Alex Jones’ speech is continuing to cause all kinds of harm to the lives of innocent people like the Sandy Hook families. Are you saying Twitter should let that continue just to underscore what an asshole he is?
10 Likes
I agree, geobas, their safe harbor is in jeopardy.
Also, when ideas are supressed, they become “forbidden fruit” and some people will think “these ideas must be really good for them to try to keep them from us–it’s the prescious hidden knowledge.” That’s fallacious reasoning, of course. There are so many positive ways to combat toxic ideas without trying to silence people, like giving people who like to take pride in their nation positive examples of non-toxic, non-hating nationalism that say “our nation is great, and so are others” for example, to counter those who say “our nation is great, let’s denigrate others”, and calling out examples of toxic nationalism and showcasing positive patriotisms for people who like to be patriotic for their particular nation, whichever one that is.
The traffic on Jones’ site has dropped by half since services like Facebook decided they didn’t want to enable his hateful nonsense anymore. Limiting his reach really is working.
7 Likes
The problem with this simplistic line of thinking is that we already restrict “dangerous” speech, whether it’s illegal chemical formulae, bomb/weapon blueprints, or supporting terrorism or inciting violence.
Bigotry and the support of bigotry leads to violence, murder, and many of the same results as the items above. One of the biggest differences, though, is that the items above tend to affect everyone, while bigotry often only affects brown people, many of which do not have the agency required to defend themselves.
Make no mistake: bigotry and nazi ideology are just as dangerous to the affected classes as those other categories of speech. Those of us who are not affected by the outcome of these online exercises in “freedom” would do well to remember these decisions have real, genuine consequences outside the bubbles of our own entitlement.
16 Likes
I don’t know why this is so damn hard for some people to understand.
They’re never “just words” or ‘negative feelings’ or “different opinions”; bigotry and tribalism actually manifest action from those ideas.
If you want to be a part of civilized society you have to accept that a bare minimum of civility is required; that includes not going out of your way to be a dick to other people just for being different.
12 Likes
Two words: blind privilege.
Three more words: ignorance of history.
10 Likes
Oh, I know; I just can’t fathom the apparent lack of a sense of self preservation: ‘if they do it to them, they’ll do it to me.’
7 Likes
There is a single ACLU representative in the media on this topic, while the ACLU as an organization has literally changed their policy on advocating for others after they royally bungled Charlottesville. You’re glossing over a lot of the modern history of the ACLU.
10 Likes
This needs a lot of unpacking.
Is Jones an idiot and an asshole? yes to the last one, no to the first one. He’s not an idiot in that he’s been pretty successful with his schtick, the only way we could absolutely call him an idiot is if we actually think he believes anything he says which he doesn’t, Jones is not peddling his truth, he is not confused about reality he makes shit up knowingly. Deliberately.
If we merely say that Jones is engaging in unpopular speech then there is definitely a case for saying twitter is being neutral by allowing him to use their platform, but simply categorizing Jones as unpopular is a false dichotomy, yes lies are unpopular but only because they are untrue, because they cause harm.
You could still go on to defend people who peddle lies as being misinformed, saying that they actually believe what they say, yes, there is even a case to be made for these people, but what can you say about someone who deliberately fabricates lies for a living? lumping his ouvre in with unpopular speech legitimizes his efforts at sowing discord. His behavior, parasitic.
But hasn’t he already gotten the chance to speak? The way this is phrased suggest that we, and by extension twitter should give him a chance to prove himself. He already has, for years. There is no mistake about the kind of message he brings, people have heard him, he’s been allowed on twitter for years. If twitter were to shut him down, it would not be without a chance to prove himself an idiot. The unfortunate reality these days is that if you allow him on your platform, you prove he’s not an idiot, you prove he knows how to to game the system and benefit from his grift. The only way to prove him an idiot is to shut him down for being idiotic.
I called his behavior parasitic, because it is. He makes money by pretending to believe the things he says and getting others to believe his lies. It is the equivalent of a three card monte scam.
