To the left, white supremacists are worse than pedophiles, apparently

I was reading a few recent articles written by the owner of Daily Stormer in the wake of his site, and Stormfront, having their domains seized. He listed literally dozens of sites on the web that cater to pedophiles that have not had their domains seized by the 3 service providers that have all banned him. Even the owners of the Tor network, which is where his site has been relegated to, have come out and denounced him and his website, even though they eventually (after a few hundred public posts discussing the pros/cons) said they will not block him from the service. He pointed out how the owners of Tor have never had such an extensive internal battle over the overwhelming amounts of illicit material that is traded over their network, including actual images and video of child pornography being traded anonymously by online perverts. He posted an online screen shot of an actual pedogroup complaining about how Daily Stormer was coming to their darkweb safezone. Tor is also where a lot of illegal drugs are traded, contract killing services are offered for sale, and other nasty, illegal things such as these.

I've been arguing for years that white racism is more opposed by the left than pedophilia, and these articles seem to support that conclusion. After all, the latter was an extremely common thing in the Weimar Republic, even in Amsterdam up until the 1980's. Some notable LGBT icons over the years, such as Harry Hay and Alan Ginsberg, were either card carrying NAMBLA members or openly sympathetic with the group's goals, and this didn't stop Hollywood celebrities like Johnny Depp from having tearful "goodbye" phone conversations with these icons as they were on their deathbeds. Despite raping and sodomizing a drugged 13 year old girl, it didn't stop Roman Polanski from getting a standing ovation from Meryl Streep, who many years later acted appalled at Donald Trump's comments about women. I sincerely doubt these people would have continued to have support if they were white supremacists or Nazis. They would have been completely rejected by the left.

And let's not forget the Salon article where a writer makes a sympathy appeal for his pedophilia.

So is it true? Is someone like Andrew Anglin more repulsive to the left than actual child rapists, and those who fantasize about it? In his own posted articles he denies being a "white supremacist Nazi", despite being labeled that by his detractors. In his words, he "believes what any of (his) four great-grandfathers would have believed in their day". He openly admits to having non-politically correct beliefs, he does not support multiculturalism, "diverse" societies. He openly expresses a wish for his own race to survive the game of demographics which has always been stacked against whites, a global minority. The only way they could survive as a people, he argues, is if they were allowed to exist in a place where they were not threatened, kind of like how certain types of fish and birds are kept away from others so that they don't become extinct through hybridization. Is this viewpoint really more disgusting to the left? Is this view really grounds for removing his website, which nobody is compelled to read unless they wanted to?

 

I'm ok because he is more despicable than me.

 

Is that your progressive way of saying "yes, white supremacists are worse than pedophiles"?

 

Racism is the ultimate sin. Baby ****ing can be justified with a certain amount of moral malleability. Now what I want to know is what if a white pervert like Christopher Paul Neil or Mark Berndt rapes a black child? What side does the right-thinking progressive take on that one?

 

In the Huge Effort for Moral Equality ... let just say WHite Supremacist are the same as Pedophiles

Happy?

 

Will never forget the "discussion" I got baited into with a dumbass Democrat woman who started off with "rape is worse than murder." This is just more of the same kind of leftish dumbassery, but is absolutely the case. The big net companies were allowed to merge, merge, merge during the O years, and suddenly Barry S. is rich as Croesus. Must be a coincidence just like with the Clintons. Now Trump is talking antitrust and THIS, more than anything else, terrifies media companies, results in lots of the Trump hate from media. He is threatening their merger choochootrain and is not likely to play the same kind of ball that crook Democrats play like pros.

One way they hide the fact that they are LOSING the American centrist audience hand over fist is "mergemergemerge." All sorts of accounting camouflage available there. So OF COURSE they are throwing in with the far left, going against free speech and after something that hardly exists. Will it blow up in their cyber faces? Stay tuned.

 

The left hates equal rights for white people.

