ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags censorship , free speech

Reply
Old 28th March 2019, 12:58 PM   #161
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,356
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Robert Heinlein on Free Speech..and he says it better then I ever could:

It's from his novel "If This Goes On" (aka "Revolt In 2100")



Underline "no matter how holy the motives". They always have wonderful reasons for wanting to take freedom away from you.
I enjoy all the poetic words people are posting here, but no matter how stirring they may be, they're declarations, not arguments.

One part of my position is that we're so enamored of the poetry in the ideal of freedom and liberty, we don't evaluate the risks on both sides accurately. We're too distracted by the song of LIBERTY!
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon.
-G.K. CHESTERTON
Cavemonster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 12:59 PM   #162
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 23,158
Quote:
When any government , or any church for that matter,
N/A
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 01:06 PM   #163
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 85,391
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Yes but I'm sure you understand that what someone says and what someone does are two different, if related, things. Saying "well you can't do X" is one thing, but saying "well, you can't say X" is quite a bit more slippery.



Indeed. What's your exact point or question?
An answer to what you asked.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 01:08 PM   #164
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 85,391
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Which they would be doing anyway.

Ridicule is the answer. The Blues Brothers had it right. No wannabe white supremacist wants to be publicly ridiculed
Quite sincerely and seriously, what evidence do you have that that works?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 01:26 PM   #165
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 19,695
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Just chiming in to restate that they should be allowed to have their platform. Let them be seen and heard. Makes them easier to identify.

If they are restricted to clandestine sites, their exposure to each other becomes a closed echo chamber, and reinforces their beliefs. Let them see themselves and their ideological comrades ridiculed openly. Let every new potential recruit see how society what large thinks of them. The hard core haters won't be moved one way or the other, and will still go on sociopathic sprees; they will with or without facebook. But the less cuckoo may be persuaded that the views are fundamentally sick when sunlight shines on them.
The way the algorithms at facebook and youtube work, they are already in a closed echo chamber of their own beliefs.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 01:41 PM   #166
Skeptic Tank
Trigger Warning
 
Skeptic Tank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,390
I think if white nationalist ideas didn’t have inherent merit, logic, resonance with human nature and a lot of appeal to a large portion of white people (especially as they shrink in population share) then these notions of “sunlight is the best disinfectant” and “ridicule will kill it” would work just fine.

Maybe sunlight is the best disinfectant, knowledge is power, and ridicule does dispel awful ideas but maybe some of you are just off the mark about which are the infectious, harmful, unnatural and awful ideas.

Maybe that’s why Plan B is gaining popularity: silence them.
Skeptic Tank is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 01:59 PM   #167
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 22,328
Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
infectious, harmful, unnatural and awful ideas.
I was told that the black man's penis is not actually larger.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 02:09 PM   #168
Skeptic Tank
Trigger Warning
 
Skeptic Tank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,390
Originally Posted by William Parcher View Post
I was told that the black man's penis is not actually larger.
I suspect that on average it probably is, compared to white men and almost definitely compared to East Asian men. Not my area of expertise, though.

What got your mind onto the topic of penises?
Skeptic Tank is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 02:19 PM   #169
William Parcher
Show me the monkey!
 
William Parcher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 22,328
Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
What got your mind onto the topic of penises?
It was your mention of...
Originally Posted by Skeptic Tank View Post
harmful, unnatural and awful ideas.
__________________
Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.
William Parcher is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 02:45 PM   #170
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,310
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
I enjoy all the poetic words people are posting here, but no matter how stirring they may be, they're declarations, not arguments.

One part of my position is that we're so enamored of the poetry in the ideal of freedom and liberty, we don't evaluate the risks on both sides accurately. We're too distracted by the song of LIBERTY!
I'm sure Torquemada said similar things about heretics. They all loved the idea of freedom of speech and belief... but didn't evaluate the risks correctly. Luckily he was there to restrain them, otherwise the societal consensus might have been challenged by demagogues!
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 02:55 PM   #171
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,356
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
I'm sure Torquemada said similar things about heretics. They all loved the idea of freedom of speech and belief... but didn't evaluate the risks correctly. Luckily he was there to restrain them, otherwise the societal consensus might have been challenged by demagogues!
Again, you're appealing to emotion.

Make an argument.
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon.
-G.K. CHESTERTON
Cavemonster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 03:04 PM   #172
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,310
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
Again, you're appealing to emotion.

