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 Facebook incidents , Facebook issues , free speech issues , internet incidents

Reply
Old 22nd April 2019, 08:46 PM   #281
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 75,563
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
People who wear Che t-shirts are labeling themselves. How shall we treat them?
Is there some group of left wing revolutionaries getting together via FB and carrying out guerrilla warfare?

BTW, in case you've forgotten and for those that don't know, guerrilla warfare is about attacking infrastructure, not terrorizing people with bombs.

If not, then you treat someone with a Che t-shirt like any other ordinary teen.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 22nd April 2019 at 08:47 PM.
Skeptic Ginger 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 22nd April 2019, 08:50 PM   #282
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 75,563
Originally Posted by Stout View Post
Any platform that allows anti-Islam and anti-immigrant speech can be a site recruiting white supremacists. This forum might even get on the SPLCs radar as a hate site.
Really?

I believe exaggerating applies to your complaints.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger 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 22nd April 2019, 08:54 PM   #283
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 75,563
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
We've apparently already decided to judge people on the basis of superficial signaling, and not their actual actions. That ship has sailed.
That's your version of what's happening here, not mine and I imagine there are lots of people who see it like I do.

Maybe you're too close to the groups you believe are being suppressed. But whatever it is, you are exaggerating the free speech oppression.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger 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 22nd April 2019, 08:57 PM   #284
I Am The Scum
Illuminator
 
I Am The Scum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,009
Originally Posted by sadhatter View Post
I could say I'm hung like a horse, doesn't make it true.

If they called themselves werewolves would you assume you needed silver bullets to kill them?
If someone labels themselves as a nazi, then I am going to treat them as though they are a nazi.

If you have any objections to my behavior in this regard, state your case.
I Am The Scum 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 22nd April 2019, 09:00 PM   #285
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 75,563
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Wearing a swastika declares one as a Nazi, and Nazis don't have a right to free speech, according to you.
That's you exaggerating again. Now if you are wearing that Nazi shirt because you want to join, be in or recruit white supremacists that want to attack people, then that is the problem. Not the shirt by itself.

Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Che Guevara was every bit as nasty and murderous as the Nazis. Wearing a Che t-shirt declares one as a believer in Che's ideology, and should likewise deprive one of the right to free speech on the same grounds, right?
So Castro and Guevara murdered thousands of ethnic... uh... um.. Sorry, I'm at a loss to finish that sentence.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger 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 22nd April 2019, 09:03 PM   #286
I Am The Scum
Illuminator
 
I Am The Scum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,009
I think some people have fallen so hard for the "pro-free speech for nazis" argument that they have begun to empathize with any inconvenience an avowed nazi might face. It even leads them to set aside rational moral consideration and instead lash out at their perceived opponents, which is... communists, I guess?
I Am The Scum 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 22nd April 2019, 10:18 PM   #287
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,520
Originally Posted by portlandatheist View Post
I disagree.

Quote:
“The next world war will result in the disappearance from the face of the earth not only of reactionary classes and dynasties, but also of entire reactionary peoples. And that, too, is a step forward.”
Engels
--Engels
It is a secular religion that believes in death to infidels.

Oh boy! I just love when right-wingers (and some times left-wingers, too) present quotations from Marx and Engels in this forum.
Edited by zooterkin:  <SNIP>
Edited for rule 12.


And now we have portlandatheist's quotation. What is it even supposed to mean? Well, we know what portlandatheist wants it to mean, but let me first remind you that Engels wrote it when he was in his 20s, almost 20 years before Marx published the first volume of Das Kapital, and it's nothing but a stupid prediction (and a wrong one, of course), not exactly a declaration of any intention. There's a short Wikipedia article about it - with context!:
Völkerabfälle
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx

Last edited by zooterkin; 25th April 2019 at 01:38 PM.
dann 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 22nd April 2019, 10:30 PM   #288
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,520
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
People who wear Che t-shirts are labeling themselves. How shall we treat them?

That would be me! Tell me what you think you know about Che.
Jon Lee Anderson wrote a very good biography about him if you want to know in detail: Che Guevara: A Revolutionary Life (GoodReads). Jon Lee Anderson has also debunked many of the myths that right-wingers spread about Che, so if you really want to know about Che, you should read it.

