Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard
In a coordinated campaign across 14 states, the German police on Tuesday raided the homes of 36 people accused of hateful postings over social media, including threats, coercion and incitement to racism.
Most of the raids concerned politically motivated right-wing incitement, according to the Federal Criminal Police Office, whose officers conducted home searches and interrogations. But the raids also targeted two people accused of left-wing extremist content, as well as one person accused of making threats or harassment based on someone's sexual orientation.
"The still high incidence of punishable hate posting shows a need for police action," Holger Münch, president of the Federal Criminal Police Office, said in a statement. "Our free society must not allow a climate of fear, threat, criminal violence and violence either on the street or on the internet."
The raids come as Germans are debating the draft of a new social media law aimed at cracking down on hate speech, a measure that an array of experts said was unconstitutional at a parliamentary hearing on Monday.
The measure, championed by Justice Minister Heiko Maas for passage this month, would fine Facebook, Twitter and other outlets up to $53 million (50 million euros) if they failed to remove hate speech and other forms of illegal content.
The left ladies and gentlemen.
Related Stories
The German Parliament has passed the "Network Enforcement Act" or "NetzDG":
The German Parliament passed a new social media law1, called the "Network Enforcement Act" ("NetzDG" in German), that punishes social media companies with fines ranging from 5 million to 50 million euro if they don't immediately remove "obviously illegal" content. Human rights groups have called the law rushed and harmful to free expression.
According to the German Federal Criminal Police Office, hate crime has grown by 300% in the past two years alone. In a speech1 today, Germany's Federal Minister of Justice and Consumer Protection, Heiko Maas, said that freedom of expression is a great asset to have in an open society, but it ends where criminal law begins.
[...] At a recent hearing, of the 10 experts who were invited to testify, eight criticized the law that was still in draft stage at the time. Five of them said the law would be incompatible with the German Constitution. The Network Enforcement Act was slightly modified since then and, for instance, the mention of companies having to implement automatic content filters has been removed. However, a new "self-regulatory" body will have to be created, whose operation costs will be paid by the private industry. The companies will be able to send some content for evaluation if they are uncertain of its legality. It's not clear how transparent or accountable this body will be, according to the European Digital Rights (EDRi) non-profit organization.
A recent post on ProPublica has shown that Facebook's own censorship policies are inconsistent at best. For instance, the company would censor hate speech against white people, but not against certain Muslim groups that were considered radicalized by Facebook's low-paid contractors. It's also not the first time Facebook's inconsistent censorship rules have attracted the public's attention, whether it was about old and popular war pictures or blocking competitors' links.
1 Linked page is in German. --Ed.
Previously:
Germany Raids Homes of 36 People Accused of Hateful Postings Over Social Media
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 25 2017, @10:21PM (16 children)
National Socialist Basic Income Forever
Final Death to Soylent Niggers
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 25 2017, @11:31PM (15 children)
I'm thinking they come from a single source.
It's time to start marking them as SPAM.
Let's get this repeated abuser put on a short leash/banned.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 25 2017, @11:39PM
How stupid are you really?
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 25 2017, @11:42PM (3 children)
Why? They're harmless. Just ignore them.
(Score: 3, Informative) by lentilla on Sunday June 25 2017, @11:50PM (1 child)
They're about as harmless as flies at a barbecue. One or two can be ignored. Too many and everyone packs up and goes home early.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @12:04AM
Downmods are about as harmless as flies at a barbecue. One or two can be ignored. Too many and the troll gets pissed off and bypasses your stupid fucking bans and becomes a prolific shitposter because your site deserves to be full of shit.
What did Obi-Wan say about striking me down? Good work, idiots!
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 25 2017, @11:55PM
No no no! Every AC needs to be banned permanently! Except the one special AC who self identifies as Gewg-Jewg-Jewj-Niger-Nigger!!
The ORIGINAL NIGGER is the ONLY NIGGER and the ONE TRUE NIGGER deserves PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT!!!!!!!!!
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 25 2017, @11:53PM (4 children)
The irony of bitching about this on a post that is ostentatiously about free speech....
Free speech means just that. If you draw a line somewhere then you can move that line around to please whatever political whim you want.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @12:24AM (2 children)
Col. Kurz: "You don't approve of my methods?"
Capt. Willard: "Frankly, Sir, I don't see any method"
Prepare for Apocaylpse Now analogy:
AC: "And you want to censor the free speech right to keep posting "n****" posts?
Me: "Frankly, I do not see any speech. I see flies. Flies that are born in shit, grow out of shit, and basically have nothing constructive to contribute to a conversation because they are just shit. I mean, what can you say to shit? For that matter, what is there really to say about shit? Where is Miyamoto Musashi when you need him?" (The reference is to "Samurai" [imdb.com] (1954) where Musash asks the rabble to keep the noise down, and they all come up the stairs to beat him up, 'cause, you know, violence and racist alt-right! 白右! Musashi, eating his lunch, remarks that they are "too many flies", and grabs one out of the air with his chopsticks. The rabble all retreat. )
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @02:45AM (1 child)
Perhaps. I still see it as hypocrisy. Saying some speech is 'ok' and other is 'not allowed'. When you draw a line you will find yourself on the wrong side of that line at some point. People in power do not give one fuck about your line. What you say can and will be used against you. Count on it. Freedom of speech was put in our bill of rights for a reason. The lawyers who wrote it down saw how the gov fucked over thousands every day because they said the 'wrong thing'. They were fairly harmless and just angry. Instead if you making underground they become ensconced in their values. Count on it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @08:16AM
Shit.
