Comment on [deleted]
masterofballs@wolfballs.com 2 years agoP2P databases would be good. I probably should work on that eventually.
I'm not interested in hosting white nationalist content. Im not a white nationalist. I love hanging out in China town. Im just interested in allowing the most freedom possible while not turning away users.
Getting a little black pilled on it. It might be worth while to have a instance that turns away leftest ideologies. Just so we can build a base of good users. That would need a big talk with all the users here though.
Anyway the exact formula I have not figured out yet. Even gab isn't really free speech. They allow Nazi content but ban antifa stuff pretty sure. Even if its not in their terms of service.
Spotted_Lady@wolfballs.com 2 years ago
I said pro-white, not WN or Nazism, but I gave that more as an example and was thinking more generally.
As for Antifa, I'd say they are a terrorist group, so I see no violation of free speech if you disallow groups that have inherently violent ideologies. Just talking about making America great is not in itself terrorism or violence. But hosting a group that sprays bleach or acid at the cops and teaches how to use lasers to permanently blind the opposition should be a no-no anywhere.
Yeah, I'm just spit-balling.
Esperantist@wolfballs.com 2 years ago
Having met a bunch of self-identified antifa people I disagree about them. It's a nebulous label which isn't exclusively self-applied, much like the label of WN or Nazi, and as such there's no "quality control" on who is or isn't antifa. Anyone can call themselves antifa, or be called antifa. Ideologically there's no requirement for violence, although plenty of them are certainly prone to it, and it doesn't seem right to blanket a diverse set of views as terrorist. I hate to use the slippery slope argument because generally they're pretty weak, but it really is a slippery slope. Without a formally agreed upon definition, you could basically designate any leftist as a terrorist this way.
Spotted_Lady@wolfballs.com 2 years ago
Hell, call them all terrorists. If they don't like it, then stop calling the rest of us Nazis and fascists.
As far as I am concerned, nearly every Leftist is a terrorist and deserves to be treated as such.
Esperantist@wolfballs.com 2 years ago
I can only say so much to change your mind on any particular label, but I think my biggest consideration with this blanket labeling of groups (be they groups I agree with or not) is just the history of how the American government treats "terrorists" - and I'm using that word loosely. Once you're designated a terrorist, all bets are off and despite what's on paper, you don't really have any rights. You don't really even have to go back far to find examples of this.
The Abu Ghraib prison operated by the US military held people that, by the admission of the former commanding officer of the prison, tortured and executed people who she estimated were 90% innocent. They were just people in the wrong place at the wrong time who happened to be called a terrorist by the wrong person.
Are you sure it's a good idea to throw the "terrorist" label around, given what our government does to people who get called terrorists? What happens when it's you, or your family, or your friends who are on the receiving end of that? I'm pretty far left. I certainly don't think I deserve that kind of treatment for holding the extremist position that we should have 16 years of taxpayer funded schooling instead of 12, or that we shouldn't have starving kids in the richest country on Earth. Do you?
I guess all I'm saying here is that we have to be really careful with how we use words.
goldenballs@wolfballs.com 2 years ago
Surely just being anti-left is the most inclusive of all...?
Spotted_Lady@wolfballs.com 2 years ago
With all due respect, I was speaking within a specific context to a specific person with a response tailored just to them. And if you go further up, you'd see I was speaking of a hypothetical place, not the direction of this site.
My point is that if one wants a pro-white equality site (not Nazi shit and other degeneracy), they should have that right as a matter of principle. Period. They shouldn't be forced to be inclusive or have "diversity."
I apologize if this comes across too strongly.
goldenballs@wolfballs.com 2 years ago
I aren't bothered... and I know...
We might well agree that antifa are toxic fascists, but i don't see how banning violence is workable. Freedom fighters are often smeared as terrorists. These are just words. It's like an oppressive government making unreasonable laws to criminalize normal and legitimate behaviour - a recent example is the govt Nova Scotia criminalizing protest, by abusing unreasonable laws made for another illegitimate purpose and mission creeping them to apply for yet another illegitimate purpose. Nova Scotians should be protesting outside their provincial govt..
I agree that people should be free to comment and also give everyone else the freedom to take the piss out of them... Which is precisely what lefties try to do
Calling people terrorists is problematic, because why aren't globalist bankers called that too? I don't think you can define animherently violent ideology. There's plenty of violence in religious books.
The original reddit way of just ignoring people seems simpler. If the ideology is the problem, liberate the criticism and mockery of it, and add an admin cost to that kind of free expression... Like a hypocrite tax... Like communists could be forced to run their servers as unpaid collectives, so that they're shit, and nobody wants to use them. Let the market decide as much as possible.
I mean you can go the dark web, make death threats, and people will ril the shit out of the threat issuer... they are not taken seriously, and lose network, and that's the admin cost of being a dickhead.