4 ms·

That fact that you think that "alt right, anti-vaccine crazies" are extremist is the best example for not wanting people like you be able to censor anything.

exceptione 2y ago
You should send an invoice to China, that fueled mistrust about vaccines via disinformation campaigns in the west on "social" media . [1] (Do not take notice that China vaccinated their own people though, or the cognitive dissonance might be too much). __ 1. https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-china-covid-disinformation-campaigns/31590996.html https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-china-covid-disinformation-ca...
thrance 2y ago
The alt-right is directly responsible for the attempted Coup d'État on the capitol on Jan 6. Project 2025 vows to replace any competent officials with partisan sycophants. Mr. Trump said to his electoral base that if he is elected, they would "not have to vote ever again". So yes, the alt-right is an anti-democratic extremist group. As for anti-vaccine groups, their contribution to the death toll of past pandemics is no secret to any moderately informed person.
- southernplaces7 2y ago
  So because some people choose to express their democratic right to disagreement for their own reasons, and this includes doubt about vaccines, the idea of being against vaccines should be treated as extremism to be forbidden? If that's your interpretation of how personal rights and free expression work in a democracy, then I fear for the direction of democracy with idiots such as yourself guiding policy. As for what happened on January 6th, it was in practical terms a concentrated bit of aggressive protest theater, and far from anything seriously resembling an attempted coup. You'd have to be deluded by ideology to call it something so serious. For example, that event was much smaller than the enormous amount of government property damage and calls to topple governments made by a much larger number of people during the earlier Floyd protests across the US and other countries. Would you call those extremist too? In any case, by naming the most radical actions of a certain subset of a wider belief system as a reason for considering all aspects of that wider belief system as extremist and worthy of banning, you're just another garden variety autocratic monkey at heart, looking for ways justify banning whatever concept doesn't fit your tribal identity. By your ridiculous logic, any belief system could be justifiably banned because in some ambiguous way, it's "responsible" for the specific activities of certain people who hold to its most extreme version, though the two things (a wider system of beliefs and specific people's active choices) are separate.
jorvi 2y ago
In my country the anti-vaccine groups incensed each other so much that at one point they started burning down cellular ("5G") towers, causing reduced availability of emergency services in rural areas. They gathered in front of politicians their houses in large groups, sometimes even with torches, hoping to scare even the kids inside the house. They sent myriad of death threats. Totally not extremist.

exceptione 2y ago

You should send an invoice to China, that fueled mistrust about vaccines via disinformation campaigns in the west on "social" media . [1] (Do not take notice that China vaccinated their own people though, or the cognitive dissonance might be too much). __ 1. https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-china-covid-disinformation-campaigns/31590996.html https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-china-covid-disinformation-ca...

thrance 2y ago

The alt-right is directly responsible for the attempted Coup d'État on the capitol on Jan 6. Project 2025 vows to replace any competent officials with partisan sycophants. Mr. Trump said to his electoral base that if he is elected, they would "not have to vote ever again". So yes, the alt-right is an anti-democratic extremist group. As for anti-vaccine groups, their contribution to the death toll of past pandemics is no secret to any moderately informed person.

southernplaces7 2y ago
So because some people choose to express their democratic right to disagreement for their own reasons, and this includes doubt about vaccines, the idea of being against vaccines should be treated as extremism to be forbidden? If that's your interpretation of how personal rights and free expression work in a democracy, then I fear for the direction of democracy with idiots such as yourself guiding policy. As for what happened on January 6th, it was in practical terms a concentrated bit of aggressive protest theater, and far from anything seriously resembling an attempted coup. You'd have to be deluded by ideology to call it something so serious. For example, that event was much smaller than the enormous amount of government property damage and calls to topple governments made by a much larger number of people during the earlier Floyd protests across the US and other countries. Would you call those extremist too? In any case, by naming the most radical actions of a certain subset of a wider belief system as a reason for considering all aspects of that wider belief system as extremist and worthy of banning, you're just another garden variety autocratic monkey at heart, looking for ways justify banning whatever concept doesn't fit your tribal identity. By your ridiculous logic, any belief system could be justifiably banned because in some ambiguous way, it's "responsible" for the specific activities of certain people who hold to its most extreme version, though the two things (a wider system of beliefs and specific people's active choices) are separate.

jorvi 2y ago

In my country the anti-vaccine groups incensed each other so much that at one point they started burning down cellular ("5G") towers, causing reduced availability of emergency services in rural areas. They gathered in front of politicians their houses in large groups, sometimes even with torches, hoping to scare even the kids inside the house. They sent myriad of death threats. Totally not extremist.