(Score: 2) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Monday June 26 2017, @11:21PM
So it's OK to shout "FIRE!!! RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!!!" in a crowded theatre?
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @12:06AM
Ignore inappropriate behaviour...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @04:23AM (3 children)
Its funny, this site is ostensibly for free speech. So how can they ban a shitposter and maintain their values. Also, the person is obviously capable of getting around IP bans so it isn't even possible. Don't feed the trolls is the only thing that can be done, obviously being downmodded upsets their sensitivities so take solace in that.
But this isn't a government site, it is a community of techy nerds. Should we implement such riles? They already ban people for certain infractions so it is possible. Perhaps codes of conduct would be better than letting society get to the point of legislating against offensive speech.
(Score: 2) by Wootery on Monday June 26 2017, @08:06AM (1 child)
Not really. The mods-to-website-size ratio is high enough that they could just delete the individual comments. Or, if we're terrified of censorship, perhaps have them auto-hide and tagged as spam, so they can still be viewed if people go the extra mile.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday June 26 2017, @10:17AM
There are no "mods" in the sense that you're thinking, just admins. There are five of us with systems access enough to delete posts and only two that check in daily. Contrast that with our 200K or so hits a day and you'll see one reason why we're not even going to consider it.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Monday June 26 2017, @11:27PM
"They" can't. And if they could they shouldn't.
But an "ignore" capability would be really nice to have (I'm not shooting the messenger because I don't like the message, I may even LIKE the message; but some messengers really need to be ignored).
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: -1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 25 2017, @10:37PM (10 children)
If this is what a country has to resort to after importing a large number of muslims then it is time to ban islam. Kick them out. Prevent them entering in the first place
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 25 2017, @10:39PM (1 child)
Is that classified as a hate speach?
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 25 2017, @10:47PM
Hate speech isn't illegal in every country, do I need to send your free speech hating nigger ass back to Africa
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 25 2017, @10:47PM
Can someone explain this?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 25 2017, @10:54PM (3 children)
Go read some history of Germany after WWII. They started banning certain types of speech - including hate speech - soon after the war and have been tinkering with it ever since. It is a self-check to prevent the atrocities that lead up to the war from ever happening again.
Trying to pin this on anyone but the Germans themselves is disingenuous at best.
(Score: 5, Touché) by KiloByte on Sunday June 25 2017, @10:58PM
Well, you're forgetting that Germans have a strong history of banning certain types of speech — ones that are disliked by the government in power — a few years before the war.
Ceterum censeo systemd esse delendam.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 25 2017, @11:27PM
It's a foolish knee-jerk reaction that only proves that they are not principled when it comes to freedom of speech, and would not do anything to prevent such atrocities if a large portion of their population was actually in favor of them and the political climate was just right.
(Score: 5, Informative) by khallow on Monday June 26 2017, @12:38AM
It didn't work then and it won't work the next time such atrocities happen.
(Score: 2) by Wootery on Monday June 26 2017, @08:25AM (2 children)
Reminder: removing SN's AC feature wouldn't be problematic censorship.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @03:27PM
Sure, but isn't that kind of like letting the terrorists win?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @07:32PM
Neither is comment moderation.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Sunday June 25 2017, @10:39PM
Seems cart before horsery shenanigans.
One wonders whether removing an avenue of venting actually changes anything. SCOTUS pretty much ruled exactly the opposite recently.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 25 2017, @11:01PM
It's a partisan explanation from the free speech side, but interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAUqjbIzDxY&t=0s [youtube.com]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Lagg on Sunday June 25 2017, @11:12PM (79 children)
The fact that I can see a centuries old story about eggggggggggggggs being repeatedly applicable tells me that I must be seeing a different reality than other people do. Especially MB because he keeps referencing this group like it's a hidden militia or society. To me they're still vegans that have too much privilege to figure out which protest to go to.
You see: The Left(TM) takin' muh liberties
I see: Politicians capitalizing on that thinking.
Really, at the end of the day. You think the police state gives a shit about your actual political views? Please. I once watched a semi-improv movie about Hitler coming back to life and filming people's real reactions on the street in Germany. The hate groups just went to another symbol. If the spirit of the law was a concern anymore - assuming there was a good spirit to it which I think there was - I really don't think either of these things would be allowed to happen. But the former showed the uncomfortable truth that tabooing something makes it more appealing, and hateful views survive and evolve under different labels. The left used to be the right and vice-versa.
