't mean the entire world should roll over.
    - Chris2048 6y ago
      Just to clarify, by "roll over" you mean "change their democratic systems to prevent the election of fascists"? The election of the Nazis didn't justify the sweeping power transfer that resulted, including control of the press, a private party militia (Brownshirts) etc etc etc I'm criticising efforts to interfere with who is allowed to be elected, versus limiting what powers can be obtained through election.

walrus01 6y ago

I was wondering how long it would take until we got to the argument of "oh no, won't somebody please think of the unfortunate oppressed fascists! it's a good thing that xiaomi has phones and software for them, because their own local european government is against them". The paradox of tolerance and an open society is that if you allow actual fascism to flourish (and Le Pen is absolutely a fascist, in my opinion), you risk ending up with something much worse in the long run.

ampdepolymerase 6y ago
That's not a very valid argument in a thread about information security.
robertlagrant 6y ago
The paradox of oppressing in the name of opposing oppression is that it is already something much worse.
Chris2048 6y ago
"oh no, won't somebody please think of the unfortunate oppressed fascists!.. Except anyone that you want to oppress will retroactively be labelled "fascist", or "far-right" by whatever loose system serves that purpose. The latest version of "terrorist", "activist" or "heretic". and Le Pen is absolutely a fascist, in my opinion But whose opinion is canon in matters of censorship? Le Pen is also a valid political candidate with fair support in her electorate. Consider this - If a "fascist" is democratically elected, what wins: anti-fascism (presumably from the perspective of an opposing 3rd party, as Le Pen doesn't describe herself as a fascist); or democracy? so you say "if you allow actual fascism to flourish.. something much worse in the long run" - who gets to decide what is "allowed", and what isn't? Seems to me the basis for such stability would have nothing to do with subjective judgements of what constitutes "fascism" - and more to do with principles of democracy - i.e. a fascist entity can be democratically elected - it just can't be given powers that would allow it to override democracy, or escape legal oversight. Perhaps the key word is "extralegal"? The problem is that too many political entities (not just far-right) seek extralegal, overreaching powers; believing it OK so long as "they can be trusted"; but if the king of today is a good king, his heir might still be bad. And the good government that allows for overreach enables the bad government that does the same.
- amaccuish 6y ago
  > Consider this - If a "fascist" is democratically elected, what wins: anti-fascism (presumably from the perspective of an opposing 3rd party, as Le Pen doesn't describe herself as a fascist); or democracy? This actually happened in recent history. Just because Hitler (and yes I must unfortunately rely on such a reference, and no, Le Pen is not Hitler, but it provides a good example of far-right vs democracy) was elected doesn't mean the entire world should roll over.
  - Chris2048 6y ago
    Just to clarify, by "roll over" you mean "change their democratic systems to prevent the election of fascists"? The election of the Nazis didn't justify the sweeping power transfer that resulted, including control of the press, a private party militia (Brownshirts) etc etc etc I'm criticising efforts to interfere with who is allowed to be elected, versus limiting what powers can be obtained through election.