3 ms·

Censorship isn’t futile. The regimes that use and used it aren’t stupid. It works. See how Milo and Gavin McInnes just disappeared from notice once Twitter/Goog

Censorship isn’t futile. The regimes that use and used it aren’t stupid. It works. See how Milo and Gavin McInnes just disappeared from notice once Twitter/Google/Facebook decided that it was time to bring down the banhammer. Censorship works.

traviswt 5y ago
Wow I didn’t realize it but you’re very right about those two. Can’t even remember the last time I saw anything related to them. So, does banning individuals from social view preferentially on one side actually shift the Overton window, or centrism itself?
ayngg 5y ago
It depends on what your goals are. If you want to de-platform individuals it can be effective (but it isn't guaranteed since people like Trump have remained very popular in spite of it), but these individuals are just grifters who exploit an underlying sentiment, people who are de-platformed and forgotten are just replaced by someone else. Right wing populist sentiment which feeds it all is just as prominent as it has been before the censorship.
throwaway82652 5y ago
That isn't censorship at all though. Both of those people still have wikipedia pages and it's fairly easy to find their writings. Calling this "censorship" is like saying it's "censorship" to kick someone out of a zoom meeting for being disruptive. What seems to be actually happening is everybody who tries to do business with those people knows what they're trying to do and finds it objectionable. At what point will you consider that if nobody wants what they're selling, what they're selling might actually be bad? How many times do they have to fail before we can collectively accept this? If you keep getting kicked out of zoom meetings for being disruptive, at some point shouldn't you accept that you are at fault? I get the feeling that some entrepreneurs get sucked up into this idea that we can create a world where no one is ever wrong, without realizing that's a horrible idea. That's another form of toxic positivity.
incomingpain 5y ago
>Censorship isn’t futile. The regimes that use and used it aren’t stupid. It works. See how Milo and Gavin McInnes just disappeared from notice once Twitter/Google/Facebook decided that it was time to bring down the banhammer. Your 2 examples are people who are clearly not censored. Censorship have made them greater in celebrity because of the censorship. Both of them have nice long wikipedia pages and you can go read or listen to what both of them have to say. “When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.” ― George R.R. Martin, A Clash of Kings By censoring these 2 people, and even naming them right now, you have made them a greater celebrity than they were ever going to be. >Censorship works. I honestly haven't cared to listen to either of these people, they aren't in my political sphere and they are not my political opponent. However absolutely not. These 2 examples are censorship backfiring to huge degree.

traviswt 5y ago

Wow I didn’t realize it but you’re very right about those two. Can’t even remember the last time I saw anything related to them. So, does banning individuals from social view preferentially on one side actually shift the Overton window, or centrism itself?

ayngg 5y ago

It depends on what your goals are. If you want to de-platform individuals it can be effective (but it isn't guaranteed since people like Trump have remained very popular in spite of it), but these individuals are just grifters who exploit an underlying sentiment, people who are de-platformed and forgotten are just replaced by someone else. Right wing populist sentiment which feeds it all is just as prominent as it has been before the censorship.

throwaway82652 5y ago

That isn't censorship at all though. Both of those people still have wikipedia pages and it's fairly easy to find their writings. Calling this "censorship" is like saying it's "censorship" to kick someone out of a zoom meeting for being disruptive. What seems to be actually happening is everybody who tries to do business with those people knows what they're trying to do and finds it objectionable. At what point will you consider that if nobody wants what they're selling, what they're selling might actually be bad? How many times do they have to fail before we can collectively accept this? If you keep getting kicked out of zoom meetings for being disruptive, at some point shouldn't you accept that you are at fault? I get the feeling that some entrepreneurs get sucked up into this idea that we can create a world where no one is ever wrong, without realizing that's a horrible idea. That's another form of toxic positivity.

incomingpain 5y ago

>Censorship isn’t futile. The regimes that use and used it aren’t stupid. It works. See how Milo and Gavin McInnes just disappeared from notice once Twitter/Google/Facebook decided that it was time to bring down the banhammer. Your 2 examples are people who are clearly not censored. Censorship have made them greater in celebrity because of the censorship. Both of them have nice long wikipedia pages and you can go read or listen to what both of them have to say. “When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.” ― George R.R. Martin, A Clash of Kings By censoring these 2 people, and even naming them right now, you have made them a greater celebrity than they were ever going to be. >Censorship works. I honestly haven't cared to listen to either of these people, they aren't in my political sphere and they are not my political opponent. However absolutely not. These 2 examples are censorship backfiring to huge degree.