The fact that you superfocus on this group is just giving the politicians the most raging erection because that is the model behavior for their ideal citizen. They get to swap the "ebil party" crown every few years so the criticism never actually goes anywhere. You can tell this shit works because the random insults and "noes ur racist" stuff looks almost identical when those cards start being used.
Also fuck you for your big endianness MB. I hate you and you're a fundamentally terrible person.
http://lagg.me [lagg.me] 🗿
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 25 2017, @11:25PM (58 children)
it's funny, i always associated him with authoritarian leanings, which would be the right, and that the article seemed about authoratative action via the government of Germany.
It's always been the left that pushes the bounds of free speech, of censorship, of even what it is to be decent. The right would be polite with their abuse, but the left was brash, shock jock type of person.
Like the simplistic views in the movie Demolition Man -- the narrow minded has a perfect view of society that all of these weeds ruin, and Dennis Leary as the antagonist of the local right wing government was a guy practically running on weed if not taco bell.
The left would not clamp down on free speech -- special interest groups do that. And both sides have their special interest groups.
Blaming this on "the left" is a mentally easy way to avoid looking too hard at the problems in Germany (or here for that matter).
I've never known the liberal media, with their gay agenda, to knock down the doors of conservatives and demand that they speak up for their rights or they'd go to jail. No, it's quite the opposite, with weird one-issue voters shooting abortion clinic doctors for allowing women to mind their own business with their bodies. one issue voters are frequently special interest group specific, but that type is never The Left.
cripes my girlfriends father practically had a stroke because her little sister was friends on FB with a girl that came out as lesbian, and he posted this huge rant about how she'd burn in hell and all that stuff and -- for what? being part of the left? not wanting to get married in the catholic church like he was told to do and it's not fair? that she'd become a terrorist bride because muslims condone group lesbian orgies with blue star tatoos?
but i don't blame it on the right. I blame it on him--for not even being willing to understand differences. I fault MB the same way.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday June 25 2017, @11:32PM (48 children)
If you think curtailing free speech is a thing of the right, you've no a clue in your precious little head. Look around at the left attempting to shut down speech they dislike every single day. Have a red pill before you speak again, please.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 25 2017, @11:39PM (7 children)
Have your own red pill: http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/cancel-sarsour-the-hilarious-hypocrisy-of-the-alt-right/19879 [spiked-online.com]
PS: Does nobody realize the Matrix stole that fucking pill from total recall where it's poison meant to kill you?
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday June 26 2017, @12:01AM (3 children)
Yes, your one example is in total parity with the hundreds of examples from the left. Every ideology must be perfect except yours, eh?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @12:17AM (2 children)
So you expect me to do the legwork for you and dig up more ample examples?
I have to admit though, I wish I had your telepathic gift of being able to deduct someone's "ideology" from a single off-hand post like that. Must come in real handy.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday June 26 2017, @12:33AM (1 child)
No ideology has a perfect followership unless nobody actually holds it. Humans are one and all imperfect.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @12:41AM
I agree with you on that.
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @12:28AM
"Red Pill" is a back-formation from "red pillar", which refers to a certain male appendage that has been, um, abused to the point it bleeds. Makes for Sad Puppies, and misogyny. Thus, these types are called, "Red Pillars". Seems like they want to speak about something.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @07:11AM (1 child)
Except what you are seeing is Alt-Right psyops. Using the successful tactics of the Crazy-left against them.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday June 26 2017, @10:19AM
No, this is using the crazy actions of the left against them.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by fustakrakich on Sunday June 25 2017, @11:50PM (33 children)
Oh please... Left/right... show me any real difference. Authoritarians are authoritarians. This whole left/right bullshit is nothing but a distraction, but that does not diminish its effectiveness amongst the plebs obviously.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 4, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday June 26 2017, @12:02AM (32 children)
Scope. Currently the ideology of the left is pushing damned hard for censorship of all sorts. The right isn't. They have entirely different things that make them cocksuckers.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday June 26 2017, @03:05AM (13 children)
Oh, the absolutes. Retract? [soylentnews.org]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday June 26 2017, @04:57AM (5 children)
Don't bother. Uzzard is another useful idiot for the authoritarians, precisely because he's deluded himself into thinking his personal disagreeableness (and no doubt terrible hygiene) is the same thing as actually Stickin' It To The Man (TM). Fact is, he's got his head so far up his own ass he's become a walking Klein Bottle.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday June 26 2017, @05:51AM (4 children)
Chill, mate, that didn't add anything to the discussion and you aren't going to convince me using negative imagery about a person.
Just ask our philosopher-on-duty about the philosophical stature and personal hygiene habits of a friend of his, Diogenes (well, I bet aristarchus will deny he was ever friends with Diogenes and invoke something like the non-overlapping life spans; I have a hunch is more about embarrassment, though. Large grin - a cynical one, to be precise).
On the other side, most of the authoritarians I met over my life were impeccable dressed (with the notable exception of my father).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday June 26 2017, @06:12AM (3 children)
I dunno, a guy who spends several hours a day with his beaky schnozz up a dead water buffalo's decomposing rectum probably isn't gonna smell all that good...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by c0lo on Monday June 26 2017, @06:34AM (2 children)
Which is in no relation whatsoever with the authoritarian trait of his character (I won't deny it, he might though) or his chances to be wrong or correct in any given situation.
