• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Facebook bans far right groups

JoeMorgue said:
Again as long as "No you can use my soapbox" is "a ban" in your head we can't argue you down from your ledge.
Click to expand...

I'm using "ban" the way everyone, including the mods of this forum, use the word. I'm not the outlier here, you are.

Tell you what Zigg. Give me your password to this board* so I can login as you and speak with your voice. If you don't do that, you are banning me.
Click to expand...

This is a particularly stupid attempt at a comparison. If you were to log in and post as me, then other posters would falsely believe that those were my words. But nobody is confused about the fact that posts individuals and groups put on Facebook are made by those individuals and groups and not by Facebook the company. Furthermore, I don't pick and choose who can log into my account and post as me, nobody gets to do it.

The closest thing to a valid comparison with specifically my account would be you posting a visitor message on my forum profile page, and me wanting to delete that post.

But a much better comparison would simply be to... get this... banning a poster from this message board. And surprise, surprise, it's called a ban. By the people doing it, and by everyone else as well.

Give me the keys to your house so I can walk in whenever I want and talk to your family. If you don't do that, you are banning me.
Click to expand...

We've been over this before too. Houses are not like other property. But if a business open to the public refuses to let you on their premises, guess what? Yeah, that's a ban. That's how people routinely describe it.
 
JoeMorgue said:
He's saying that after the fact "peace" can be achieved through horrible means, and we should be careful of using "Well it's all peaceful now" as an arguing point.

If the barbarian horde kills everyone capable of fighting back or dissenting, you've technically achieved peace.
Click to expand...

I thought that that was what he was saying. Hence my question.
It's a pretty crazy reply to my post.
 
Darat said:
Again I'm still not understanding what equivalence you are trying to draw. Can you just say it plainly?
Click to expand...

Wearing a swastika declares one as a Nazi, and Nazis don't have a right to free speech, according to you.

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?
 
I Am The Scum said:
There is nothing inherently violent about communism.
Click to expand...

I disagree.
“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
Click to expand...
--Engels

It is a secular religion that believes in death to infidels.
 
Ziggurat said:
Wearing a swastika declares one as a Nazi, and Nazis don't have a right to free speech, according to you.

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?
Click to expand...

Wearing Che Guevara shirts was cool and edgy back in the 90s, usually by kids who had no idea who he really was or what his ideology was. Do you honestly run into a lot of people who wear Che Guevara shirts now? I think it's been over a decade since I've seen one, which rather makes your focus on them appear to be both dated and a silly whataboutism.

But sure, I have no problems if Facebook decides to not allow Che Guevara groups on their site. Are there any?
 
JoeMorgue said:
Again as long as "No you can use my soapbox" is "a ban" in your head we can't argue you down from your ledge.



Tell you what Zigg. Give me your password to this board* so I can login as you and speak with your voice. If you don't do that, you are banning me. Give me the keys to your house so I can walk in whenever I want and talk to your family. If you don't do that, you are banning me.



*Note to Mods. This is a hypothetical. I would obviously never actually post as another user.
Click to expand...
Jesus Christ. I keep warning you. But does anyone listen? No. The pants-on-head-retarded arguments multiply without end.

As is Cassandra to the fall of Troy, so am I to the argument by analogy.
 
Ziggurat said:
We've apparently already decided to judge people on the basis of superficial signaling, and not their actual actions. That ship has sailed.
Click to expand...

You're dodging, so I'll help you out.

You know that a Che shirt is almost never a political statement. It is more typically a fashion statement.

If you actually disagree with the italicized statement, let me know.
 
Stankeye said:
How would you get the means of production moved from the people who own it to the workers?
Click to expand...
I don't know. Ask a communist.

Also the dictionary (google) specifically calls it class war. Maybe they mean peaceful war?
Click to expand...
It's a metaphor. You know, like how the "battle of ideas" is not an actual battle?
 
I really don't see the problem here. If Facebook heads into a situation where they start banning anyone that even seems to suggest racist or separatism of anything else for that matter, then, so so what?

At the end of the day they will just be reducing their customer base, and that will hurt them, and you know what, it gives someone else that chance to come forward and pick up people kicked out of Facebook, and for them to build up a new platform.

If the worse was to happen in who was banned, then Facebook would end up going the same way as MySpace, Bebo, Google Plus, Vine, Yik Yak, Friendster, FormSpring, Yahoo! Buzz, Ping, Boly, Piczo. Friends Reunited, OtKut, Meercat, Yahoo! 360, Six Degrees, Peach, Eons, Pownce, FriendFeed, Capazoo.... and all the rest, and what woukld happen is that we'd have a new big thing.
 
Ziggurat said:
Wearing a swastika declares one as a Nazi,...
Click to expand...

Prince Harry is clearly not a Nazi.

Nor am I for that matter. I'm not even racist, but I've enjoyed wearing a swastika for shock value in the past.

Even better, brown gangs, who are inherently not Nazis, use swastikas in NZ as part of their insignia. I find it quite amusing to be at the pad of guys who would be in the gas chambers with the Jews & Romany using them.

Your conclusion is wrong.

But it's ok, so is the next one:

Ziggurat said:
Wearing a Che t-shirt declares one as a believer in Che's ideology...
Click to expand...

Wearing a Che t-shirt in NZ is identical to wearing a ZigZag papers t-shirt. A cool design that means exactly nothing.

I know from long experience that almost no people who have ever worn a Che shirt know anything about him at all.
 
Darat said:
We are talking about people who label themselves.....
Click to expand...

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?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom