You know who wants to let internet businesses do whatever they want with zero government oversight? Andrew Torba. You know who cries when business exercise that freedom? Andrew Torba. Whiny baby.
“For whatever reason, we’re shying away from individual liberty, individual responsibility to this nanny-state, Big-Brother-esque forum or model of the Internet, which is really scary to me,” Torba said in a with a commentator on YouTube."
Well, except according to you they should have no avenue to publish their thoughts on the internet, as we should force any website that would allow them to post to be taken offline.
So that isn’t censorship? Preventing the dissemination of ideas is censorship. Even if they are disgusting or violent. The medium doesn’t matter.
Should the other websites be forced to express ideas they don’t wish to? Where’s their freedom of expression then?
White supremacists use the term to describe their sexual inadequacy. Calling their incel status “white genocide”. Essentially blaming racial minorities for keeping the pool of white womenfolk away from their clutches. Essentially blind to the fact that white supremacist views and general poor body odor tends to drive people away.
GAB was of no value. They shut themselves down because it is likely their fanbase will expect an FBI presence now. They need another place to play out their murderous ideas.
If there was a site on the net openly advocating for your death, or celebrating when your kin are slaughtered, you’d have a totally different opinion.
Advocating for genocide doesn’t have a place in society. We are not all one day going to wake up and say “You know what, yes, lets kill a swath of our population!”. That’s why this argument is so naive and simplistic. Not all ideas are worth sharing, because we, as a society, choose not to condone them.
I’m sorry that you’re trapped in a society where advocating violence is considered unworthy of discussion, but that’s how it is. You are welcome to start your own site that advocates (or allows for the advocation) of such things, but you will be unable to force others to carry your bits.
That’s the thing - these arguments aren’t about freedom, are they? They’re about forcing others to support positions of hatred and bigotry. And you’re not going to find people here who are for that position. Sorry if that’s disappointing.
I think their are better ways to confront racism than defacto censorship. like teaching love an understanding. I dont believe letting bigots have their voice gives them any power at all. If you go online looking for racist shit you are already a racist right? Closing their avenues of conversation only serves to drive them more underground. The great thing about letting them have a public voice is they tell everyone about what scumbags they are.
That’s not what I did, though.
Those are your own words, demonstrating that you seem to have more than a few… questionable opinions about what is and is not socially acceptable in a civilized society.
And even though your needless ‘ad hom’ reply has already been eaten before I even got done typing this reply, I am still inspired to respond with music:
That’s because the information being censored isn’t spurring people on to harm you.
This isn’t a game, or some sort of thought exercise. People are dying from this rhetoric, and folks do not want to support it. It’s that simple. Lives are more important than ideology (well, unless your reach the level fundamentalism I suppose).
Why does one preclude the other?
Got no flower for your gun, no hippie chick.
It isn’t government censorship. I suppose you could frame it as private censorship if you want, but it really isn’t. It is people choosing to not do business with you. In the case of Gab it isn’t that they just had one racist on there, it is that it is a haven for that shit. I don’t blame anyone not wanting to do business with them any longer.
Everyone is ok with private censorship. Or is it ok if I came to your house and scream obscenities at 3am at you? You would be cool hiring this guy, as an example. It is just one of many examples that if you hold and express vile opinions, expect people to not want to be around you.
I used to run a fairly large forum (10K users) and banning people who violated the rules was just part of the terms of use. I was under do obligation to let idiots stay and say what they wanted.
Anyone can setup their own server and run a site from their home. So even this isn’t really censorship, as you can make your own forum or blog or what ever and spout what ever you want.
I MIGHT concede the point that a registrant refusing to host your domain that points to your home based server might be one step too far. But I do believe one will always find SOME registrant willing to take you on. Just like one is likely to find a server host.
If you really feel that way then you should open your home to a weekly or monthly meeting open to all Nazi’s and white supremacists to come over to plan some bombings and mass shootings. In fact if I read what you said up thread correctly, if you don’t do this then you are suppressing their free speech which is way more import than the safety of you and your home. Make sure to record and post the video so we can be impressed with your personal dedication to all free speech.
If you don’t do this then you are no better than the rest of us individuals and businesses that want nothing to do with these terrorists.
Um, that’s not what GoDaddy did. They gave these fascists 24 hours to transfer the domain to a new registrar.
Especially people who choose Gab as their platform of choice, as long as it’s incorporated into either an “hilarious” meme involving ovens and such or into a lament for the non-existent destruction of the “white race.”
Someone who once lived in Squirrel Hill did that for millions of Americans. It didn’t prevent an anti-Semitic arsehole from shooting up the Neighbourhood. Teaching that only gets one so far.
If there’s anything that needs to be taught it’s history. Odd how you left that out.
This is not about giving them a voice, which they still have; this is about giving them a reputable platform, which they aren’t owed from anyone.
Gab isn’t an underground site – it was explicitly founded and openly marketed as a place where nationalists and bigots were welcome. And there’s no conversation to be had: the “debate” was settled in 1945.
From then until recently they have been underground, which was far preferable than where they are now: in the White House and various European parliament houses.
and yet you give off every impression of someone who doesn’t understand that word’s implication. this situation is much more simple than you keep trying to make it. there is nothing to be gained in the toleration of views that are intolerant to the point of celebrating the deaths of a whole religious, ethnic, or racial class of people based on their identity. this isn’t an argument with someone who wants to balance the budget this is a life and death fight for existence against groups who seek the extermination of their pet bloc of people.
you give every impression of someone who doesn’t understand the seriousness of the circumstances and whether you’re playing at it for the sake of argument or your positions are seriously maintained they represent aid and comfort to the genocidal. they represent positions that make your fitness for the title “civilized” to be called into question.
You’d think if they were so intent on being “independent” and sticking it to The Man that they would handle their own hosting.
Or, failing that, find a Web host and domain registrar in Russia. Putin would probably cut the ribbon on a dedicated data centre for Gab.
My husband the public librarian already spends a startling amount of time weeding Chick Tracts out of shelved books. They aren’t even the good (i.e. foamingly rabid conspiracy loony) ones, either. If you’re going to leave ideological trash lying around for people to pick up, at least take a little pride in it–give me something to laugh at when he brings it home.
They do have that right.
All of the changes we’re hearing about are individuals and corporations freely choosing to stop associating with a brand and a particular point of view.
Don’t those individuals and corporations have every right to do this? Would compelling them to act differently be “free speech” for them?
Nobody is entitled to a platform, either.
Except this didn’t happen. They are free to move their domain to another registrar.