(character assassination is irrelevant and, IMHO, a worse waste of time than posting on SN).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday June 26 2017, @08:06AM (1 child)
That, dear c0lo, presupposes that there is a character to assassinate.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday June 26 2017, @08:20AM
:)
Even a bad character is a character - heck, even char(0) is still a character.
And TMB is quite a peculiar one.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday June 26 2017, @10:20AM (6 children)
Generalities not absolutes. Learn your rhetoric.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday June 26 2017, @11:22AM (5 children)
(mmm... on top of the other qualities, pedantic and unrepentant. Good to know)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday June 27 2017, @11:06AM (4 children)
Yeah, that's fair. Trivialities do annoy me a bit and if you believe in your position you've no reason to repent it.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday June 27 2017, @11:52AM (3 children)
Yes, being wrong in an instance is trivial, indeed.
It's in the human nature, why fight it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday June 27 2017, @11:57AM (2 children)
Indeed, so repent already. I'll sit over here happily correct and unrepentant.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday June 27 2017, @12:23PM (1 child)
You clearly are in a good mood today.
Me, at the end of the day and in bed already, I'm too tired to repent; would you be a sport and repent for me today? Ta.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday June 27 2017, @01:27PM
I would but I think I've forgotten how. It's been so long since I was wrong about something I'd have to look it up.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday June 26 2017, @04:14AM (16 children)
So, groups like the ACLU or People for the American Way are 'right wing'? And all those religious wackos that want to censor books for 'profanity' are 'left wing'? What about present day prohibitionists? Left or right? I'm just trying to get my bearings here. It seems like everything reversed itself over the last fifty years. Were all the hippies really 'right wing' too?
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @04:36AM
This is all they have left, they found themselves loyal and deeply embedded in the conservative train wreck. So they do what they do best, claim the high road and project their own group's issues on to "the left". Can we all just agree that both political parties are corrupted beyond redemption? Which side is more evil is a dumb game to play, let's stick to the constitution and move forward from there.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday June 26 2017, @10:22AM (13 children)
Darlin, even the ACLU is speaking out against the left nowadays.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday June 26 2017, @01:11PM (12 children)
Well, by your definition, they have been since they were formed. Funny that still no one has been able to distinguish left wing authoritarianism from right wing authoritarianism. If you could be so kind, it would be most helpful
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday June 27 2017, @11:04AM (11 children)
Eh, it'd end up being a tl;dr post if I went into any depth. I'll give you a couple examples instead. The left currently wants to gut the first and second amendments while he right wants to gut the fourth and fifth.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Tuesday June 27 2017, @09:05PM (10 children)
So, basically they are defined by their target, and not their character? Well, okay, I didn't know the bill of rights could be divided up that way. I'll try to work with that, but I doubt I will get anywhere.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday June 28 2017, @02:06AM (9 children)
If you're going for simplicity, yes. It's not feasible to separate everyone out by their individual and widely varying beliefs for a short debate. So, you separate them out by their actions instead of their words, which is a more telling metric anyway.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday June 28 2017, @03:31AM (8 children)
But again, the actions are the same, only the targets differ. This like arguing the difference between terrorists and 'freedom fighters'. The only difference there being where the gun are pointed. And as far as the targets you mentioned, why is one more valuable than the other?
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Wednesday June 28 2017, @09:35AM (7 children)
I never said one was more valuable than another. They're simply different conversations.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday June 28 2017, @01:02PM (6 children)
And it's still not differentiating 'left' from 'right'. They are still irrelevant to any conversation, aside from their diversionary value for somebody who has no argument, or is simply biased in some fashion. The goals of authoritarianism has no bias of this kind. Power seeking is a pathological problem, not political. The most basic motivations for such are the same for everybody. It's a function of the brain stem, not the cortex.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday June 29 2017, @02:06AM (5 children)
They're relevant in the same way that any generalization is relevant, as a means of being able to address the part of a Venn diagram that share the characteristics you wish to address.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday June 29 2017, @08:49PM (4 children)
There is authoritarian and libertarian/anarchism. Which one is 'left', and which one is 'right'? Why, for example, is China 'left' and your average Central/South American tin pot is 'right'? To me there just is no difference. All the so-called left wingers (liberals) become right wingers (conservatives) when they get and want to keep their power.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday June 30 2017, @12:09AM (3 children)
Sigh, you're deliberately misunderstanding. Authoritarianism is not a left-right trait && the left in the US has gone extremely authoritarian of late. The two statements are not in conflict in any way.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Friday June 30 2017, @01:54AM (2 children)
What is this 'left' you are talking about? What makes them 'left'? I'm still not getting an answer, other than the targets, which makes no sense. It should be determined by the motivations (the basic animal ones, not the superficial social propaganda) and their ultimate goal, not their methods. To me these are just people out to discredit the civil rights movement with propaganda, a conservative bunch indeed, same as the birthers (birchers?). It appears they are succeeding with the catchall 'political correctness' shtick. None of that makes it 'left' by any stretch of the meaning. The real 'left' doesn't get any press anymore, much less positive press. The real 'left' consists of groups like the ACLU, the Innocence Project, people fighting against systemic racism (yes that still exists in the US, especially in the prison system), prohibition, eminent domain, the wars, the robber barons that run the banks and steal our pensions, etc, not the whiny college punks making the headlines these days. They are more like paid agitators and designated distractions. Nothing to do with 'left'. You need a better word to describe them.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday June 30 2017, @02:55AM (1 child)
No. Proper liberals fight for equality not special rights for "the oppressed". And systemic racism has never existed in the US. Nor anywhere else. It is a socialist bullshit term made up to justify seeking equality of outcome rather than equality of opportunity and to further entrench identity politics.