Make an argument.
I think you have it precisely backwards.

I am saying that open debate and inquiry is good for society. As evidence, I can point to our past and many other current societies and we see that open, free speech societies are more progressive, have more rights, more innovation than closed, censored, societies.

You are appealing to emotion (oh noes, the irresistible siren call of trumpian rhetoric in electronic form!??!!!) and saying we must ban it, or bad BAD! things will happen. (Evidence that society cant handle it, or that the benefits of censorship outweighs the costs, is not to be seen)
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 03:35 PM   #173
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,356
Originally Posted by Giz View Post
You are appealing to emotion (oh noes, the irresistible siren call of trumpian rhetoric in electronic form!??!!!) and saying we must ban it, or bad BAD! things will happen. (Evidence that society cant handle it, or that the benefits of censorship outweighs the costs, is not to be seen)
I feel as though you've stumbled into the wrong thread. I haven't said a word about Trumpian logic.

My position is more targeted to naked White Supremacy and Neo nazi advocacy and the like. I don't have to appeal to emotion or what-ifs to say these ideas can be dangerous. The US already fought a couple wars around this sort of thing. US intelligence agencies will tell you about the danger of these groups. That's not speculation it's reality.

Now as for whether the benefits outweigh the costs, it's not easy to predict, but we can look to countries that have more strict speech restrictions than the US and see if they have experienced negatives that we can't bear. There's room for different opinions on that, but what we don't see in those countries is anything resembling the direst warnings or any reason to believe they're on the brink of such things.

EDIT: I just did a search through the thread to make sure I'm accurately describing the arguments I've made. I did mention Trump supporters once earlier on this page, but not in the context of wanting to ban their speech or argue that it posed a particular threat. It was in the context of the point that ridicule is an ineffective tool to dissuade people from a closely held belief.
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon.
-G.K. CHESTERTON

Last edited by Cavemonster; 28th March 2019 at 03:39 PM.
Cavemonster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 04:03 PM   #174
sackett
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Detroit
Posts: 5,437
Here we #*&☆¤¿ go another time!

Once again, we have a thread debating the value of limiting freedom of speech. The topic comes up from time to time -- and once more, I feel disgust at the people who advocate the establishment of thought crime.

Tell me: Are you non-free speech fans really and truly conceding that, well, yes, there are men somewhere in the world who are entitled to tell you to be silent? That you are not good enough to publish anything you choose? That you are genuinely unequal to your silencers and censors?

Show me the man who has the right to tell me what I can say. He may have authority bestowed on him by an unjust (and foolish) law, and may use coercion to try to silence me, but that is just the same old flexing of tyrrany, nothing more.

Show me a man who acquiesces in such a law, and I'll show you a slave.
__________________
Fill the seats of justice with good men; not so absolute in goodness as to forget what human frailty is. -- Thomas Jefferson

What region of the earth is not filled with our calamities? -- Virgil
sackett is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 04:22 PM   #175
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 23,158
Originally Posted by sackett View Post
Once again, we have a thread debating the value of limiting freedom of speech. The topic comes up from time to time -- and once more, I feel disgust at the people who advocate the establishment of thought crime.
And once more I feel exasperation at the people who insist on drawing a false equivalence between the ignoring and deplatforming of odious points of view by private individuals and companies, and actual criminalization by the authorities.

We get the same damn tired line every time some group of liberals decide to boycott a business, even though that's precisely the way the free market is allegedly supposed to work.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002

Last edited by Checkmite; 28th March 2019 at 04:25 PM.
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 05:05 PM   #176
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,356
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
And once more I feel exasperation at the people who insist on drawing a false equivalence between the ignoring and deplatforming of odious points of view by private individuals and companies, and actual criminalization by the authorities.

We get the same damn tired line every time some group of liberals decide to boycott a business, even though that's precisely the way the free market is allegedly supposed to work.
In his defense, I've said a few times in this thread that I'm conceptually open to government censorship. I think the bar to allow it should be incredibly high and the use would have to be very specific, but I don't see it as an uncrossable line.

I'm not fully committed, but I think one thing I'm mostly on board with is publicly funded universities having the freedom to reject a speaker who wants to call their students of color subhuman. I'm happy to argue the merits of that intervention and I'm happy to consider I may be wrong.

