3 ms·

> If you want to claim they're a hate group you point to age as a protected class, and then you end up with everyone shouting at each other because whether that

> If you want to claim they're a hate group you point to age as a protected class, and then you end up with everyone shouting at each other because whether that's true or not turns on the very point of contention. Yes, people make bullshit troll arguments all the time. So cut through the trolling and reach the meat of the discussion. Don't fall for the bait. If you really want to call Planned Parenthood a hate group, go on ahead. I don't think you'll get very far. But you're using it as a hypothetical false argument trying to prove a point, rather than relying upon a real life argument or real life example. As I said before, I know you're trying to talk about a real situation. So try me. Who are you actually trying to talk about? This topic is [flagged] at this point so I don't think too many people are visiting here anyway.

AnthonyMouse 3y ago
> If you really want to call Planned Parenthood a hate group, go on ahead. I don't think you'll get very far. That depends on who you're trying to get very far with. If it's pro-choice coastal elites, obviously not. But suppose the person making the decision is pro-life. > Who are you actually trying to talk about? It's not about any group in particular. It's about what happens when you open this can of worms. Actual formal hierarchical "hate organizations" are basically dead. But there are a lot of unstructured collections of people with shared goals and in each of those groups there are extremists and people with mental illness and teenagers who think it makes them big to threaten someone else. It's no difficulty to find instances of bad behavior. But group-level enforcement is just playing into tribalism. There is a reason collective punishment is a violation of the Geneva Conventions. And there is no reason to think censorship will ever end any differently than it always does, with whatever group is in charge of censorship decisions imputing them with whatever ideological biases they may hold.
- dragontamer 3y ago
  I'm a pro-life coastal elite. Try me. Private Catholic school, cause I'm Catholic. About as elite as you can get (well, I went to Public High school I guess). I can talk about other groups without falling into the fallacy of just calling them a "Hate Group" just because I disagree with them. Even on important issues like Abortion. In any case, the anti-abortionists who go towards bombs and explosives are hate groups, and I have to work at making sure my Catholic (and Catholics, a group I'm part of) are not associated with such assholes. That's just life. Assholes exist, on my side of the political spectrum, on your side, on opponents side, etc. etc. I'm not going to align myself with those violent assholes to score political points. I'm more than confident in my ability to argue about the life of the fetus on my own grounds without having to bring in strawman arguments or whatever. ---------- If anything at all, its become more important to distinguish myself from other assholes as these hate groups come up. I can be pro-life without being a hate group, but it does mean acknowledging that the hate-groups need to be moderated (both in my own groups, but also in the public spaces).
  - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
    > I'm not going to align myself with those violent assholes to score political points. It's not you who makes the choice. They align themselves with you. The first time you learn they even exist can be when opponents use their words to malign you.
    - dragontamer 3y ago
      I'm well aware of that. BLM and its relationship with Black Bloc is an example I brought up for good reason. ---------- So we have the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys on the Right. Have Republicans clearly censored these more-violent groups out of their spaces? (Leadership of these groups have literally been prosecuted and sentenced for their involvement in January 6th conspiracy). Or has the right coalesced support of them and promised to pardon them? ---------- Everyone knows that assholes exist in all forms. Not necessarily rising to the level of hate groups (Proud Boys are becoming more-and-more like a hategroup, but I don't think Black Bloc or Oath Keepers have risen quite to that level yet). But in all cases, these three groups are extremely problematic to the left, and the right. Censoring those violent viewpoints, calling them out, and diminishing them is the least I expect of reasonable people. However, some politicians are calling on their supporters and offering public promises for them. The extreme flanks try to out-extreme each other. Its up to the centrists and the reasonable people to pull them back and/or call them out and say "Those guys over there: they went too far and are not to be associated with us anymore". You can't just accept allies all the time, some of these allies are not worth their trouble. ------------- Look, its my overall opinion that Republicans are bad at this because this is the first time they've decided to perform activism. Be it online or in person. I get that these assholes don't represent all the Republicans, but there's good decisions and bad decisions here. When people online are asking to censor some of the more problematic elements (ie: Oath Keepers or Proud Boys, and some of the stuff they proclaim), it applies just as strongly to the Black Bloc or other violent leftists (or historically, Black Mafia, Nation of Islam, etc. etc. in the Civil Rights era). People going "I'm against censorship so I wanna support even these problematic members" always strikes me as naiive. You absolutely cannot let these groups take over the persona of your organization. These groups are too dangerous to gain power. So advocacy is a constant fight. Not only against your political enemies, but even with your political allies (Ex: BLM having to explicitly fight back against left-aligned Black Bloc to minimize the violent acts in their name). -------------- In any case, "Hate Group" isn't the issue you seem to have. It seems to be with "censorship", as that's what we keep coming back to. I've listed three problematic groups (Black Bloc, Proud Boys, and Oath Keepers), which are by large, not considered "hate groups". But I think they're closer to the issues you're trying to talk about.

