It is wholly disingenuous to conflate the push to de-platform groups that mean to perpetuate hate and violence to a generalist push to control the flow of information. That point is complete and utter bullshit.
People such as myself that advocate de-platforming bigot do not give a single solitary fuck about controlling information. I want to *reduce harm*. That's it.
Anyone that gets on a high horse about how that idea is SLIPPERY SLOPE is purposefully trying to derail the point of it.
As we've seen on the fedi, any neutral stance on 'politics' results in bigots being able to harass and abuse at will. We've seen this with Masto main and mstdnDOTio two of the most high profile platforms run by white guys who have refused repeatedly to take a hard stand.
There is no such thing as having a neutral platform. Either you are against bigots or you're not. There is no middle ground.
Attemping to play the middle *always* favors bigots. ALWAYS.
It is delusional to believe otherwise
And one of the things I see constantly is white guys from writeDOTas, to pixelfed, to fosstodon, bitterly complain about having to choose a side and we should focus on 'more important things'
This is a coward's argument. These people want to be viewed as influencers and thought leaders, but don't have the fucking courage or maybe ethics to make a decision either way, so they conflate their resistance to morality as an actual political stance.
And it's not. They are just cowards.
To equate the push of victims of targeted abuse to de-platform bigots to FACISM is the argument of a person that simply doesn't want to get involved because they are afraid to experience 1/10th of the abuse marginalized communities face on a daily basis.
And what we're seeing, which I gotta give Gab a bit of credit for, is how many 'leaders' in the FOSS game are just hypocritical cowards when it comes down to it.
And we should not be listening to anything they have to say.
Kev, Dansup, Kananii, Gargron, Angristan etc all have the same thing in common: they conflate their feelings to morality as if they are comparable. As if their feelings about de-platforming bigot have any relevance to keeping people safe.
And they don't. None of their feelings matter on this topic because they are not *targets*. They want to believe their myopia is universal and it's not.
In the push against bigots, their feelings just matter more than safety.
And that's how hate spreads.
One of the main reasons I'm disliked by a few circles on here is because I refuse to get pulled into arguments that are really about someone's random, half baked feelings rather than the topic itself.
And that's what I see happening around this whole 'debate' of de-platforming hate groups.
We SHOULD be de-platforming hate groups. That's a no brainer. Any point that takes us away from that is simply self serving and based on a personal bias.
It's not a hard choice... well if you're not a bigot
@Are0h i would just love for someone to have an actual, not-hypothetical-mental-exercise example of anti racism / anti bigotry halting the otherwise free flow of ideas and non-hate speech. *folds arms* i’ll wait
@mood History tells us the complete opposite, that's why they can't.
That's why we're the debate usually centers around some soft white guys feelings rather than the actual topic.
@Are0h emotions should always be avoided in serious judgement. We have to detach from a situation to see its effects. Emotions are best known for clouding judgement.
@jack I would disagree with this, and empathy needs to be a part of ethical decisions moving forward.
Denying that is just going in circles.
@Are0h empathy absolutely should be a part of this. Empathy is a symptom of detachment. We have to look outside ourselves for empathy to work.
@jack Again, strong disagree as empathy is the opposite of detachment.
I have no idea why you are so dead set on detachment from emotion as a way forward, but it's really strange.
@Are0h I’m not. I’m saying we need to be able to see both sides in an argument. When you’re talking about suffering children, the argument that keeps them suffering has no side.
@jack Yeah, man. That's empathy. You're describing empathy.
And that's simply not true. We're literally seeing in real time that isn't true.
@Are0h we need to be able to understand our feelings. This means looking inside, and out. I’m not set on detachment. I’m saying somethings are easy. Like helping kids. It shouldn’t require a judgement. But complex problems sometimes need us to take two steps back. We should feel and care. We’re humans. But fear and hate are also feelings.
@jack And inherently there is nothing wrong with fear or hate. The problem is what we do with those feelings. Denying them only exacerbates the issue, as, again, we are literally seeing there results of everyday.
I agree taking a step back is fine advice, but removing our feelings from the process is the exact opposite of what we should be doing.
@Are0h now you get what I was trying to say. :).
@jack Uhm, no, we weren't saying the same things. I'm never an advocate for pushing down one's emotional for the sake of decision making.
I'm not sure how you've got to point where what we're saying is somehow equitable. Because it's not.
@Are0h I was trying to back you up. We aren’t saying the same thing. I was saying something incorrectly. But you got it to the point were it was what I had meant. That’s why I boosted that response. :)
@jack Ha, that's not what I got at all from what you were doing, but ok.
@johntherun @Are0h this is very fair. “We” (straight white guys) do have to learn to see from the perspective of the oppressed. Elitists make it easier for some of us. But we still can’t really imagine the type of oppression that is racism. Thinking about problems different ways should be important to everyone. That was my addition. Because if you don’t feel pain, you will never understand those who do. And too many are suffering.
@Are0h also, take not. I only said we should avoid emotion in judgement. We shouldn’t avoid it while making our case for judgement though.
@jack We're going to agree to disagree.
@Are0h Kaninii, Gargron and Dansup don’t federate with Gab
Angristan is the only one ...
( i don’t wanna be a troll here)
@Roland I didn't say they did.
joke about nazis
@Are0h "Guys we'll just debate the nazis using the marketplace of ideas... aaaaaaaaaaand they've taken control of the government."
@Are0h I guess you are aware of the paraox of tolerance? That's exactly that
@Are0h brings this tweet to mind
OCR Output (chars: 258)
Q Dr. Jens Foell
@ FMRI guy
ing to @TrancewithMe
As we say in Germany, if there's a
Nazi at the table and 10 other
people sitting there talking to him,
you got a table with 11 Nazis.
10:18pm - 13 Feb 2018 - Twitter for iPhone
To anyone who can't understand this post:
Let's say one person is asking you to eat an entire bar of soap and someone else is telling you not to do that.
What would it say about you if you decided the best thing to do was to eat half a bar of soap?
@Are0h I saw that account used the N word to yell at an admin
curiously, not a black admin
so in addition to being extremely racist they're also inconsistent
@Are0h Liberalism in a nutshell.
@Are0h i never have anything ueseful to add to your inspiring entries. still true. so i thought, let's do a one-take cover of some relevant song that i know i can't perform without embarrassing myself to hell (selected: nofx's perfect government). keep it as kompramat for if ever i truly fail to act as an ally against the proud h'whites or whatever these gabbos are, i guess. & please do keep f'cking with the tolerance of hate. peace love (& other empty h'white sans-pragmatism rhetoric).
@Are0h Yes! I've started describing my strategy as one of harm reduction recently.
@darius I like that context because it frames on who is actually doing something of worth vs. who is just talking.
If you're not helping someone not yourself, what's really they point of your DIVERSITY efforts.
@bamfic I agree with a lot of this.
The very acts white people need to resolve this are conditioned out of them by adherence to whiteness.
That's the irony of that ideology. It teaches you to hate you ideas, strategies you need to live and grow and be a whole person.
That's why I refer it as a culture of death. There's a reason the most resourced social group on the planet is also the one that is fading the fastest.
@Are0h the slippery slope is a well established fallacy. I can't believe people are actually acknowledging it as a valid line of argument.
@slapula Well, people who argue this aren't really basing it anything but their feelings and myopia. That's what makes them bigots.
I surprising part for a lot of people is seeing how many LEADERS are susceptible to this non-sense.
@Are0h yup. everyone talks about the "slippery slope" of censoring these guys, but never the slippery slope of giving them a platform in the first place
It's a slippery slope! First they came for...
wait, what's this poem about again
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!