Many countries have more restrictions on speech than the US allows. And while we can argue whether they are better or worse off than us because of it, the feared authoritarian dystopia generally fails to materialize.

Many countries have laws regarding Hate speech:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech#United_States


I'm very open to arguments of "It wouldn't be worth it" but since we have actual examples in the world, we should look to them to make our pro-con lists instead of speculation which looks a little alarmist given most of the world has managed to deal with some levels of restriction without becoming 1984.
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon.
-G.K. CHESTERTON
Cavemonster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 05:13 PM   #177
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,656
Most of the English speaking western world you mean.

When you look back The Iron Curtain and Cultural Revolution were't too far back in history.
Stout is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 05:17 PM   #178
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,356
Originally Posted by Stout View Post
Most of the English speaking western world you mean.

When you look back The Iron Curtain and Cultural Revolution were't too far back in history.
Not sure I parse what you're saying. Could you rephrase?
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon.
-G.K. CHESTERTON
Cavemonster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 05:37 PM   #179
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,656
Oh sorry, screwed up the quote. That was in response to your last sentence about becoming 1984. Sure here and now the idea of a 1984 type of dystopia seems far fetched, paranoid even but if we look not too far back in history we can come up with examples of societies who. gone down that road.

Remember it wasn't too long ago that we were all laughing at those people with their microchip conspiracy theories. Ha Ha we said, that paranoid....then along comes smartphones, the next best thing.
Stout is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 05:51 PM   #180
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,356
Originally Posted by Stout View Post
Oh sorry, screwed up the quote. That was in response to your last sentence about becoming 1984. Sure here and now the idea of a 1984 type of dystopia seems far fetched, paranoid even but if we look not too far back in history we can come up with examples of societies who. gone down that road.

Remember it wasn't too long ago that we were all laughing at those people with their microchip conspiracy theories. Ha Ha we said, that paranoid....then along comes smartphones, the next best thing.
I don't think anyone is wrong to be wary of oppressive government power.

Where I disagree is the argument that policies in line with most of the developed world put us meaningfully closer to that. The USSR and the cultural revolution didn't sneak up like a frog in boiling water by increments. Those were violent revolutions. While terrible things can come step by step. I don't think Canada is meaningfully closer to being 1984 than we are just because they have hate speech laws.
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon.
-G.K. CHESTERTON
Cavemonster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 06:13 PM   #181
Chanakya

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 1,018
As far as the marketplace of ideas, there's two ways to transact. You can honestly examine perspectives and ideas, with emphasis on understanding; or you can (mis?)use the marketplace to push some agenda, use rhetoric and suchlike with a view, primarily, to influence others' thinking.

I agree, when you're sure some instance answers to the latter description, then it may be wise, sometimes, to keep away from those particular shops, to personally disengage from transactions of this nature.

But that can only be a subjective decision, a personal choice.

Attempting to regulate the marketplace itself to suit one's personal likes and dislikes, that is either unwise, or itself the overture to deliberate furthering of specific agendas.
Chanakya is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 06:16 PM   #182
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,656
I don't think Canada is either but if you read the hate speech laws there's a lot of wiggle room there including the phrase "if you believe it to be true" or something like that, it's been a few days since I looked at it, to make sure it was still there.

There's no advocating genocide, that's for sure but topics like criticizing religion, white pride, etc are still fair and legal.

As to private companies choosing what they want to censor on their platforms, that's up to them but it just seems kind of stupid to design a platform and invite people to share then go all weird when people actually share what they want to share.

The no porn thing makes sense, under 18s and all and getting young people hooked is, no doubt, a large part of their business plan but facebook was up front about that, right from the start.

Remember the breast feeding fiasco ? Now that's an excellent example of facebook uncensoring in the face of reason so lets hope they apply the same reason should they progress down the censorship road.
Stout is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 06:20 PM   #183
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 80,659
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
An answer to what you asked.
Could you specify which thing I asked that you answered? I'm actually not sure here.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 06:30 PM   #184
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,356
Originally Posted by Stout View Post
As to private companies choosing what they want to censor on their platforms, that's up to them but it just seems kind of stupid to design a platform and invite people to share then go all weird when people actually share what they want to share.
I actually disagree on this as well. There really aren't many private platforms that don't have some restrictions.

Even here, we have the MA which censors speech that it would be illegal for the US government to censor themselves.

