3 ms·

> allow violent statements against Russians Nonsense. It's against Russian invaders, which makes complete sense. When they come in to bomb schools and maternit

> allow violent statements against Russians Nonsense. It's against Russian invaders, which makes complete sense. When they come in to bomb schools and maternity wards how else are you going to stop them without killing them? The Russians are acting like victims even when they're Nazi invaders.

vkou 5y ago
I don't think[1] FB had any problem with banning people who made 'violent statements'[2] against coalition forces in, say, Iraq. There is an obvious contradiction in social media rules about violence. Encouraging violence = bad. A politician encouraging violence (By drumming up support for a war) = good. Wishing death and ruin upon our soldiers = bad. Wishing death and ruin upon enemy soldiers = good. It's perfectly fine to be partial about this sort of thing (Facebook does not exist in some weird non-political, non-aligned space - it is an American company, with a large overlap with a broadly western worldview), but once you are, you do need to accept that you are serving as a propaganda organ. [1] But I don't know for sure. [2] I mean, there's a wide range of things that are encompassed by this.
freedomben 5y ago
> Nonsense. It's against Russian invaders, Are you saying that "Russian invaders" aren't "Russians" ?
- AnimalMuppet 5y ago
  Of course Russian invaders are Russians. But it's against them as invaders, not against them as Russians. What do you want? A way of opposing the invasion that doesn't involve shooting the invaders? That would be nice, but we don't have one of those. (Putin does - he could order a withdrawal right now if he chose.) So if we're going to do more than say "tsk, tsk" in response to the invasion, it's going to involve killing invaders. And those invaders happen to be Russians, so it's going to involve killing Russians - not because they're Russians, but because they invaded Ukraine. This is all really obvious. I can't tell if you're just being super pedantic, or if you're trying to obscure reality.
- jamincan 5y ago
  Russian invaders are a subset of Russians. Acting against a subset is not the same as acting against the whole. The 'invaders' is the critical part and whether they are Russian, Chechen or Syrian makes little difference.

vkou 5y ago

I don't think[1] FB had any problem with banning people who made 'violent statements'[2] against coalition forces in, say, Iraq. There is an obvious contradiction in social media rules about violence. Encouraging violence = bad. A politician encouraging violence (By drumming up support for a war) = good. Wishing death and ruin upon our soldiers = bad. Wishing death and ruin upon enemy soldiers = good. It's perfectly fine to be partial about this sort of thing (Facebook does not exist in some weird non-political, non-aligned space - it is an American company, with a large overlap with a broadly western worldview), but once you are, you do need to accept that you are serving as a propaganda organ. [1] But I don't know for sure. [2] I mean, there's a wide range of things that are encompassed by this.

freedomben 5y ago

> Nonsense. It's against Russian invaders, Are you saying that "Russian invaders" aren't "Russians" ?

AnimalMuppet 5y ago
Of course Russian invaders are Russians. But it's against them as invaders, not against them as Russians. What do you want? A way of opposing the invasion that doesn't involve shooting the invaders? That would be nice, but we don't have one of those. (Putin does - he could order a withdrawal right now if he chose.) So if we're going to do more than say "tsk, tsk" in response to the invasion, it's going to involve killing invaders. And those invaders happen to be Russians, so it's going to involve killing Russians - not because they're Russians, but because they invaded Ukraine. This is all really obvious. I can't tell if you're just being super pedantic, or if you're trying to obscure reality.
jamincan 5y ago
Russian invaders are a subset of Russians. Acting against a subset is not the same as acting against the whole. The 'invaders' is the critical part and whether they are Russian, Chechen or Syrian makes little difference.