If they're actually breaking laws, prosecute them. If they're not, STFU. It's the fault of the people who voted in a government that it is corrupt and sells laws and favors not the fault of businesses that take advantage of such. It's exactly the same as accepting government assistance in any other area. You know, like food stamps and welfare and educational financial aid. It is the tipping of the playing field to the advantage of someone who voted for/paid them.
As for a better word... Tell you what, you eject them out of your political party and I'll be glad to call them something else. While you all occupy the same letter on the ballot, you get lumped together.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Friday June 30 2017, @03:17AM
And systemic racism has never existed in the US.
:-) A quote for the ages. At least it clarifies why this can go no further...
As for the banks, etc. You are right. The voters let it happen.
And my political 'party' is statistically invisible, pretty much like the real 'left'.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday June 26 2017, @04:18PM
This left vs. right stuff really is nonsense, and does not map to reality very well, as you've noted here. Instead, check out this site [politicalcompass.org]; there's more than one axis of political thought, there's at least two (economic and social). Be warned, though, that site is really trying to convince people that capital-L Libertarianism is the best political philosophy, so it is a bit slanted, but the underlying idea is sound. There's authoritarians who believe in laissez-faire economics and authoritarians who believe in state socialism, and there's social libertarians on both sides as well. Even this probably simplifies things too much, because there's different issues where people feel differently, but I think this is about the best we'll get for now. Today's "alt-right" people are probably pretty close to laissez-faire on economics and fairy authoritarian on social issues, whereas the much-maligned college SJW liberals are probably pretty close to authoritarian state socialism, whereas the more old-fashioned "liberals" are more for social libertarianism with a more moderate amount of state socialism (i.e. nationalized healthcare). But even here it's hard to make hard categorizations: the college SJW crowd believes in freedom to be LGBTQetc., to use whatever bathroom you want, etc., but they want to clamp down completely on "hate speech" and push a sometimes-militant agenda w.r.t. minorities (see the hubbub at Evergreen when some white prof refused to stay away for the "Day of Absence" or whatever). The alt-right wants to oppress LGBTQetc. people and have government-sanctioned Christianity but wants total freedom to carry guns around everywhere.
There's also the issue of local/state vs. federal/national. Some authoritarians just want to have authoritarianism at lower levels, not everywhere. So they want to have a state law in their state promoting their religion or bashing gays or whatever, but they oppose having many things be nation-wide, under the whole "states' rights" idea. We saw this back in the pre-Civil Rights days too: racists really only cared about having separate water fountains and oppressing "uppity" blacks in their own locales and states like Alabama, and really didn't care much about what people in California or New York did. People who cared about freedom and stopping oppression believed in universality, so they wanted these things stopped not only in places where the local populations completely agreed so it was easy to fix, but also in other places where people and authorities were much more backwards.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @06:15AM
Ah, ideologues like Theresa May, perchance? that well known left winger....
there's a point at which you'll eventually see that all this left/right stuff is nonsense propagated by a professional political 'class' of cultural parasites, its function is to engender the 'us vs them' mentality in population groups these parasites wish to control, whilst we're busy fighting each other over 'big-end' or 'little-end' they're safe...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by unauthorized on Monday June 26 2017, @08:31AM (4 children)
You are cherrypicking so hard that you put Anita Sarkeesian to shame.
The right is and has always been pro-censorship. Just because there are other groups doing it better than them at this very moment does not detract from the fact that the desire to shape the moral character of society through sociopoitical influence is endemic among conservative-minded people.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday June 26 2017, @10:24AM (3 children)
That right there. You attack the ones putting your liberties in the most danger at the moment. You do not give them a pass for past good deeds.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @03:30PM (1 child)
You are so transparently partisan it's just sad.
At least you're leaving plenty of gems like these for the next time it's the D team's turn at the helm.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday June 27 2017, @10:57AM
Partisan? Which party do I belong to then?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by unauthorized on Monday June 26 2017, @05:18PM
Ignoring the SJWs to focus on the mainstream conservatives was a mistake which got us where we are today. Once a crazy fringe gains the moral authority, it's too late to stop it from doing damage.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @05:31PM
no i said it was the people -- people like you. i described a problem relevant locally to be by someone who freaked out because he has a closed mind.
you did not really respond to that, when I compared him and you, you went back on blaming the left because I somehow over looked that.