Ultimately Jones is not a good candidate for testing societies limits of tolerance for unpopular speech because he is a sociopath intent on exploiting society for his own benefit. He is knowingly hiding behind this defense as a means to pick pockets, that is precisely the sort of behavior that ultimately weakens democracy, not shutting down con men.
4 Likes
Card-carrying member of the ACLU here. They definitely do not take a free-speech absolutist position (I wouldn’t donate to them if they did). Their remit is the First Amendment, or (put another way) making sure the state does not suppress free speech or free assembly.
What the ACLU realised after Charlottesville is that they can no longer expect police and local municipalities to behave with the same level of responsibility, competence and good faith that those in Skokie did when they forced the city to let the Nazis march in 1977.
6 Likes
Well, I can say ‘the opinions of bible-thumping, moralistic, racist asshats are given far too much credence in the US’, but you’re right, I can’t say it in German 
3 Likes
Except nazis have long been allowed permits for public marches. I’ve had to see KKK members hand out flyers in my home town. They are not a suppressed minority. Neither tactic - air or smothering - has been effective. Right wing parties with authoritarian and racist elements exist here in the US and in places where they ban nazi imagery.
8 Likes
Including Germany:
Fortunately most Germans understand how dangerous they are (and not because the bigots were given the opportunity to spread their message of hate):
5 Likes
Right? Especially Germany. I think that many people like to blame former East Germans for that primarily, but there was strong laws on both sides of the divide regarding the banning of nazi stuff. The west german government in the immediate postwar period was rather conservative. On top of that, I seem to remember that one of the Badermeinhoff guys ended up a right winger, too (this was in the 90s).
This is what worries me as the silent gen die off - that without that direct memory, our historical understanding of what happened to Germany in the 30s and 40s will fade and not be remembered for what it actually was.
7 Likes
That’s an understatement. They were letting former low-level Nazi officials back into government as early as the 1950s. The resurgence of right-wing populism is a problem for all Germans, as the 2017 election demonstrated. “Last bastions” of liberal democracy are in danger just as much any others. Some recent articles:
[spoiler: Sweden Democrats are yet another European right-wing anti-immigrant party of hate]
Sadly I’ve come to the conclusion that this already happened a few years back as the last of the generation that experienced the 1930s and 40s as teenagers and young adults died off. The moment that happened the new crop of fascists started crawling out from under the paving stones. The study of history is our only defense, and establishment conservatives have spent 40 years devaluing and underfunding it to serve their own short-term political purposes.
5 Likes
It’s worth noting that the martyr’s cry of “you’re banning me/hiding my comments because I’m expressing an unpopular opinion” is a favourite one of right-wing trollies and apologists for right-wing populists on discussion forums, including this one. More often than not it’s a cover for the fact that they were making arguments in bad faith. Jones and his apologists are no different.
8 Likes
Both sides did that, too. Denazification became a casualty of the Cold War (same with Japan after the war).
We still have a few survivors of the death camps/holocaust, but many of them were very young in the camps and are quite old now.
Deborah Lipstadt was fighting against them from the 80s, they just have a bigger platform now. Groups like the National Alliance (here in the states) were actively recruiting young disaffected men in the 70s and 80s (often through a perverted version of hardcore/oi).
You know I agree there. I’ve been squawking on about that here for years (to often deaf ears, I’m afraid).
7 Likes
The difference is now they’re emboldened in a way they couldn’t be when more Holocaust survivors and WWII veterans were around to say “are you out of your bloody minds?” There’s been a distinct shift in just the last 8 years as a critical mass of people with lived experience of those horrific two decades died off. It’s really given me a discouraging view of humanity’s capability to learn and grow.
8 Likes
Agreed. The earlier waves of this matter, because they kept the language alive long enough to pass it on to a new generation. Worse, the new generation embraces the language of victimization and turns it to their advantage in their attempts to save a failed system of racist violence.
6 Likes
Apparently Jones is unhappy with the status of his arrangement with Jack…
3 Likes
