YouTube drops mask, Mass Demonetizes right wing content

[Jolthig]

Or maybe certain social media platforms don't want a bad reputation so they'll crack down on hate in their channels?

[Liriena]

That's not the real problem, though. The real problem is that while YouTube and Google drape themselves in rainbow flags for Pride month, their platforms are being used to promote anti-LGBT hatred, and they're letting it happen because it makes them big money.

I remember when free speech was a left-wing issue, that was so nice, what happened?

A bunch of pretentious "classical liberal" dumbshits online, with no understanding of real life beyond empty, vague abstractions, convinced everyone around them that ackhsshually free speech is synonymous with absolute anomie on every level and anything other than appeasement towards extremist propaganda and stochastic terrorism is fascism. And now the left-wing is left with the unenviable task of reminding everyone that the material world is not contained within a spurious Voltaire quote.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Ah, so you think that we can't have any restrictions on speech because if we did we'd logically have to ban everything.

You know there are already restrictions speech, yeah?

I didn't say that. I said if we banned things because they have the potential to cause indirect harm, we'd logically have to ban everything.

Yes, but that is speech that restricts fraud, defamation, yelling fire in a crowded theatre. None of those are expressing an idea, they're only trying to hurt people, not communicate an idea. Yes, hate speech is also trying to hurt people, but it is still expressing an idea while doing it. That's the difference.

[Liriena]

Y'all kept using it as an emotional crutch to non-arguments and everyone kinda got sick of it.

The idea that people should be able to say what they feel without fear for their livelyhoods shouldn't be a difficult one.

Contrary to what you might have heard from Game of Thrones characters, words are not wind. They have an effect in our material lives. They have consequences. Sometimes terrible (and intended) consequences.

Your idea is a valuable aspiration, but it's also worse than useless as an overarching policy for today.

[Des-Bal]

A bunch of pretentious "classical liberal" dumbshits online, with no understanding of real life beyond empty, vague abstractions, convinced everyone around them that ackhsshually free speech is synonymous with absolute anomie on every level and anything other than appeasement towards extremist propaganda and stochastic terrorism is fascism. And now the left-wing is left with the unenviable task of reminding everyone that the material world is not contained within a spurious Voltaire quote.

Using the threat of extremist propaganda and potential for violence by uninvolved parties as a pretext for opposing speech? It sounds like the left-wing has been left with the unenviable task of taking up McCarthyism.

[Liriena]

None of those are expressing an idea, they're only trying to hurt people, not communicate an idea. Yes, hate speech is also trying to hurt people, but it is still expressing an idea while doing it. That's the difference.

And what's the significance of that difference?

"Oh, you see Scrotum McNazishit honestly believes in organizing to kill all Jews. It's an idea he sincerely holds in his heart. So we can't do anything, really. Because ideas are precious little gemstones that we must protecc at all cost, regardless of what the specific ideas are. I see no potential for this blowing up in our collective faces and... what do you mean someone shot up a mosque because they watched a ton of Ben Shapiro again???"

[Des-Bal]

And what's the significance of that difference?

"Oh, you see Scrotum McNazishit honestly believes in organizing to kill all Jews. It's an idea he sincerely holds in his heart. So we can't do anything, really. Because ideas are precious little gemstones that we must protecc at all cost, regardless of what the specific ideas are. I see no potential for this blowing up in our collective faces and... what do you mean someone shot up a mosque because they watched a ton of Ben Shapiro again???"

Outlaw thoughts.

[Ostroeuropa]

None of those are expressing an idea, they're only trying to hurt people, not communicate an idea. Yes, hate speech is also trying to hurt people, but it is still expressing an idea while doing it. That's the difference.

And what's the significance of that difference?

"Oh, you see Scrotum McNazishit honestly believes in organizing to kill all Jews. It's an idea he sincerely holds in his heart. So we can't do anything, really. Because ideas are precious little gemstones that we must protecc at all cost, regardless of what the specific ideas are. I see no potential for this blowing up in our collective faces and... what do you mean someone shot up a mosque because they watched a ton of Ben Shapiro again???"