I didn't. I did say both sides had special interest groups--they clearly arent the same but the one issue voters exist on both sides.
hiding from unpleasant thoughts is often conservatism at its roots, but being a jerk can come out from either party.
anyway, special interests, snowflake syndrome, both are real, and you're vitriolically defensive for some reason, like its ok to call others a name but not get labeled as one. I guess an offense is the best defense?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @12:53AM (8 children)
authoritarian leanings, which would be the right
Nope. You would only say such nonsense if your completely-wrong "knowledge" of politics is 1-dimensional.
Left and Right, properly labeled, would be Socialist and Capitalist, respectively.
Now, there is often some overlap with folks' position on another completely different axis [politicalcompass.org] which gauges support for civil liberties vs concentrated authoritarian power.
...but there are e.g. Libertarian (Law of the Jungle) types who are anti-Authoritarians who are economically on the Right (Mike Gravel on the linked chart).
It's always been the left that pushes the bounds of free speech
Again, I wish you lazy humps would learn and use the correct terminology.
Those are Reactionaries and Progressives.
...and recent experiences with the free speech of Milo Yiannopoulos [google.com] and Richard Spencer [google.com] say that you're way off the mark.
(Inciting violence and calling for illegal activities is not given license by law.)
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday June 26 2017, @01:35AM (5 children)
Ok, how do you define "reactionaries" and "progressives"?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @02:24AM (4 children)
First, they're proper nouns, defining groups, so they're capitalized.
Next, having participated in several threads on the topic, you already know about Reactionaries.
For others: It references a longing for a time in the distant past [google.com] when e.g.
- there was segregation/Jim Crow
- women couldn't vote
- people (e.g. plantation owners) could own humans
- people who didn't own land couldn't vote
- people down on their luck didn't have a social safety net and could be exploited even more than usual
.
Defining "Progressives" typically involves the concept of "social reform" [google.com] i.e. proper civil liberties, as well as more equality in political power and wealth distribution.
The former skews toward the Top Right of the political palate (previously linked) and the latter skews toward the Lower Left.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday June 26 2017, @04:52AM (3 children)
Second, as I long suspected, "reactionary" is near purely imaginary. Sure, maybe you could get someone behind one or two of these alleged principles, but you aren't going to find many people going for most of them. But I guess the whole point of tarring someone with the reactionary label is to insinuate that they support these things. No point to bothering, if you ever intend to be sincere. I would suggest instead dropping the label for something more productive and descriptive, like say conservative. Progressive is way overused. I imagine the people behind the arrests of the story think they're progressive, but they're obnoxiously trampling freedom of speech (the most important of the civil liberties) for ridiculous purposes. Now, your progressives might be more civil liberty-loving, but once again, it seems unlikely that this label is being put forth sincerely.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @08:22AM (2 children)
Of course, khallow! The obvious explanation is that you is one, so you cannot see it, just like you cannot smell your own farts. There have been no conservatives in America since Teddy Roosevelt. Nothing but reactionaries, recidivists, crypto-royalists, racists, Southern Democrats, Shriners, and Oddfellows. Which one, or ones, are you, khallow?
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Monday June 26 2017, @12:09PM (1 child)
"There have been no conservatives in America since Teddy Roosevelt."
That's funny. I always think of him as a progressive because of the platform of his Bull Moose party, the progressive party of 1912. Among its planks was women's suffrage, a ban on child labor, and tighter regulation of industrial combinations (monopolies and oligopolies to you and me). He was no Democrat, but somebody really fighting for the average American.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @08:27PM
But Teddy did establish the National Parks! He was, unlike the foaming Reactionaries of today, an actual conservative who tried, you know, to conserve stuff. As opposed to destroying or selling to China, or letting Bundys overgraze the hell out of it.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Monday June 26 2017, @04:25AM (1 child)
Inciting violence and calling for illegal activities is not given license by law.
Where does it say you need a license?
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @08:02AM
given license [google.com]
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Sunday June 25 2017, @11:37PM (17 children)
No, I think the parties take turns being the biggest anti-liberty fuckwads and feeding the police state mentality and that the left currently holds that crown by a huge margin. If you disagree you'd better bring a damned good argument because it's easier to point out examples of leftist fascism right now than it is to tie your shoes.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 25 2017, @11:50PM
Hey boobies!!!!!
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Lagg on Monday June 26 2017, @12:38AM (15 children)
That's what I'm saying though. I don't need to point out examples of either because I fully understand the point that they take turns. You clearly understand this too. Which is why it's so damnably confusing that you can at the same time be one of the types that condenses it down to either wing's issue as much as the idea of party loyalty being abused and incorrectly seen as patriotic in itself. Then being used by politicians of any party for their own agendas. Taking turns with the brand of evilness doesn't actually mean they just suddenly become less malicious because they're in the background of power.