I bought my Che-shirts when I was with the international brigade in Caimito, Campamento Internacional Julio Antonio Mella, so in my case they're more than a fashion statement.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann 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 22nd April 2019, 10:34 PM   #289
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,520
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Is this forum a site recruiting white supremacists?

It's not, but you can't blame them for not trying. They're just so inept at it that it doesn't really work.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann 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 22nd April 2019, 10:48 PM   #290
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,520
Originally Posted by Stankeye View Post
How would you get the means of production moved from the people who own it to the workers?

I don't know. Do you have any suggestions?
If you suggest to go to the owners and politely ask them to stop exploiting the workers and hand over their loot, it doesn't seem to work.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann 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 22nd April 2019, 10:54 PM   #291
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,520
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
But sure, I have no problems if Facebook decides to not allow Che Guevara groups on their site. Are there any?

I do, obviously. I have no idea if there are any.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann 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 22nd April 2019, 11:47 PM   #292
Hlafordlaes
Disorder of Kilopi
 
Hlafordlaes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: State of Flux
Posts: 10,525
Wow. Tu quoque and whataboutism as proponents of various Big Truths claim the other stinks. On ISF. Truly, we have indeed become the empty ranting echo chamber we often bemoan in Community. Skepticism? Meh.

Speech that directly denies or seeks to suppress political equality does not deserve protection within the same political system that guarantees that political freedom, as it denies the very foundation of the freedom it claims to do so. Logical contradiction is not a valid foundation for law. It creates permanent conflict and undermines the legal system and democracy. Jim Crow, for starters. North Carolina. Babies in cages. The contradiction persists in the US because of the progressive enshrining of the Founding Fathers and Constitution in – vomit your guts out – "divinely inspired" or "übermensch" clothing. The GOP has publicly shoesized its democratic IQ in an attempt to make fascism sound like sunshine and flowers.

I hold to the exact same position wrt religious doctrine: those creeds that would deny freedom of religion to all other faiths cannot possibly deserve protection under that very same freedom, or it is no freedom at all. Currently, Christians are the worst offenders, but the other Abrahamics are close behind, taking turns with their threats.

The enemy of any single political freedom, or all such freedom, is totalitarian doctrine, be it religious or political. Historical inevitability, racial purity, nationalism, an Abrahamic/Hindu/Buddhist neck slicer... whatever: all crap. Perfect truths, on human faces, wear a death mask. They all deserve Hume's Guillotine.
__________________
Driftwood on an empty shore of the sea of meaninglessness. Irrelevant, weightless, inconsequential moment of existential hubris on the fast track to oblivion.
His real name is Count Douchenozzle von Stenchfahrter und Lichtendicks. - shemp

Last edited by Hlafordlaes; 22nd April 2019 at 11:50 PM.
Hlafordlaes 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 23rd April 2019, 12:06 AM   #293
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 14,814
Originally Posted by Hlafordlaes View Post
Speech that directly denies or seeks to suppress political equality does not deserve protection within the same political system that guarantees that political freedom, as it denies the very foundation of the freedom it claims to do so.
That is a very broad brush you are applying here. Who gets to be the arbiter of what speech deserves protection and what doesn't?

Originally Posted by Hlafordlaes View Post
Logical contradiction is not a valid foundation for law.
Rubbish. Every law must be firmly based on logic. Anything else and it is just deciding which lunatic will run the asylum.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 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 23rd April 2019, 12:08 AM   #294
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 75,563
Originally Posted by dann View Post
It's not, but you can't blame them for not trying. They're just so inept at it that it doesn't really work.


Your posts are great, especially the leg-work.

I will say, however, to be consistent, that unless Zig et al are planning violence, recruiting like-minded ideologues is not the violence thing that concerns me. And I don't see any violence recruiting in any post here, right or left.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 23rd April 2019 at 12:10 AM.
Skeptic Ginger 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 23rd April 2019, 12:23 AM   #295
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,520
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post


Your posts are great, especially the leg-work.

