Surely just being anti-left is the most inclusive of all...?
Comment on [deleted]
Spotted_Lady@wolfballs.com 2 years agoI 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.
goldenballs@wolfballs.com 2 years ago
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.
Spotted_Lady@wolfballs.com 2 years ago
My issue with sites like I propose is that there needs to be a way to keep the crackpots and plants out. So, in that case, have a regular site and have special private rooms for vetted folks to discuss certain topics. Those rooms could require a subscription fee and background checks. I wouldn't want real or fake skinheads taking over. Every time there is a new free speech site, the Left finds a way to cause violence and pin it on them. That isn't much different than Nero having the city set on fire and blaming Christians, whether he actually played a violin or similar or not.
You have a good point. International bankers are financial terrorists.
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.
Spotted_Lady@wolfballs.com 2 years ago
To me, those are just leftist talking points. That is what they say when they are not in control or are grappling for more control. All but them are terrorists.
And I see too many on the Right or somewhere in the middle who want the right to be harmed, or they'd be fighting no holds barred and wishing harm on those who are harming their people, and may Emperor Constantine's religion of cuckery be damned.
At this point, anyone who makes excuses for Leftists marginalizing Conservatives is part of the Left, and anyone making excuses for non-whites who harm whites is either an enemy or a traitor.
I get what you are saying and see it as misapplied. Personally, I never came here to debate, only to express myself and share. I tend to like to state my opinions and move on.