“Has that happened here?”
Google’s constructing the censored search engine for China right now. Google previously has stealthily no-platformed Youtubers who put up doing videos that included content like supporting LGBT rights. Or look up Dennis Cooper.
You want the corporations to be the speech police. Fine. That’s where we’re going. You’re not going to like where it ends up.
That’s not what anyone here has said or even implied, and it’s not what’s happening with Gab.
The will of the free market which capitalists love so very much has spoken; Gab is still free to go establish their own platform to distribute their content, and from what I understand, they also have the required monetary resources to do so.
Definitely agree that critiquing power is essential. But since critique itself is insufficient to challenge power, we also need movements against power. And building and sharpening movements requires critiquing them. Movements which wave away all criticism as the work of opponents generally find themselves rigid and ineffective.
Yeah, absolutely. In case I wasn’t clear earlier, nothing I’m saying is in support of debating nazis. Punch nazis.
I don’t have any opinion on Devil’s Advocacy, what I’m talking about is actual debate within the Left (or whatever we want to call it). In short: fascist driving trollies has increased the rate at which leftists mistake other leftists who disagree with them as opponents. This is bad, it’s part of the nazis’ plan, and we should try to resist it by remaining as open as practically possible, rather than circling the wagons and treating critique as suspect.
There’s not a clear hard line to take there like “You always must debate anyone who wants to argue!” or something, it’s just I’ve noticed the trend and I think it’s going in the wrong direction.
That’s an unfair oversimplification, one which indirectly insults the intellect of the members of this forum. It implies that we don’t know who our real allies are.
That may be true in some cases, but at least on this site, the regular contributors tend to be just a little ‘smarter than the average bear.’
Furthermore, mere disagreement on some details regarding the struggle isn’t what identifies someone as an opponent in the fight for progress.
No one here has asked for 100% emphatic agreement on every issue, just a basic consensus that certain bad ideas are not only antisocial, but that they are inhumane and unacceptable to those who strive to create a truly peaceful, equitable and just civilization.
That’s not a very high bar to set, yet some folks still have trouble passing it…
And the nards too. Why choose one or the other, when both are equally satisfying together.
True, but I’m not bring it up in defense of the companies. I’m bringing it up in defense of the idea that this isn’t a violation of the First Amendment, as so many who defend Gab are claiming it is.
I (along with a lot of their employees) don’t like that Google is helping China, but the First Amendment is less relevant there than it is in this case (“don’t be evil”, on the other hand…).
If Google decides to remove links to bomb-making instructions, it’s not going to be to appease the right but because … they’re bomb-making instructions.
yeah I dunno bud, when you spend as much time saying “now I’m not a Nazi, buuuuut” as you did in this thread, maybe it’s just time to take the L
is spending your time on slippery slope arguments for the direct benefit of Nazis really how you want to spend your time?
No. This isn’t about China.
Has it happened here? In this thread, which is not about China, but about this. That’s what I’m asking you about.
Sure, but that’s not what we were talking about just now, but about the perceived necessity of playing Devil’s Advocate when there is no reason to, and how some folk were complaining about being misperceived as advocating for Nazis when they weren’t, and then I was saying that was sort of a self-inflicted problem, and not really anyone else’s issue.
I mean, we all agree, but the devil seems to have gotten into some details, and I’m not sure why, since I’m pretty sure I didn’t leave the door to the details open in the first place.
But someone keeps wanting to open up that door, and as far as I can tell, that door is shut for good reason, and has been so for a long time.
It’s not like there isn’t a window in it and you can’t look back and see why it’s closed.
Now past noon, and I’ve stretched a metaphor beyond the point it was ever made for and it still retains some elasticity!
GIF of a person pointing up at THIS, which blinks in at the best moment.
Closest I can get right now:
I refer you to @anon86154871 's recent comment as a perfect example of the phenomenon I’m describing. That said, I’m not upset about the misunderstanding. I get that this is the internet and nobody has any reason to trust me or spend their time reading what I write.
Maybe the confusion is that you think folks on this thread are playing Devil’s Advocate, when they’re speaking in earnest. I believe this thread was kicked off when some folks, myself included, expressed concern about Paypal and other internet megacorps having such power to enforce their political priorities. I didn’t write that “for the sake of argument”, it’s actually my opinion as a radical antifascist, and I wrote it because I think other people should share my opinion. That could have been a pretty straightforward conversation, since the two concepts are not at all hard to synthesize. But instead the conversation trended argumentative. How come? That’s what the rest of the discussion has been about. For me anyway - I think a lot of fragmentation has been happening too, which probably explains why we’re now having to argue about what the argument is even about 
I agree in general that the best response to being misunderstood is to adjust one’s own approach rather than blame your audience or the norms. But it’s interesting (to me at least) that a significant aspect of fascist strategy is to mess with the norms themselves, and it’s worth being aware of how that shapes even our own discourse.
It’s really weird how you seem to keep coming back to making it about yourself.
If you’re truly an advocate for the side that’s actively fighting against fascism and authoritarianism, then it’ll show in your everyday actions… but it’s utterly futile to try to “prove it” here.
And continuing to needlessly derail a thread isn’t helping in that regard, just fyi.
I’m sure you’re right, thanks for bearing with me.
Those aren’t actually conflicting points. Google does have a legal right to make a product spec’ed for the Chinese market. It wasn’t “free speech” advocates that shut that down, it was Google’s own employees taking a stand against it.
Jesus Fire Emblem-playing Christ.
I wasn’t the one who brought up playing Devil’s Advocate. I just pointed out such “play” has no worth now in response to someone who did.
Yes, I essentially do the same in my own house or online spaces I run. But is this grounds for concern?
I get it. A large company is a force multiplier for any given effect they can implement. You wonder what if the shoe were on the other foot? It isn’t, so that concern is misplaced in this part of the cosmos, but if that ever were the case, you’d be living in a universe where everyone wears goatees, and your concerns would be rather different anyway.
But is that actually a valid concern what happened to Gab? No, it is not.
I think we all agree on how Gab screwed themselves over, but the big thing is Gab festered with Nazis, and did nothing to curtail it. Nazis represent a threat to civilization. Nobody should want to be associated with that. Jack should take a hard note.
Paypal et al. are likewise under no obligation to be bankers for bigots. Users are free to show up in person and insert cash into an orifice … in the the building where Gab is located … and keep their lights on that way. Anyone stopping them?
If you can see the difference between a right and a convenience, then it becomes clear that no one is obliged to assist Gab to even exist, much less take money on their behalf and help them meet payroll, host their domain, or whatever.
Gab still being lively on Twitter…
Funny how that one worked out, eh?