Unlike the right-wingers who pretend to know about them, I have read enough Marx and Engels to become suspicious whenever I see these quotations where they're supposed to preach violence. (And it was downright embarrassing to see Caveman1917 embrace one of them that was entirely made up!)
It usually doesn't require much legwork, but people who are out to prove the inherent violence in socialism and communism tend to be very unconcerned with the veracity of whatever they stumble upon in the internet.

Quote:
I will say, however, to be consistent, that unless Zig et al are planning violence, recruiting like-minded ideologues is not the violence thing that concerns me. And I don't see any violence recruiting in any post here, right or left.

Direct violence recruiting would violate the MA. Defending the first amendment rights of direct violence recruiters isn't, I guess, and I assume that this is the reason why advocates of direct violence recruiting restrict themselves to that.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx

Last edited by dann; 23rd April 2019 at 01:58 AM.
dann 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 23rd April 2019, 02:31 AM   #296
Eddie Dane
Philosopher
 
Eddie Dane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 6,652
I was a 'free speech absolutist' of sorts.

But the effects of social media has made me rethink my position.

The technology has made it possible to radicalise or dupe pockets of extremists. case in point: antivaxers are having a real impact on herd immunity and measles are making a comeback. There are enough idiots to make flat earth believers a thing.

Likewise, extremist groups can radicalise small groups and spur them to violent action. I don't think these ideas can spread beyond a fringe group, bot OTOH these fringe groups can be dangerous.

Just look what the Russian FSB have managed to accomplish in terms of stoking divisions.

If I was running a big social platform, I'd be very concerned that my platform would be instrumental in the next church bombing or mosque shooting.

Social media has changed the game and I'm afraid we must adjust.
__________________
Death to Videodrome! Long live the new flesh!
Eddie Dane 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 23rd April 2019, 02:54 AM   #297
Eddie Dane
Philosopher
 
Eddie Dane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 6,652
Originally Posted by Stout View Post
What ? you mean there's no massive nazi infestation on Facebook ? Ever since Trump got elected and the nazi warning flag was raised, I've been waiting for these guys to have stadium sized rallies.
Uh, they tried that.

It was called the Unite The Right ralley in Charlotsville.

The Alt-Right had major on-line succes and thought the time had come to move into meatspace. It was a major disaster for them. Not only did they get attacked and doxed. The ralley also exposed divisions in the 'movement' where all groups were actually competing with each other and all the leaders were backstabbing each other in hopes of becoming the Fuhrer of the Alt-Right. (There were leaked texts of Richard Spencer wanting David Duke to show up for co-branding, but tried to keep the after-party a secret from Duke so he could steal his thunder).

They melted back into the internet, but the jubilant mood had soured and then the bans came and the whole thing started to unravel.

I predict the whole thing will end up languishing in some corner of the dark web.
__________________
Death to Videodrome! Long live the new flesh!
Eddie Dane 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 23rd April 2019, 03:17 AM   #298
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,493
Originally Posted by I Am The Scum View Post
I think some people have fallen so hard for the "pro-free speech for nazis" argument that they have begun to empathize with any inconvenience an avowed nazi might face. It even leads them to set aside rational moral consideration and instead lash out at their perceived opponents, which is... communists, I guess?
And there is the funny bit that refusing to serve gays for moral reasons is good and shouldn't be criticized but how anyone could find something morally objectionable about nazis is weird and off putting.

So we can clearly get a list of things that are worse than nazis. Breasts, gays, are clear answers what else do we have?
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle 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 23rd April 2019, 03:20 AM   #299
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,493
Originally Posted by Eddie Dane View Post
I was a 'free speech absolutist' of sorts.
Look free speech is great, look how much the free speech supporters are cool with the rohingya genocide. As long as the right groups face genocide and violence why should we try to stop it?

Facebook censoring the calls to kill all the rohingya should be right up their in their outrage as censoring things like nazis.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle 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 23rd April 2019, 03:25 AM   #300
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,520
PS
Stephen Hicks, PhD, the guy that ahhell got his Marx quotation from (mentioned above), also has the Engels quotation. At least he has the honesty to link to the full texts, so I recommend taking a look at his page, at the quotations. He has only five of them, and I assume that that is all that he has been able to find to support his idea that Marx and Engels were preachers of violence.
Read the quotations, read the context they come from, and notice the context that Stephen Hicks tries to make them fit into!
Marx's philosophy and the *necessity* (!!!) of violent politics
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx

Last edited by dann; 23rd April 2019 at 03:27 AM.
dann 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 23rd April 2019, 04:08 AM   #301
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 14,814
Originally Posted by Eddie Dane View Post
I was a 'free speech absolutist' of sorts.