Pretending naziism spreads because nazi ideas are just so convincing is a convenient way for liberals and progressives to ignore their own role in it. People are already turned far-right before they find other far-righters to congregate with.

They use this crap to ignore their role and seize more power to censor criticism and opposition to their bullshit, pushing yet more people to the far-right.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

A bunch of pretentious "classical liberal" dumbshits online, with no understanding of real life beyond empty, vague abstractions, convinced everyone around them that ackhsshually free speech is synonymous with absolute anomie on every level and anything other than appeasement towards extremist propaganda and stochastic terrorism is fascism. And now the left-wing is left with the unenviable task of reminding everyone that the material world is not contained within a spurious Voltaire quote.

Using the threat of extremist propaganda and potential for violence by uninvolved parties as a pretext for opposing speech? It sounds like the left-wing has been left with the unenviable task of taking up McCarthyism.

Probably because the far-left has Jacobin origins, and the Jacobins were not very nice to people who disagreed with them.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

None of those are expressing an idea, they're only trying to hurt people, not communicate an idea. Yes, hate speech is also trying to hurt people, but it is still expressing an idea while doing it. That's the difference.

And what's the significance of that difference?

"Oh, you see Scrotum McNazishit honestly believes in organizing to kill all Jews. It's an idea he sincerely holds in his heart. So we can't do anything, really. Because ideas are precious little gemstones that we must protecc at all cost, regardless of what the specific ideas are. I see no potential for this blowing up in our collective faces and... what do you mean someone shot up a mosque because they watched a ton of Ben Shapiro again???"

The difference is that banning fraud and things like that is not prohibiting an idea, it is not legislating human thoughts. Banning an ideology very much is. No one here wants to make shooting up a mosque legal.

[Liriena]

And what's the significance of that difference?

"Oh, you see Scrotum McNazishit honestly believes in organizing to kill all Jews. It's an idea he sincerely holds in his heart. So we can't do anything, really. Because ideas are precious little gemstones that we must protecc at all cost, regardless of what the specific ideas are. I see no potential for this blowing up in our collective faces and... what do you mean someone shot up a mosque because they watched a ton of Ben Shapiro again???"

Outlaw thoughts.

No. Outlaw nothing. But do encourage new and better societal norms against assholes and their asshole "speech". You openly, publicly express your desire to lead a genocidal movement? You have that human right, and we have the human right to criticize, denigrate and exclude you, and refuse you our spaces to recruit vulnerable people into your movement. The state owes you its protection, but we don't owe you shit.

[Ostroeuropa]

Outlaw thoughts.

No. Outlaw nothing. But do encourage new and better societal norms against assholes and their asshole "speech". You openly, publicly express your desire to lead a genocidal movement? You have that human right, and we have the human right to criticize, denigrate and exclude you, and refuse you our spaces to recruit vulnerable people into your movement. The state owes you its protection, but we don't owe you shit.

The societal norms being encouraged aren't new or better, merely a new set of targets and an inverted language. You're welcome to spaces. But you're not welcome to turn neutral spaces into your spaces while still pretending they are neutral.

Call it Queertube if you like, nobody is going to stop you. But advertise honestly about it and see how many people are interested. This also goes for universities and so on. Society is not "Your space", it is our space.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Outlaw thoughts.

No. Outlaw nothing. But do encourage new and better societal norms against assholes and their asshole "speech". You openly, publicly express your desire to lead a genocidal movement? You have that human right, and we have the human right to criticize, denigrate and exclude you, and refuse you our spaces to recruit vulnerable people into your movement. The state owes you its protection, but we don't owe you shit.

100% agree.

[Scomagia]

None of those are expressing an idea, they're only trying to hurt people, not communicate an idea. Yes, hate speech is also trying to hurt people, but it is still expressing an idea while doing it. That's the difference.