 

A lot of those sites, are hosted by servers in areas that aren't at all concerned with content.

The racist sites can very easily be hosted in old soviet block nations, & hong kong, Thailand, places like that, immediately.


For obvious reasons though, they'll likely not go that route.

Another route, is build their own servers, & host their own crap.

 

Yes, there is definitely a point system in effect, or a scale, that determines which side they take. Certain groups seem to have more weight than others.

But what I really want to know is, when did the left become the arbiters of morality? After decades of arguing that morality is subjective, artificial, and based on social constructs that change over time, they are now in a position to decide that white supremacism (and only white supremacism - other races get a pass, of course) is objectively and universally wrong, and no amount of moral relativism is possible.

Like you said, we see things like child rape being justified (like when a 53 year old Muhammad took a 6 year old bride) because it was simply a product of the times. That's how things were done then, so we can't really denounce it using our modern standards of morality. However, these same people have no problem condemning Confederates or white racists from the 1940's as evil, using modern standards of morality.

It's completely inconsistent, though undoubtedly "progressive".

 

No, I was asking if that was the essence of your argument. (Not you personally)

 

Daily Stormer registered with a Russian server and had their domain seized by the Government within a day. So it can happen there just like it can happen here.

You are not correct. They have always run their own servers and hosted their own content. The seizure comes from the companies that resolve web addresses into domain names. Daily Stormer and other sites have no control over this. They have to be able to register their site so that when someone types a certain address into their search bar, it routes them to the correct servers. The companies that handle this conversion blocked this from happening, so people are no longer able to go to their servers when their address is typed into their browser.

 

Why are you so nervous about answering the question in the OP? Are white supremacists worse than pedophiles, or not?

 

TOR is not owned by anyone. No one can prevent the Daily Stormer or anyone else from using the protocol. No one can find out where the servers are located (assuming the site is configured correctly). This is why there is illegal stuff sold on TOR.

 

How can GoDaddy pull a domain it doesn't host?

Also, if you host your own content, BE SURE to follow TO THE LETTER the DCMA, & the rest of the legislation, pertaining to online content, from the country you operate your servers from.

As far as DS is concerned, pick another server/build one, & roll the dice.

 

This is a false comparison. Both are evil so I choose neither.
You didn't make it clear how you feel on this, care to take a stand?

 

https://www.torproject.org/about/overview

 

Of course you have.

It's weird that you seem to have zero qualms about the owner of the Daily Stormer admitting that he browses pedo sites.

Seems like yet another item to put on the list of reasons why the FBI should keep a watch on this ****bag.

 

Of course I believe child rapists are worse than people who want their race to survive. Obviously. Very telling that you view the two as equal, though. Very progressive.

 

He doesn't browse pedo sites, he posted a conversation from a pedo group appealing to TOR to block access to his site.

Your reply seems to prove my argument in the OP.

 

At leaskt equal to. As attested by the number of white male on young vulnerable black female rapes that happened under the clan

To kill a mockingbird was based on real events

 

Hate to break it to you but your own post says differently:

So how did he get that screenshot? Did it just suddenly appear on his computer?

I guess a person as morally deficient as he is doesn't really mind playing around in the garbage dump of the internet. It's not the first time that the right-wing has come out in favor of pedophilia.

 

Anglin never raped anybody as far as I know. He certainly doesn't advocate rape, especially against children, no matter the race. Can't say the same for Roman Polanski, that Meryl Streep gave a standing ovation to, or the pedophile groups that have not had their websites banned.

But here's the thing, I can find tons of posts in your posting history condemning white supremacists and Nazis. I don't see any posts condemning pedophiles. If they were equally bad, I'd expect to see an even mix, but I don't. It appears that you have a bigger problem with one of these groups.

 

To see voluminous posts regarding something, there needs to be threads on the topic(s).

 

Do pedophiles vote Democrat? I would assume they do .

 

Very telling that you draw a conclusion about me that is not accurate. You asked what I opposed and I said both.