But the effects of social media has made me rethink my position.

The technology has made it possible to radicalise or dupe pockets of extremists. case in point: antivaxers are having a real impact on herd immunity and measles are making a comeback. There are enough idiots to make flat earth believers a thing.

Likewise, extremist groups can radicalise small groups and spur them to violent action. I don't think these ideas can spread beyond a fringe group, bot OTOH these fringe groups can be dangerous.

Just look what the Russian FSB have managed to accomplish in terms of stoking divisions.

If I was running a big social platform, I'd be very concerned that my platform would be instrumental in the next church bombing or mosque shooting.

Social media has changed the game and I'm afraid we must adjust.
There is not and there has never been "absolute" freedom of speech. Speech that is (falsely) defamatory, threatens harm or incites others to commit harm has always been unlawful and rightfully so.

But you now want to extend limitations on free speech so that they extend to mere opinions. This is not acceptable.

Your antivaxer example is a poor one. Once these views started getting popular, they were rebutted in the mainstream media. The end result of this kookiness, the public know more about the benefits and need for vaccination than ever before. They are also better equipped to deal with nonsensical claims about vaccination.

Your belief that we should now restrict the freedom of opinions lest the terrorists react violently is a terrifying one. Their aim is to cause fear and dissent throughout the world and curbing freedoms is one way to hand victory over to them. They must never win.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 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 23rd April 2019, 04:14 AM   #302
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,151
Originally Posted by dann View Post
I do, obviously. I have no idea if there are any.
I searched, but only found a few. Two were in Spanish, and the other one was in a language that just came out as symbols on my screen. I don't think they are anywhere near as common as white supremacist groups.
wareyin 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 23rd April 2019, 05:02 AM   #303
Eddie Dane
Philosopher
 
Eddie Dane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 6,652
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Look free speech is great, look how much the free speech supporters are cool with the rohingya genocide. As long as the right groups face genocide and violence why should we try to stop it?

Facebook censoring the calls to kill all the rohingya should be right up their in their outrage as censoring things like nazis.
As much as we like to talk about the dangers of violent political groups using social media to recruit in the West, the argument is much more strong in many developing nations with sharper religious or ethnic divisions.

I've listened to the Joe Rogan interview with Jack Dorset (Twitter CEO) and was actually amazed he didn't raise this point himself.

Almost every ethnic/religious/class atrocity I can think of was kicked off by some form of fake news. 'The Jews are poisoning the wells' went by word-of-mouth, Marie Antoinette said 'let them eat cake' went by a pamphlet, the 'Tutsis are plotting to take over' went by the radio, and we've already had 'Muslims are making Buddhists sterile by poisoning their food' via Facebook.

Imagine being in Dorsey's position and your platform becomes the medium for the next Ruandan genocide. Something like that can go amazingly fast.
__________________
Death to Videodrome! Long live the new flesh!
Eddie Dane 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 23rd April 2019, 05:10 AM   #304
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 14,814
Originally Posted by Eddie Dane View Post
As much as we like to talk about the dangers of violent political groups using social media to recruit in the West, the argument is much more strong in many developing nations with sharper religious or ethnic divisions.
So your solution is to crack down of freedom of speech in the west?
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 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 23rd April 2019, 05:21 AM   #305
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 87,222
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
So your solution is to crack down of freedom of speech in the west?
Facebook is multinational.
__________________
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 23rd April 2019, 05:24 AM   #306
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 14,814
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Facebook is multinational.
That wasn't Eddie's argument.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 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 23rd April 2019, 05:25 AM   #307
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 13,261
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
There is not and there has never been "absolute" freedom of speech. Speech that is (falsely) defamatory, threatens harm or incites others to commit harm has always been unlawful and rightfully so.

But you now want to extend limitations on free speech so that they extend to mere opinions. This is not acceptable.

