4 ms·

> Tech's obsession with hating on Gab/Parler is based upon on the identity of the people in them, not on whether offensive or not-sanctioned speech should be al

by orf 6y ago

> Tech's obsession with hating on Gab/Parler is based upon on the identity of the people in them, not on whether offensive or not-sanctioned speech should be allowed in general. Because it’s often one and the same: the “identity” of the people on them are the ones spreading hate speech and disinformation. You don’t need to sugar coat it as “not-sanctioned speech”, nobody is banning anyone for saying “hey I support Donald trump!’ They are banning people for saying “trans people will burn in hell” and “the Jewish cabal that run the world are eating babies and that’s why Biden stole the election and the democrats will be executed on TV by trump”. Unfortunately this kind of speech comes from mostly one side of the political spectrum. Yes, I’m sure you can cherry pick random left-leaning Twitter users saying dumb things, but it’s not quite on the same level as you can find on ParlerWatch[1] for example. Gabs founder: https://i.redd.it/u8mbqmrh41k61.png https://i.redd.it/u8mbqmrh41k61.png 1. https://old.reddit.com/r/ParlerWatch/top/?sort=top&t=month https://old.reddit.com/r/ParlerWatch/top/?sort=top&t=month

abernard1 6y ago
> nobody is banning anyone for saying “hey I support Donald trump!’ If that person says they don't believe the results of the election they are. If that person says that they don't believe the vaccines or lockdowns don't work, they are. Twitter, Facebook, and tech in general have lost this card to play. They've been banning people for things that have nothing to do with racism and everything to do with them being not-Democrat. In a world where 95+% of tech companies are Democrats in the U.S., it's easy to believe all the head-nodding and congratulations that your views are the only morally correct ones. It's also easy to deliberately avoid any sense of nuance or context because that would require overcoming cognitive dissonance that half the country isn't a bunch of racists.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- orf 6y ago
  > require overcoming cognitive dissonance that half the country isn't a bunch of racists The Republican Party: not racist, just #1 with racists. I think that’s the problem.
- croon 6y ago
  > If that person says they don't believe the results of the election they are. If that person says that they don't believe the vaccines or lockdowns don't work, they are. So spreading misinformation then? You just proved GPs point.
- shadowgovt 6y ago
  The political spectrum of tech is pretty centrist. Leaning fiscal-conservative, even. It's the right wing of American politics that has swung so far to the right of where it used to be that it's made tech look Democratic in contrast. If tech employees are supporting Democrats, it's because the alternative has come to look insane.
  - soundnote 6y ago
    People have suggested re-education camps or other "deprogramming" for Trump voters, including elected Democratic representatives. And yeah, it is often one and the same. Don't remember who it was, but someone said that the problem with free speech is that you'll spend most of your time defending scoundrels. If we look at hate speech, people literally lecture that people who happen to be born like me are "born into not being human", say the lives of people like me don't matter. We are told we should not speak and yet that our silence is violence. Trainings for "diversity" across a wide range of institutions have started segregating along racial lines, and the list goes on. During the Grievance Studies hoax, for example, one of their papers was sent back because it was too sympathetic and not sociopathic enough. Said paper advocated making white students sit on the floor and putting them in chains as a learning experience. Yet open racism is fine, because the target ethnic group and sexual orientation are acceptable to the activist class. Likewise, people who get kicked out for "transphobia" will often not be people who hate transpeople in any proper sense, but have policy disagreements where there are no win-win solutions. Yet anything but being completely on board with the activist class's 100% no limits pro-trans policy agenda is "phobia". The claim holds up as well as wet paper. How about gender affirming treatment for kids who cannot physically know what sexuality properly is because they haven't been through puberty? Someone's a bit off their gender role? Tomboy, nah, they're a boy, time to stuff them full of hormones. Concerns that this just might be insane are again, labeled hate. Said cultists insist on mantras of trans(wo-)men are (wo-)men in an explicit denial of biology that the best of our medicine can't alter: We just craft a facade that eases dysphoria to care for our fellow human beings. As Buck Angel put it: "I use testosterone to masculinize myself so I feel more like me." He's routinely called a transphobe. This is basically the biology equivalent of flat eartherism or young earth creationism, but not subscribing to the creed is stamped hate speech. The mantra wouldn't even be necessary if its claim was actually true. Hell, it's arguably even worse than flat eartherism, since a human can't at a glance confirm that the Earth is indeed round, but TWAW/TMAM asks us to baldly deny the input of our eyes in everyday life. It's not one side that has gone insane: Good chunks of both are open lunatics.
Draken93 6y ago
That is exactly the point. People that define their identity by feeling superior because of their race, religion or their sexuality are not the kind of people that are known for their differentiated, non problematic comments.
soundnote 6y ago
People have suggested re-education camps or other "deprogramming" for Trump voters, including elected Democratic representatives. And yeah, it is often one and the same. Don't remember who it was, but someone said that the problem with free speech is that you'll spend most of your time defending scoundrels. As far as hate speech goes, people literally lecture that people who happen to be born like me are "born into not being human", say the lives of people like me don't matter. We are told we should not speak and yet that our silence is violence. Trainings for "diversity" across a wide range of institutions have started segregating along racial lines, and the list goes on. During the Grievance Studies hoax, for example, one of their papers was sent back because it was too sympathetic and not sociopathic enough. Said paper advocated making white students sit on the floor and putting them in chains as a learning experience. Yet open racism is fine, because the target ethnic group and sexual orientation are acceptable to the activist class. Likewise, people who get kicked out for "transphobia" will often not be people who hate transpeople in any proper sense, but have policy disagreements where there are no win-win solutions. Yet anything but being completely on board with the activist class's 100% no limits pro-trans policy agenda is "phobia". The claim holds up as well as wet paper. How about gender affirming treatment for kids who cannot physically know what sexuality properly is because they haven't been through puberty? Someone's a bit off their gender role? Tomboy, nah, they're a boy, time to stuff them full of hormones. Concerns that this just might be insane are again, labeled hate. Said cultists insist on mantras of trans(wo-)men are (wo-)men in an explicit denial of biology that the best of our medicine can't alter: We just craft a facade that eases dysphoria to care for our fellow human beings. As Buck Angel put it: "I use testosterone to masculinize myself so I feel more like me." He's routinely called a transphobe. This is basically the biology equivalent of flat eartherism or young earth creationism, but not subscribing to the creed is stamped hate speech. The mantra wouldn't even be necessary if its claim was actually true. It's even worse than flat eartherism, since a human can't at a glance confirm that the Earth is indeed round, but TWAW/TMAM asks us to baldly deny the input of our eyes in everyday life. Hate and disinformation do not at all come "mostly from one side of the political spectrum" - science denial in the "party of science" is alive and well.
- goatinaboat 6y ago
  but someone said that the problem with free speech is that you'll spend most of your time defending scoundrels. That was Chomsky.
SaintGhurka 6y ago
>nobody is banning anyone for saying “hey I support Donald trump!’ They most certainly are. That exact phrase will literally get you banned on some forums. [0][1] If you want to radicalize people, a good way to start is to marginalize them. [0]https://www.ravelry.com/content/no-trump https://www.ravelry.com/content/no-trump [1]https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/new-ban-do-not-post-in-support-of-trump-or-his-administration.835849/ https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/new-ban-do-not-post-...
- orf 6y ago
  Two irrelevant niche forums banning you does not make an argument. Go to /r/conservative and say “I support Biden” and you will be banned within a minute. Does that mean liberals are being brutally silenced by oppressive moderators and therefore we have no choice but to helplessly become radicalised by racists?

by orf 6y ago

abernard1 6y ago

> nobody is banning anyone for saying “hey I support Donald trump!’ If that person says they don't believe the results of the election they are. If that person says that they don't believe the vaccines or lockdowns don't work, they are. Twitter, Facebook, and tech in general have lost this card to play. They've been banning people for things that have nothing to do with racism and everything to do with them being not-Democrat. In a world where 95+% of tech companies are Democrats in the U.S., it's easy to believe all the head-nodding and congratulations that your views are the only morally correct ones. It's also easy to deliberately avoid any sense of nuance or context because that would require overcoming cognitive dissonance that half the country isn't a bunch of racists.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
orf 6y ago
> require overcoming cognitive dissonance that half the country isn't a bunch of racists The Republican Party: not racist, just #1 with racists. I think that’s the problem.
croon 6y ago
> If that person says they don't believe the results of the election they are. If that person says that they don't believe the vaccines or lockdowns don't work, they are. So spreading misinformation then? You just proved GPs point.
shadowgovt 6y ago
The political spectrum of tech is pretty centrist. Leaning fiscal-conservative, even. It's the right wing of American politics that has swung so far to the right of where it used to be that it's made tech look Democratic in contrast. If tech employees are supporting Democrats, it's because the alternative has come to look insane.
- soundnote 6y ago
  People have suggested re-education camps or other "deprogramming" for Trump voters, including elected Democratic representatives. And yeah, it is often one and the same. Don't remember who it was, but someone said that the problem with free speech is that you'll spend most of your time defending scoundrels. If we look at hate speech, people literally lecture that people who happen to be born like me are "born into not being human", say the lives of people like me don't matter. We are told we should not speak and yet that our silence is violence. Trainings for "diversity" across a wide range of institutions have started segregating along racial lines, and the list goes on. During the Grievance Studies hoax, for example, one of their papers was sent back because it was too sympathetic and not sociopathic enough. Said paper advocated making white students sit on the floor and putting them in chains as a learning experience. Yet open racism is fine, because the target ethnic group and sexual orientation are acceptable to the activist class. Likewise, people who get kicked out for "transphobia" will often not be people who hate transpeople in any proper sense, but have policy disagreements where there are no win-win solutions. Yet anything but being completely on board with the activist class's 100% no limits pro-trans policy agenda is "phobia". The claim holds up as well as wet paper. How about gender affirming treatment for kids who cannot physically know what sexuality properly is because they haven't been through puberty? Someone's a bit off their gender role? Tomboy, nah, they're a boy, time to stuff them full of hormones. Concerns that this just might be insane are again, labeled hate. Said cultists insist on mantras of trans(wo-)men are (wo-)men in an explicit denial of biology that the best of our medicine can't alter: We just craft a facade that eases dysphoria to care for our fellow human beings. As Buck Angel put it: "I use testosterone to masculinize myself so I feel more like me." He's routinely called a transphobe. This is basically the biology equivalent of flat eartherism or young earth creationism, but not subscribing to the creed is stamped hate speech. The mantra wouldn't even be necessary if its claim was actually true. Hell, it's arguably even worse than flat eartherism, since a human can't at a glance confirm that the Earth is indeed round, but TWAW/TMAM asks us to baldly deny the input of our eyes in everyday life. It's not one side that has gone insane: Good chunks of both are open lunatics.