Also, it's really going to help in the future to keep in mind that whatever you affiliate yourself with is not associated with the people you think and they are not acting in your favor. If anything can ever prove this it's Sanders' little thing with bank fraud currently. And there's no doubt whatsoever in my mind that he sold out so hard because Clinton would have gotten him out of trouble. Trump has outright stated who his real people are. All wings on the axis are represented in those examples. All are leaders and failures at the same time, leading self-interested failures leading people with misdirected passion. There is a degree of mental gymnastics required to imagine that the left wingers alone can be the enemy when looking at it from a global perspective. Like taking into account US, UK/brexit, this article, anti-muslim sentiment, pro-isolation mindsets, etc. they are probably one of the least power holding wings of recent years. In the US they are for sure. Maybe this is deserved, maybe a wake up call. But come on now, misprioritization of target.
http://lagg.me [lagg.me] 🗿
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday June 26 2017, @12:54AM (14 children)
Why, you ask? Because if group A is doing something you disapprove of, you point the finger directly at them. It doesn't matter if group B is doing something different that you disapprove of; that changes not one iota of the blame for group A.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Lagg on Monday June 26 2017, @02:37AM (11 children)
It's pretty disingenuous to say then that your group A is the one that likes to use laws established with good intent for fascist purposes without also including group B. It's not that you're pointing out the wrong at-fault party. Just that you're blaming one component of the organization as if to imply the entire thing isn't cancerous. The thinking involved in this bust strike me as pretty conservative. Almost conservative by definition. Which is not what the left strikes me as. But you seem to think otherwise. Which is another recurring theme I find happening. I think it's confusing because they're both impossible to tell the difference between sometimes and the mix of satire and might-as-well-be satire makes it impossible to discern.
Also I've seen enough posts to know that it's not a group A/B situation for you. You favor one particular non-hypothetical mode of thought. Which is fine and your right to do as much as it is mine to reject all modes beyond my own. I don't find either way of doing politics and philosophy to be flawed. I sincerely mean that. But plez. The information is right out in front of you. If you're going to have enemies at least include the whole set. Like really the behavior of these people isn't hard to track and compare/contrast. I've only been doing it since 2001.
and none of this business about group 42 being somehow less prone to big government boot-to-throat placing like this please. I have seen enough "lock her/him/them up" and mouth-frothing calls to defund schools/states in order to force them into something they can't be legally compelled to do that I just flatly refuse that people take that idea seriously. That there is one part of the spectrum that makes the march to fascism slower. They'll both use government oppression when it suits them. They'll both agitate and isolate people to control them. Those people will disseminate the phantom so that it rings as genuine to other people.
I mean you just did it for this summary. Shit's not rocket science. It's effective too.
http://lagg.me [lagg.me] 🗿
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @04:40AM (3 children)
TMB is highly disingenuous, realize that first then stop engaging in "discussions" because either you circle jerk or he is intellectually dishonest as a primary resort.
(Score: 2) by Wootery on Monday June 26 2017, @08:10AM (2 children)
Coming from an AC. Priceless.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @08:25AM
TMB took my AC from me. True story! https://soylentnews.org/~DeathMonkey/journal/2411 [soylentnews.org]
"I got better."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @03:35PM
You attack the messenger good plan. Solid point bruh.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday June 26 2017, @04:57AM
At this point, I no longer care about disingenuous nature of such things. As long as someone gets punished for breaking laws, trampling rights, and so on, we have something we can build on. You won't get political allies to do this, only the enemies.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday June 26 2017, @10:28AM (5 children)
Show me a group B entity that's posing any real threat to my free speech like group A is doing as a matter of policy and I'll oppose them too. It's not happening from group B in any amount significant enough to attract my notice.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Lagg on Monday June 26 2017, @08:44PM (4 children)
There's always an equal but opposite example of it for whatever wing you want. The left hijacks social progress to encourage different kinds of isolation which leads to censorship, they use the social outcasts as stage props to this end. But the right is also the wing that is as of typing this actively finding reasons to make people piss themselves in terror because the climate is right for it - and attempting to shut down dissent by calling every instance of it they don't like fake. Using the same tactics that the left does.
It's still censorship, one's just a different kind of direct and with different pretense. You can't recognize that because the form of oppression has a tone that suits you. And people who associate with a party or accepted spectrum-based school of thought are easy to control with this.
Basically, examples are plethora. Especially this last year. You need not look far for examples. Clinton has deplorables, obama had clingers, trump has liberals. Weaponization of terms for an individual or small group's political gain poses a bigger threat to your free speech than the washington protest zones let me say that much. It's just that the entrenched powers want you to think one of them is oh-so-caring about your rights and liberties while you're useful.