And what's the significance of that difference?

"Oh, you see Scrotum McNazishit honestly believes in organizing to kill all Jews. It's an idea he sincerely holds in his heart. So we can't do anything, really. Because ideas are precious little gemstones that we must protecc at all cost, regardless of what the specific ideas are. I see no potential for this blowing up in our collective faces and... what do you mean someone shot up a mosque because they watched a ton of Ben Shapiro again???"

Ah, yes, the ol "media made me do it" argument. Why don't you take this crap back to the nineties where it belongs. Ben Shapiro, the example you gave, has never called for the shooting of mosques. You are making your opposition's point for them, since you seem to be suggesting that free speech be narrowed to the point that Ben Shapiro, of all people, be held accountable for actions he never endorsed.

[Liriena]

And what's the significance of that difference?

"Oh, you see Scrotum McNazishit honestly believes in organizing to kill all Jews. It's an idea he sincerely holds in his heart. So we can't do anything, really. Because ideas are precious little gemstones that we must protecc at all cost, regardless of what the specific ideas are. I see no potential for this blowing up in our collective faces and... what do you mean someone shot up a mosque because they watched a ton of Ben Shapiro again???"

Pretending naziism spreads because nazi ideas are just so convincing

You and I both know that the inherent stupidity of nazism on an intellectual level has never stopped it from compelling people on an emotional level. "Rational debate" as framed by many "classical liberals" is useless. You don't talk to nazis on equal footing. You talk over them, you educate the people they'd try to recruit and refuse them a platform.

[Ostroeuropa]

Pretending naziism spreads because nazi ideas are just so convincing

You and I both know that the inherent stupidity of nazism on an intellectual level has never stopped it from compelling people on an emotional level. "Rational debate" as framed by many "classical liberals" is useless. You don't talk to nazis on equal footing. You talk over them, you educate the people they'd try to recruit and refuse them a platform.

I agree you can't argue with nazis on the facts. But you can stop creating and pushing to create the material and social circumstances that makes people find naziism appealing. It is not innately appealing. Nazis having a platform doesn't cause a problem when people aren't being driven towards them.

[Liriena]

No. Outlaw nothing. But do encourage new and better societal norms against assholes and their asshole "speech". You openly, publicly express your desire to lead a genocidal movement? You have that human right, and we have the human right to criticize, denigrate and exclude you, and refuse you our spaces to recruit vulnerable people into your movement. The state owes you its protection, but we don't owe you shit.

The societal norms being encouraged aren't new or better, merely a new set of targets and an inverted language. You're welcome to spaces. But you're not welcome to turn neutral spaces into your spaces while still pretending they are neutral.

Call it Queertube if you like, nobody is going to stop you. But advertise honestly about it and see how many people are interested. This also goes for universities and so on. Society is not "Your space", it is our space.

I'm sorry. Are you placing yourself on the side of nazism or some shit? Or equating nazis with straight white people in general?

[Des-Bal]

No. Outlaw nothing. But do encourage new and better societal norms against assholes and their asshole "speech". You openly, publicly express your desire to lead a genocidal movement? You have that human right, and we have the human right to criticize, denigrate and exclude you, and refuse you our spaces to recruit vulnerable people into your movement. The state owes you its protection, but we don't owe you shit.

That's absolutely true, the state does not require you as an individual or a corporation to value or care about free speech. The McCarthy era blacklists and boycotts were totally cool from a legal perspective.

[Scomagia]

The societal norms being encouraged aren't new or better, merely a new set of targets and an inverted language. You're welcome to spaces. But you're not welcome to turn neutral spaces into your spaces while still pretending they are neutral.

Call it Queertube if you like, nobody is going to stop you. But advertise honestly about it and see how many people are interested. This also goes for universities and so on. Society is not "Your space", it is our space.