AnthonyMouse 3y ago

> If you really want to call Planned Parenthood a hate group, go on ahead. I don't think you'll get very far. That depends on who you're trying to get very far with. If it's pro-choice coastal elites, obviously not. But suppose the person making the decision is pro-life. > Who are you actually trying to talk about? It's not about any group in particular. It's about what happens when you open this can of worms. Actual formal hierarchical "hate organizations" are basically dead. But there are a lot of unstructured collections of people with shared goals and in each of those groups there are extremists and people with mental illness and teenagers who think it makes them big to threaten someone else. It's no difficulty to find instances of bad behavior. But group-level enforcement is just playing into tribalism. There is a reason collective punishment is a violation of the Geneva Conventions. And there is no reason to think censorship will ever end any differently than it always does, with whatever group is in charge of censorship decisions imputing them with whatever ideological biases they may hold.

dragontamer 3y ago
I'm a pro-life coastal elite. Try me. Private Catholic school, cause I'm Catholic. About as elite as you can get (well, I went to Public High school I guess). I can talk about other groups without falling into the fallacy of just calling them a "Hate Group" just because I disagree with them. Even on important issues like Abortion. In any case, the anti-abortionists who go towards bombs and explosives are hate groups, and I have to work at making sure my Catholic (and Catholics, a group I'm part of) are not associated with such assholes. That's just life. Assholes exist, on my side of the political spectrum, on your side, on opponents side, etc. etc. I'm not going to align myself with those violent assholes to score political points. I'm more than confident in my ability to argue about the life of the fetus on my own grounds without having to bring in strawman arguments or whatever. ---------- If anything at all, its become more important to distinguish myself from other assholes as these hate groups come up. I can be pro-life without being a hate group, but it does mean acknowledging that the hate-groups need to be moderated (both in my own groups, but also in the public spaces).
- AnthonyMouse 3y ago
  > I'm not going to align myself with those violent assholes to score political points. It's not you who makes the choice. They align themselves with you. The first time you learn they even exist can be when opponents use their words to malign you.
  - dragontamer 3y ago
    I'm well aware of that. BLM and its relationship with Black Bloc is an example I brought up for good reason. ---------- So we have the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys on the Right. Have Republicans clearly censored these more-violent groups out of their spaces? (Leadership of these groups have literally been prosecuted and sentenced for their involvement in January 6th conspiracy). Or has the right coalesced support of them and promised to pardon them? ---------- Everyone knows that assholes exist in all forms. Not necessarily rising to the level of hate groups (Proud Boys are becoming more-and-more like a hategroup, but I don't think Black Bloc or Oath Keepers have risen quite to that level yet). But in all cases, these three groups are extremely problematic to the left, and the right. Censoring those violent viewpoints, calling them out, and diminishing them is the least I expect of reasonable people. However, some politicians are calling on their supporters and offering public promises for them. The extreme flanks try to out-extreme each other. Its up to the centrists and the reasonable people to pull them back and/or call them out and say "Those guys over there: they went too far and are not to be associated with us anymore". You can't just accept allies all the time, some of these allies are not worth their trouble. ------------- Look, its my overall opinion that Republicans are bad at this because this is the first time they've decided to perform activism. Be it online or in person. I get that these assholes don't represent all the Republicans, but there's good decisions and bad decisions here. When people online are asking to censor some of the more problematic elements (ie: Oath Keepers or Proud Boys, and some of the stuff they proclaim), it applies just as strongly to the Black Bloc or other violent leftists (or historically, Black Mafia, Nation of Islam, etc. etc. in the Civil Rights era). People going "I'm against censorship so I wanna support even these problematic members" always strikes me as naiive. You absolutely cannot let these groups take over the persona of your organization. These groups are too dangerous to gain power. So advocacy is a constant fight. Not only against your political enemies, but even with your political allies (Ex: BLM having to explicitly fight back against left-aligned Black Bloc to minimize the violent acts in their name). -------------- In any case, "Hate Group" isn't the issue you seem to have. It seems to be with "censorship", as that's what we keep coming back to. I've listed three problematic groups (Black Bloc, Proud Boys, and Oath Keepers), which are by large, not considered "hate groups". But I think they're closer to the issues you're trying to talk about.