Also, like it or not: This wing that you hate remains the one that accidentally saves people's lives as a byproduct of advertisement and media manipulation. The right remains the one that openly and actively meddles with people's lives as a byproduct of self interest.
http://lagg.me [lagg.me] 🗿
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday June 27 2017, @10:51AM (3 children)
Saves people's lives? You have got to be kidding. They save nothing; they destroy lives. Their entire playbook right now is ginning up race/gender/class/etc... hatred for every niche they can find to the point of Inciting to Riot.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Lagg on Tuesday June 27 2017, @01:32PM (2 children)
While I agree with your point about the divisive politics. The exact same tactic is used by the right and one needs only look as far as Fox News for proof. I remain bewildered at the current usage of "liberal" for example. However I can almost definitely say that greenpeace and PP have accidentally saved lives by their culty recruitment methods. They are about as left wing as one can bring to mind in a moment's thought. I got their recruiters to admit to me twice that both orgs use outsourced recruiting places that don't really care about skill or qualification. When I made the mistake of including my email (despite faking everything else) I got spammed to hell and back. PP has a fake unsubscribe link that I actually had to launch a tirade at them on twitter to get me off of. This is their reward for donating. Yet greenpeace has shamed at least 1 oil company out of wrecking the local ecosystem and PP has stopped at least 1 person from dying to birth complications. The right - for as much as I've seen - are rarely able to generate such social utility at that level of shitheadry. Because they don't understand how to engage evolving society over being contrarian cunts.
Also, with this whole midwest deplorable maga muh-illegal-voter bullshit, you really going to sit there and try to say the west coast lgbtqiaciafbibbq biqueer racefluid muhdentity bullshit is the bad? Man. I'm telling you. Jumping into the party sandbox is a waste of time. Especially when your picked poison is the one that gets you to use bizarre shit like "inciting to riot" all capitalized like this is some kind of citizen's gestapo keyword term and we're dealing with a militia. Are you fucking triggering scanners buzzard? Are you a cop? You have to tell me.
http://lagg.me [lagg.me] 🗿
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday June 27 2017, @06:05PM (1 child)
Every single day and twice on Sunday. Identity politics will destroy this nation. My picked poison is actually causing violence, riots, and deaths in the streets right now, imagine it in another twenty or thirty years.
As for social utility, the right gives more and does more charitable work than the left by a damned sight. So, yeah, I gotta say that as well. I have no idea where libertarians like myself stand but I'd hazard a guess that we out-help the left as well.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Lagg on Tuesday June 27 2017, @11:31PM
Yeah see I honestly think you're still seeing phantoms due to exposure to all media. It's not that any one of them is fake, it's that they're all fake in their humanism and social responsibility. I don't watch news anymore. I don't see things like this unless the event is so extreme that word of it reaches me organically. This happens sometimes, like with the shooting of the baseball game. But rarely. Because people get outraged and then forget. The stuff that needs to stick does.
What I saw: Nipple hats, other failed branding attempts plethora, a googler-involved demonstration and finally a fairly respectable march in the name of science. People are in general violent cunts. The way with which those events were coordinated (again besides utter failure at branding) is downright envious for the lack of reported violence. This world on fire shit is going to be regretted later if some group or another gets pissed off enough for another LA riots. Then you'll have your sunday-edition of presupposition-supporting ebil all you want. Right now, you might as well be asking for a military cordon on the froyo shop in terms of me trying to understand where you're coming from with this.
Also I expect government-lead death to hit my door quite a long time before the civilian thought police do. Maybe that's why I don't see the doom around the corner? Like, molotov up my ass versus 1600 drones approved by fat people in suits. One seems more threatening than the other if imminent threats are the concern.
http://lagg.me [lagg.me] 🗿
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Monday June 26 2017, @03:36AM (1 child)
Oh please, Buzzard. You only do it because it's more fun to wind up the center-right corporatists you call "the left" than it is to wind up the libtards and other morons on the hard right.
Geez Louise!
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday June 26 2017, @10:30AM
Man, everyone involved in the censorship push oughta be lined up for daily cactus suppositories. I don't give a damn who they are.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 26 2017, @01:05AM (1 child)
The left used to be the right and vice-versa
That's nonsense.
...and it's clear that you don't understand those terms in the slightest.
They're ECONOMIC positions.
Right==Capitalist; friendly with management and large stockholders
Left==Anti-Capitalist; worker-friendly; The Workers are the owners and the managers
It would be good if you would learn and use the broader terms Reactionaries and Progressives.
You think the police state gives a shit about your actual political views?
2 recent events in SoCal say that they do and that they take sides (with the Reactionaries).
OC Weekly Journalists Say Trump Supporters Attacked Them at Huntington Beach Rally [truthdig.com]
Gabriel Nelson's Assault [by Trumpian Islamophobes and Arrest by] Oceanside Police [orangejuiceblog.com]
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Lagg on Monday June 26 2017, @11:02PM
So what's your affiliation? This is the problem that makes me not able to tell anymore. It's the same ad-hominem bullshit. Don't like a point? Call 'em uneducated. May not be able to tell who's buying what cult's shit but you can surely tell when they are.
Also I don't see what you're talking about with this capitalist/non-capitalist stuff. Implying that left leaning people can't be pro-capitalism? That's an awfully propaganda-tainted thing to think if I'm understanding correctly.
Also, these so-called "broader terms" are the bullshit that got us here in the first place. Why not just call them Stupids and NotStupids, Komrade?
http://lagg.me [lagg.me] 🗿