I'm sorry. Are you placing yourself on the side of nazism or some shit? Or equating nazis with straight white people in general?

They obviously aren't doing either.

[Jolthig]

And what's the significance of that difference?

"Oh, you see Scrotum McNazishit honestly believes in organizing to kill all Jews. It's an idea he sincerely holds in his heart. So we can't do anything, really. Because ideas are precious little gemstones that we must protecc at all cost, regardless of what the specific ideas are. I see no potential for this blowing up in our collective faces and... what do you mean someone shot up a mosque because they watched a ton of Ben Shapiro again???"

Ah, yes, the ol "media made me do it" argument. Why don't you take this crap back to the nineties where it belongs. Ben Shapiro, the example you gave, has never called for the shooting of mosques. You are making your opposition's point for them, since you seem to be suggesting that free speech be narrowed to the point that Ben Shapiro, of all people, be held accountable for actions he never endorsed.

He may not outright incite people directly, but he does spread fear of Muslims with their apparent views on jihad.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Pretending naziism spreads because nazi ideas are just so convincing

You and I both know that the inherent stupidity of nazism on an intellectual level has never stopped it from compelling people on an emotional level. "Rational debate" as framed by many "classical liberals" is useless. You don't talk to nazis on equal footing. You talk over them, you educate the people they'd try to recruit and refuse them a platform.

Rational debate was useless, we'd all be Nazis right now.

[Liriena]

And what's the significance of that difference?

"Oh, you see Scrotum McNazishit honestly believes in organizing to kill all Jews. It's an idea he sincerely holds in his heart. So we can't do anything, really. Because ideas are precious little gemstones that we must protecc at all cost, regardless of what the specific ideas are. I see no potential for this blowing up in our collective faces and... what do you mean someone shot up a mosque because they watched a ton of Ben Shapiro again???"

Ah, yes, the ol "media made me do it" argument.

"Media made me do it" is nonsense. But "media helped radicalize me" isn't.

[Liriena]

You and I both know that the inherent stupidity of nazism on an intellectual level has never stopped it from compelling people on an emotional level. "Rational debate" as framed by many "classical liberals" is useless. You don't talk to nazis on equal footing. You talk over them, you educate the people they'd try to recruit and refuse them a platform.

Rational debate was useless, we'd all be Nazis right now.

Look at how many people are still climate change deniers or anti-vaxxers.

[Ostroeuropa]

The societal norms being encouraged aren't new or better, merely a new set of targets and an inverted language. You're welcome to spaces. But you're not welcome to turn neutral spaces into your spaces while still pretending they are neutral.

Call it Queertube if you like, nobody is going to stop you. But advertise honestly about it and see how many people are interested. This also goes for universities and so on. Society is not "Your space", it is our space.

I'm sorry. Are you placing yourself on the side of nazism or some shit? Or equating nazis with straight white people in general?

I'm saying that the societal norms being encouraged by the idpol left aren't a better society, if anything they're making it worse than previously because of the mainstreaming of an adamantly exclusionary and hostile ideology that targets people based on their demographics and normalizes abuse and injustice against them.

I'm also saying gay people and so on are welcome to spaces. What they're not welcome to is to demand neutral spaces cater to them to the extent of excluding others.

[Scomagia]

Ah, yes, the ol "media made me do it" argument. Why don't you take this crap back to the nineties where it belongs. Ben Shapiro, the example you gave, has never called for the shooting of mosques. You are making your opposition's point for them, since you seem to be suggesting that free speech be narrowed to the point that Ben Shapiro, of all people, be held accountable for actions he never endorsed.

He may not outright incite people directly, but he does spread fear of Muslims with their apparent views on jihad.

Not...really. He's definitely outspoken against Jihadis but I don't think he's equated all Muslims with Jihadis.

Even so, if we set the bar at "indirectly incites violence by making people afraid, despite never calling for and actively speaking against violence", you can shut just about anybody up.