Your antivaxer example is a poor one. Once these views started getting popular, they were rebutted in the mainstream media. The end result of this kookiness, the public know more about the benefits and need for vaccination than ever before. They are also better equipped to deal with nonsensical claims about vaccination.

Your belief that we should now restrict the freedom of opinions lest the terrorists react violently is a terrifying one. Their aim is to cause fear and dissent throughout the world and curbing freedoms is one way to hand victory over to them. They must never win.
That's not the end result of the antivacc kookiness tho. The end result is the triumphant return of long since thought extinct diseases and outbreaks and deaths.

That
's not acceptable
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se 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 23rd April 2019, 05:30 AM   #308
Eddie Dane
Philosopher
 
Eddie Dane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 6,652
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
So your solution is to crack down of freedom of speech in the west?
Like you said yourself, that freedom was never absolute anyway.

I agree with you that restricting it further is going to cost us. Especially as Social platforms invite outside 'experts' who tend to be left-leaning activists and who will simply move down the chain as they run out of real Nazis. People do not have a tendency to make themselves unemployed.

I've recently heard some clip of Alex Jones ranting about how drag queens visiting schools (yes, there is an incredibly tone-deaf campaign were outrageously dressed drag queens come read to young kids) is just a form of grooming and to lower the kid's defences so that they will be more compliant when they get kidnapped, raped and killed by men in dresses.

Jones has an audience of a few million. I'm sure 80% find him a joke, 20% take him somewhat seriously, and a subset of that believes every word that comes out of his mouth. Imagine in what kind of ******-up, angry, paranoid world you'd be living if you actually believed the world functioned as Alex Jones tells you.
Keep that paranoid media-barrage up long enough and it's only a matter of time before some nut shoots some poor person walking out a gay bar after a Ru Paul karaoke night.

It's inevitable that those companies will restrict speech because the responsibilities associated with those platforms are way too big to take risks, and possibly be held accountable for violent outcomes.
__________________
Death to Videodrome! Long live the new flesh!
Eddie Dane 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 23rd April 2019, 05:45 AM   #309
Eddie Dane
Philosopher
 
Eddie Dane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 6,652
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
That wasn't Eddie's argument.
Who is a danger to society has to be looked at on a case-by-case basis.

Look I understand why this is opposed. I consume quite a bit of way-too-edgy content. I've followed my share of conspiracy theorists, alt-right podcasts, anarchist Youtubers etc. Believe me, I've enjoyed the Wild West of edgy opinions for twenty years. It's practically my hobby. But society will think it is more important that their local Synagogue doesn't get shot up then that Richard Spencer gets to have a say on Twitter. More important that their kid doesn't get a preventable disease than that some uninformed soccer mom gets to play healer on Facebook.
__________________
Death to Videodrome! Long live the new flesh!
Eddie Dane 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 23rd April 2019, 05:56 AM   #310
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 87,222
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
That wasn't Eddie's argument.
Never said it was his argument. Just supplying some information that you didn't seem to 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 23rd April 2019, 06:03 AM   #311
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,493
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
There is not and there has never been "absolute" freedom of speech. Speech that is (falsely) defamatory, threatens harm or incites others to commit harm has always been unlawful and rightfully so.
That is not even remotely true, as many people here have shown merely wanting the jews or gays to all be rounded up and put to death is a political position and so protected speech. Advocating ethnic cleansing is protected speech. So clearly the harm and such is BS. Legally you have to be threatening an individual, wanting to exterminate the gays is of course fine. Which is why this hate speech is fine because they are not targeting individuals with their threats of violence but groups and so it is protected speech that facebook must permit.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle 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 23rd April 2019, 06:06 AM   #312
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,493
Originally Posted by Eddie Dane View Post
Like you said yourself, that freedom was never absolute anyway.

I agree with you that restricting it further is going to cost us. Especially as Social platforms invite outside 'experts' who tend to be left-leaning activists and who will simply move down the chain as they run out of real Nazis. People do not have a tendency to make themselves unemployed.