Draken93 6y ago

That is exactly the point. People that define their identity by feeling superior because of their race, religion or their sexuality are not the kind of people that are known for their differentiated, non problematic comments.

soundnote 6y ago

People have suggested re-education camps or other "deprogramming" for Trump voters, including elected Democratic representatives. And yeah, it is often one and the same. Don't remember who it was, but someone said that the problem with free speech is that you'll spend most of your time defending scoundrels. As far as hate speech goes, people literally lecture that people who happen to be born like me are "born into not being human", say the lives of people like me don't matter. We are told we should not speak and yet that our silence is violence. Trainings for "diversity" across a wide range of institutions have started segregating along racial lines, and the list goes on. During the Grievance Studies hoax, for example, one of their papers was sent back because it was too sympathetic and not sociopathic enough. Said paper advocated making white students sit on the floor and putting them in chains as a learning experience. Yet open racism is fine, because the target ethnic group and sexual orientation are acceptable to the activist class. Likewise, people who get kicked out for "transphobia" will often not be people who hate transpeople in any proper sense, but have policy disagreements where there are no win-win solutions. Yet anything but being completely on board with the activist class's 100% no limits pro-trans policy agenda is "phobia". The claim holds up as well as wet paper. How about gender affirming treatment for kids who cannot physically know what sexuality properly is because they haven't been through puberty? Someone's a bit off their gender role? Tomboy, nah, they're a boy, time to stuff them full of hormones. Concerns that this just might be insane are again, labeled hate. Said cultists insist on mantras of trans(wo-)men are (wo-)men in an explicit denial of biology that the best of our medicine can't alter: We just craft a facade that eases dysphoria to care for our fellow human beings. As Buck Angel put it: "I use testosterone to masculinize myself so I feel more like me." He's routinely called a transphobe. This is basically the biology equivalent of flat eartherism or young earth creationism, but not subscribing to the creed is stamped hate speech. The mantra wouldn't even be necessary if its claim was actually true. It's even worse than flat eartherism, since a human can't at a glance confirm that the Earth is indeed round, but TWAW/TMAM asks us to baldly deny the input of our eyes in everyday life. Hate and disinformation do not at all come "mostly from one side of the political spectrum" - science denial in the "party of science" is alive and well.

goatinaboat 6y ago
but someone said that the problem with free speech is that you'll spend most of your time defending scoundrels. That was Chomsky.

SaintGhurka 6y ago

>nobody is banning anyone for saying “hey I support Donald trump!’ They most certainly are. That exact phrase will literally get you banned on some forums. [0][1] If you want to radicalize people, a good way to start is to marginalize them. [0]https://www.ravelry.com/content/no-trump https://www.ravelry.com/content/no-trump [1]https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/new-ban-do-not-post-in-support-of-trump-or-his-administration.835849/ https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/new-ban-do-not-post-...

orf 6y ago
Two irrelevant niche forums banning you does not make an argument. Go to /r/conservative and say “I support Biden” and you will be banned within a minute. Does that mean liberals are being brutally silenced by oppressive moderators and therefore we have no choice but to helplessly become radicalised by racists?