Without SOME curation, platforms would become very unattractive places for a lot of if not most users. Take a look at chan sites for what little curation except for legal liabilities looks like.

A tiny minority of users wanting to share gruesom pictures of dead bodies or incessant spam can make a platform unpalatable quickly. And as has been noted here and on the other thread, lack of curation can make a private platform a useful tool for something as terrible as genocide.
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon.
-G.K. CHESTERTON
Cavemonster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 06:37 PM   #185
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 85,391
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Could you specify which thing I asked that you answered? I'm actually not sure here.
Look back to the post of yours that I quoted, it was the sentence ending in a question mark.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 06:47 PM   #186
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Roboramma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 12,078
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Just chiming in to restate that they should be allowed to have their platform. Let them be seen and heard. Makes them easier to identify.

If they are restricted to clandestine sites, their exposure to each other becomes a closed echo chamber, and reinforces their beliefs. Let them see themselves and their ideological comrades ridiculed openly. Let every new potential recruit see how society what large thinks of them. The hard core haters won't be moved one way or the other, and will still go on sociopathic sprees; they will with or without facebook. But the less cuckoo may be persuaded that the views are fundamentally sick when sunlight shines on them.
One problem with this line of thinking is that even on Facebook they still become echo chambers that aren't exposed to open ridicule, because the people following one particular ideology simply don't look at the opposing ideology. So it seems like a worst of both worlds solution whether they get the recruiting benefits of a large social media platform and the closed echo chamber that reinforces their beliefs.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 06:54 PM   #187
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,656
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
I actually disagree on this as well. There really aren't many private platforms that don't have some restrictions.

Even here, we have the MA which censors speech that it would be illegal for the US government to censor themselves.

Without SOME curation, platforms would become very unattractive places for a lot of if not most users. Take a look at chan sites for what little curation except for legal liabilities looks like.

A tiny minority of users wanting to share gruesom pictures of dead bodies or incessant spam can make a platform unpalatable quickly. And as has been noted here and on the other thread, lack of curation can make a private platform a useful tool for something as terrible as genocide.
Yes, but it's my choice if I want to work within the framework. Personally I don't care about the no swearing rule.

Were my ISP to suddenly start censoring websites, like the Australian ones did then I'd be motivated to take my business elsewhere. I probably wouldn't though I'd go for the VPN option instead because, like some sort of idiot, I tied my primary email account to my ISP and I'd loose it if I switched.

The cahn format is an example of something I can't work with, it's not so much their content but their layout, Same thing with Reddit.

I want it to be MY choice what I'm exposed to, I can visit a site like stormfront and come away not a nazi. The place kind of embarrasses me to be white TBH.

Last edited by Stout; 28th March 2019 at 06:55 PM. Reason: spelling
Stout is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 08:30 PM   #188
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 16,383
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
I'm not fully committed, but I think one thing I'm mostly on board with is publicly funded universities having the freedom to reject a speaker who wants to call their students of color subhuman. I'm happy to argue the merits of that intervention and I'm happy to consider I may be wrong.
The biggest reason to allow it is he may be able to convince them he is right.
BobTheCoward is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 09:23 PM   #189
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,082
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
These are all arguments I've seen commonly made, but I don't see them pan out in real life.


How do you mean identify? Do you mean outing individuals as Nazis to their employers or friends? Do you mean the issue of people knowing what a Nazi looks and sounds like? Or something else?
Primarily, to recognize their buzzwords and speakers and whatnot, without visiting their cesspools. For example, I thought Pepe the frog was just a 4chan mascot, till Richard Spencer getting punched clued me in. Wearing white polos, and what their leaders say and do I much prefer to be mainstream knowledge, rather than tucked in some dark corner of the net where we are not looking.

Quote:
That's not how it works out though. In reality, public ridicule doesn't make people back away from extreme viewpoints, it makes them more entrenched and angry. And while they have access to massive social media sites, they can come away from being ridiculed to lick their wounds with a large group of sympathizers who will assure them that it's the mean ridiculers who are wrong.
With some of the more zealous, certainly. It's the Aryan Lites that concern me more though. A ton of them with a little cultural pride today, then a little more superiority tomorrow...I hold out for believing that you can turn them away from all that before they get too comfy. Keeping their talkingheads in the mainstream spotlight seems a good way to discredit them openly, and show them for what they are, rather than how they want to be seen.