I've recently heard some clip of Alex Jones ranting about how drag queens visiting schools (yes, there is an incredibly tone-deaf campaign were outrageously dressed drag queens come read to young kids)
Yep like allowing gay people to teach it is fundamentally wrong, all deviants need to be rounded up. We must enforce total conformity to the children and any suggestion of difference must be beaten out of them.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle 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 23rd April 2019, 06:07 AM   #313
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,493
Originally Posted by Eddie Dane View Post
Who is a danger to society has to be looked at on a case-by-case basis.

Look I understand why this is opposed. I consume quite a bit of way-too-edgy content. I've followed my share of conspiracy theorists, alt-right podcasts, anarchist Youtubers etc. Believe me, I've enjoyed the Wild West of edgy opinions for twenty years. It's practically my hobby. But society will think it is more important that their local Synagogue doesn't get shot up then that Richard Spencer gets to have a say on Twitter. More important that their kid doesn't get a preventable disease than that some uninformed soccer mom gets to play healer on Facebook.
Nonsense people are clear here that the odd shooting as long as it is at a synagogue, mosque or black church is just the price that minorities have to pay for those fine white supremacist to get their words out.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle 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 23rd April 2019, 06:19 AM   #314
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,736
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Really?

I believe exaggerating applies to your complaints.
You wish. Facebook is not the internet, as much as they'd like to be.

Any time one of those political parties get's themselves in the news anyone is free to simply google them and find a way to connect with them.

It's easy to find anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim speech without going anywhere near Facebook.

This may look good from a Facebook PR perspective but in terms of shutting down anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim speech, it's but a drop in the bucket.
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 23rd April 2019, 06:29 AM   #315
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,736
Originally Posted by Eddie Dane View Post
Uh, they tried that.

It was called the Unite The Right ralley in Charlotsville.

The Alt-Right had major on-line succes and thought the time had come to move into meatspace. It was a major disaster for them. Not only did they get attacked and doxed. The ralley also exposed divisions in the 'movement' where all groups were actually competing with each other and all the leaders were backstabbing each other in hopes of becoming the Fuhrer of the Alt-Right. (There were leaked texts of Richard Spencer wanting David Duke to show up for co-branding, but tried to keep the after-party a secret from Duke so he could steal his thunder).

They melted back into the internet, but the jubilant mood had soured and then the bans came and the whole thing started to unravel.

I predict the whole thing will end up languishing in some corner of the dark web.
That,s my point exactly. These guys can't even get off the ground because their numbers are so tiny and given the infighting withing and between these groups, they *probably* never will.

Hey, you're Dutch right ? Is there any truth to a story I ran across that had a Dutch politician advocating a special Halal beach, or special Halal areas of beaches because Dutch Muslims weren't happy with what they are seeing on Dutch beaches ?

Reason I'm asking is I saw it on some weird website. I can't remember which one but since I don't speak Dutch running down the veracity of this claim is rather difficult.

If it's true then would criticism of such an idea amount to anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant speech and if so, is that criticism something that should be banned from Facebook ?
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 23rd April 2019, 06:54 AM   #316
Eddie Dane
Philosopher
 
Eddie Dane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 6,652
Originally Posted by Stout View Post
That,s my point exactly. These guys can't even get off the ground because their numbers are so tiny and given the infighting withing and between these groups, they *probably* never will.

Hey, you're Dutch right ? Is there any truth to a story I ran across that had a Dutch politician advocating a special Halal beach, or special Halal areas of beaches because Dutch Muslims weren't happy with what they are seeing on Dutch beaches ?

Reason I'm asking is I saw it on some weird website. I can't remember which one but since I don't speak Dutch running down the veracity of this claim is rather difficult.

If it's true then would criticism of such an idea amount to anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant speech and if so, is that criticism something that should be banned from Facebook ?
Yeah, I'm Dutch.

The story is from the Hague (Den Haag).

*Opens can of worms*

OK, the Hague has a significant Muslim minority, and they now have their own local party. Trollingly called the Party of Unity.

A prominent member is Arnoud van Doorn. Mister van Doorn was previously a member of the Party of Freedom, the notorious anti-Islam party of Geert Wilders. One fine morning Mister van Doorn decided he was the wrong kind of extremist and abandoned Dutch Nationalism to become an enthusiastic and activist Muslim. I think he gets paid via some Islamic non-profit that gets money from Saudi Arabia.