Quote:
The idea that exposure to criticism and mockery defeats bad ideas may make a sort of common sense, but it doesn't seem to really work that way in the real world. Just like fat shaming makes people eat more and yelling about Trump makes people watch more Fox news.
Again, I hear you, but ridicule works wonders with the not-yet-committed. Anecdotally, I gained some weight years back, and it took about two comments from people I hadn't seen in a while to make me drop 40lbs in less than six months. Shaming and ridicule can work wonders if you are not entrenched.

Quote:
They weren't born that way though. I can't say that banning them from facebook will necessarily prevent a shooting. But if we trace back the paths of white supremecists who are ready to be violent, I feel pretty confident we'd see the path of them finding and nurturing these ideologies. And significant parts of those paths will be encountering and reinforcing these ideas through publicly accessible spaces online.

This is a nice thought, I don't see a reason tho think it's common though. And an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
That's how I see it, but my ounce is in knowing the enemy and keeping him right where you can see him. And talk about him. Challenge him openly. Let the peanut gallery see them being mocked. Show every day and in every way that they are afraid. Remind others of their repeated historical losses. Just don't let them whisper to each other in the shadows unchecked. The good guys don't hide.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 09:28 PM   #190
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,082
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Quite sincerely and seriously, what evidence do you have that that works?
I'm not sure we have evidence that either version actually works. It's more of a working hypothesis on human nature. I don't know how we would accumulate data on effective strategies. Ask white supremacists which approach they respond most favorably towards? Not counting on their practical self-awareness on that front.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2019, 09:42 PM   #191
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: NJ USA. We Don't Like You Either
Posts: 7,082
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
One problem with this line of thinking is that even on Facebook they still become echo chambers that aren't exposed to open ridicule, because the people following one particular ideology simply don't look at the opposing ideology. So it seems like a worst of both worlds solution whether they get the recruiting benefits of a large social media platform and the closed echo chamber that reinforces their beliefs.
That's true. I guess I'm thinking more of the uncommitteds, or the conservative right who can be coaxed to the alt-right. If the more public platform is seen to all of us, we know what they know, and that knowledge gives us better footing. If Richard Spencer stayed under his cyber rock, fewer may have known about him and his message. But with one punch, he gained notoriety. The last I heard about him, he was being jeered off a college stage down South. Score one for mainstream sunlight, IMO.
__________________
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2019, 12:00 AM   #192
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 23,158
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
That's true. I guess I'm thinking more of the uncommitteds, or the conservative right who can be coaxed to the alt-right. If the more public platform is seen to all of us, we know what they know, and that knowledge gives us better footing. If Richard Spencer stayed under his cyber rock, fewer may have known about him and his message. But with one punch, he gained notoriety. The last I heard about him, he was being jeered off a college stage down South. Score one for mainstream sunlight, IMO.
You are so backwards about these facts that it's actually impressive in a way.

Richard Spencer was already at the height of his public notoriety when he was face-punched at Trump's inauguration. And the reason you don't hear about him anymore is because of student groups' successful attempts to deplatform his planned college speaking tour, leading many institutions to withdraw his booking or refuse to book him, thus depriving him of access to public forums, and eventually resulting in him having to cancel his public speaking tour - which is why you haven't heard from him lately. Score one for deplatforming.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002

Last edited by Checkmite; 29th March 2019 at 12:02 AM.
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2019, 12:17 AM   #193
Baylor
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 7,443
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
I feel as though you've stumbled into the wrong thread. I haven't said a word about Trumpian logic.

My position is more targeted to naked White Supremacy and Neo nazi advocacy and the like. I don't have to appeal to emotion or what-ifs to say these ideas can be dangerous. The US already fought a couple wars around this sort of thing. US intelligence agencies will tell you about the danger of these groups. That's not speculation it's reality.

Now as for whether the benefits outweigh the costs, it's not easy to predict, but we can look to countries that have more strict speech restrictions than the US and see if they have experienced negatives that we can't bear. There's room for different opinions on that, but what we don't see in those countries is anything resembling the direst warnings or any reason to believe they're on the brink of such things.

EDIT: I just did a search through the thread to make sure I'm accurately describing the arguments I've made. I did mention Trump supporters once earlier on this page, but not in the context of wanting to ban their speech or argue that it posed a particular threat. It was in the context of the point that ridicule is an ineffective tool to dissuade people from a closely held belief.
Things certainly have changed around these parts. No one in the 9/11 CT section seriously called for the silencing of 9/11 truthers (which has its roots in anti-semitism). The talented members on that board attacked the claims with rigor. The new skeptic position is to advocate for silencing critics. Strange.
Baylor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2019, 12:30 AM   #194
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 7,472
9/11 was something new with lots of things we didn't know.

We know all we need to know about Nazis and White Supremacists, and have for decades.
At some point, goodwill is wasted on those who refuse to learn the basics.
__________________
Opinion is divided on the subject. All the others say it is; I say it isn’t.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2019, 12:38 AM   #195
Baylor
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Spokane, WA
Posts: 7,443
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
9/11 was something new with lots of things we didn't know.
I knew the Jews didn't put thermite in WTC 7 so speak for yourself.
Baylor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2019, 12:56 AM   #196
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 85,391
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
9/11 was something new with lots of things we didn't know.

We know all we need to know about Nazis and White Supremacists, and have for decades.
At some point, goodwill is wasted on those who refuse to learn the basics.
Pity we don't have some evidence of what would happen if a significant number of people followed the Nazi creed so we have to deal in what ifs and hypotheticals...

I mean it could be that following Nazism would result in millions being killed, countries being invaded and so on... How could we know?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2019, 02:37 AM   #197
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 80,659
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Look back to the post of yours that I quoted, it was the sentence ending in a question mark.
I did, but I didn't see how this:

Quote:
Words are an action. They are not something that stands apart from other actions we do.
Is an answer to this:

Quote:
Yeah but they don't have the ability to downright call your speech unacceptable at a drop of a hat, regardless of what you actually say, do they?
So if you're refering to a different question, could you please specify which one?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2019, 03:36 AM   #198
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 85,391
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
I did, but I didn't see how this:



Is an answer to this:



So if you're refering to a different question, could you please specify which one?
Astonishing, its only a few posts up and you cant see it. It is as plain as day that I wass answering the question you asked I.e. "Which process is that?".
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2019, 04:17 AM   #199
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 80,659
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Astonishing, its only a few posts up and you cant see it. It is as plain as day that I wass answering the question you asked I.e. "Which process is that?".
See what I mean? You have a serious problem making your points clear. It seems rather to me that you like being opaque.

However, the real astonishing part is, your point can't possibly be an answer to "which process is that?". You asked me about a "process" we've been using for centuries. Since we're talking about the US I specified that I'm not an American, and also asked which process you're talking about. You replied:

Quote:
Whatever your country has been using, Canada is not that new of a country so it must have developed mechanisms to decide what can and can't be expressed.
Which doesn't really answer my question, but ok. Then I asked you what your question or point was with this. It can't possibly be answering my "which process is that?" since that was in response to that question or point.

So even your attempt at clarifying above does nothing of the sort. ****, it's like pulling teeth. Why can't you answer a straight question?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th March 2019, 07:05 AM   #200
sackett
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Detroit
Posts: 5,437
Do you think

Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
And once more I feel exasperation at the people who insist on drawing a false equivalence between the ignoring and deplatforming of odious points of view by private individuals and companies, and actual criminalization by the authorities.

We get the same damn tired line every time some group of liberals decide to boycott a business, even though that's precisely the way the free market is allegedly supposed to work.
that I give a **** about FacePalm or any other private businesses nannying their content? These "social media" enterprises mushroom up all the time, and like mushrooms liquefy, stink briefly, and vanish. Who cares?

But there are always more dangerous fools and rogues who try to raise laws against speech. When their wretched statutes are enacted, they set out to enforce them. There is nothing they will not do to silence any voice they object to. Remember that.

Here's the essential point: It doesn't matter what you may want to say if a government claims to have power greater than your right to say it. You can agitate for more fresh flowers in Sunday School, and there will emerge men who will silence you, perhaps permanently, if you allow yourself to be tamed.

Am I appealing to emotion? Yes I am -- if self-respect is an emotion.

I feel weary, fighting this battle yet again.
__________________
Fill the seats of justice with good men; not so absolute in goodness as to forget what human frailty is. -- Thomas Jefferson

What region of the earth is not filled with our calamities? -- Virgil
sackett is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:53 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.