He makes a point of being divisive.

This party has now said that Muslims are not comfortable being at the beach with scantly-clad white people and since the nudists have their separate section of the local beach, they want a Muslim section.

For now, it was just headline-grabbing and trolling.

There is some debate about this online from all sides, and to my knowledge, there are no restrictions on such debate.

EDIT: could that happen? I very much think a debate about this could be made impossible if the Social Media platforms delegate their curating to left-wing activists and do not ensure a diverse panel to weigh their decisions to ban people.

We've already seen universities in the US employ 'diversity officers' who promptly started to exclude white men from their events to increase 'diversity'.

I also think that as the platforms start to restrict speech, sane opposition to mass immigration, even if framed as an economic argument, will be the first victim.

And that would kick the whole thing into a new phase. You see, now the Nazi's run to certain platforms like GAB and these platforms become essentially racist platforms. But as platforms ban less extreme people, these too will flee to alternative platforms and that is when places like GAB will stop being just a place to quarantine Nazis, and will become more vibrant and will again give the extreme right an audience outside its own ranks.

I think it is very important that only the fringes on the right (Nazis) and left (Stalinists) be excluded from the main platforms. But I think the slippery slope is real and there will be never-ending scope-creep.
__________________
Death to Videodrome! Long live the new flesh!

Last edited by Eddie Dane; 23rd April 2019 at 07:04 AM.
Eddie Dane 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 23rd April 2019, 07:17 AM   #317
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 7,151
Originally Posted by Stout View Post
You wish. Facebook is not the internet, as much as they'd like to be.

Any time one of those political parties get's themselves in the news anyone is free to simply google them and find a way to connect with them.

It's easy to find anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim speech without going anywhere near Facebook.

This may look good from a Facebook PR perspective but in terms of shutting down anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim speech, it's but a drop in the bucket.
That's odd, because according to the free speech* defenders, not letting them have groups on Facebook is taking away their freedom of speech.


*Free speech for hate groups, and only the right kind of hate groups, though.
wareyin 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 23rd April 2019, 07:31 AM   #318
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,736
Thanks Eddie

IMO it would be a shame to see discussions over such issues shut down or be limited to one side only, especially if there's a "clash of cultures" component to it.
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 23rd April 2019, 07:35 AM   #319
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,736
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
That's odd, because according to the free speech* defenders, not letting them have groups on Facebook is taking away their freedom of speech.


*Free speech for hate groups, and only the right kind of hate groups, though.
I keep hearing about this but I rarely see it. Is this coming form people who really don't know what American style freedom of speech really means or that political affiliation is not a protected class ?

Sometimes people are shocked when I tell them that in Canada, we don't have freedom of speech like they do in the USA. We gave that up.
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 23rd April 2019, 07:48 AM   #320
Eddie Dane
Philosopher
 
Eddie Dane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 6,652
Originally Posted by Stout View Post
Thanks Eddie

IMO it would be a shame to see discussions over such issues shut down or be limited to one side only, especially if there's a "clash of cultures" component to it.
The Internet should be used for debate and dialogue.

One of the problems of the platforms is that they create bubbles in which people of a certain bend stew in their own opinions.

Sam Harris interviewed a lady on his podcast who had investigated the Russian social media 'meddling'.

Their MO was as follows: set up or reinforce spaces that emphasise pride in the group (right, left, white, black, doesn't matter), then feed those groups negative information and fake news about the "others". The ideally get them to have physical confrontation IRL.

You basically get people to attack a strawman of what they really are.

Yet, when people actually talk, they discover that the "other" isn't some evil entity but just human.

I've posted this before and probably will again, but there was a pro-Trump event that got protested by a group of Black Lives Matter activists. But instead of getting in a fight, the Trumpers gave the BLM people the microphone and it turned out they had a lot of common ground.
The Trumpers were just working-class white people who wanted jobs and the BLM guys wanted dignity and recognition of police brutality.
Both groups hated bad cops.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fukHd60uAkI&t=272s
__________________
Death to Videodrome! Long live the new flesh!
Eddie Dane 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 04:06 AM.
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.