Youtube to remove extremist sites

think it's called char4, that last extremist used that site

edit : I guess it was called "8chan"

from his Manifesto

http://archive.is/hChM5

 

No I was saying that calling someone a Neo-Nazi is a form of extremism.

A TOS like YouTube's seems to be bolshevism.

 

if they are not, then I agree

 

It isn't a private platform.

I don't agree with you that it's a private platform.

 

Oh so you think all of the right wing is brainwashing people and therefore they should all be silenced?


You are a Bolshevik.

 

They are not. it seems people call people not see a walk these days over not agreeing with them about something.

Just on this thread earlier somebody was calling people anti-choicers for not agreeing with them about abortion. That is bolshevism.

 

some are, like the "blood and soil, jews will not replace us" folks

I think sites can go to far, but to call youtube a left or right site is not correct, the right seems to be more out there on this platform, but either side calling for violence should be banned

 

That's not the who's getting the brunt of this on YouTube.

 

I do have one bit of concern though--it's the hostility borne of fear of ideas different than your own. If Liberty can't beat Tyranny in an open debate, then the world will deserve that hell it will bring forth.

 

it's people inciting hate and violence.. extremists - not people with normal political view differences

"YouTube announced plans on Wednesday to remove thousands of videos and channels that advocate neo-Nazism, white supremacy and other bigoted ideologies in an attempt to clean up extremism and hate speech on its popular service."

I do not think anyone will miss these groups

now if they go to far, I will be right there with you....

 

And what determines "normal"? Majority opinion? Popularity? Need I remind that Thomas Paines' ideas were considered extreme, dangerous, libelous, and treasonous in revolutionary France, and spent many days in a French cell for distributing them? I would certainly hope not.

 

the people inciting hate and violence are exempt from the TOS

Carlos Maza who really started all of this is the only person I've seen inciting hatred and violence.

but it's not neo-nazis.

They've gone too far for like the 9th Time.

 

normal is not trying to incite violence or "advocate neo-Nazism, white supremacy and other bigoted ideologies"

 

Of course Conservatives are building channels of information independent of Mainstream Social Media.

But that does not mean Conservatives should reject presidential help as a matter of principle.

 

no idea who that is, the more popular you are, the more people that complain, the more youtube has to look

 

BitChute and minds.com seem to be the best alternatives so far.

 

?

You see, it’s that “incite violence” that’s an open door? It certainly led to the arrest of Thomas Paine.

I don’t have a problem with YouTube deciding what content to allow, but I wince at the attitude that some express against “hate and violence” I hate unjust violence, but love watching the “bad” get their ”just desserts”.

Is YouTube going to stop showing Clint Eastwood clips, like those from Grand Torino because it’s too extreme and violent, which it certainly is.

Hate and violence are morally neutral concepts. Their ethical justification lies within the realm of their cause and effect.

Terms like those and “discrimination” and “prejudice” have become loaded litmus tests for the Thought-Police, and that is foreboding and troublesome.

 

movies are different, these are people using the platform to promote hate and violence - someone else can set up an environment for that like 8chan if they want

 

Hmmm. So a Nazi can make a movie extolling the virtues of Aryan superiority and fascism, he just can’t broadcast it as a lecture, indoctrination, or documentary. Subtle distinction, and doomed to fail.

 

as long as it's not a vehicle to promote hate or violence, kinda hard to do and promote the "virtues of Aryan superiority and fascism"

they can set up their own servers though, just they can't make youtube pay to spread their message

 

Why is only aryan superiority a concern? Can any other race promote hatred and violence?

Steven Crowder made rebuttal videos to vox's carlos maza. Carlos went to YouTube and wanted Steven banned because he was being mean to him and called him a lispy queer. Carlos doesn't like being proved wrong time and time again. I mean factually wrong not opinionated. Vox has 200 million and the support from NBC. Louder with Crowder is an independent group and has not once ever incited violence.

 

Or perhaps the nazi's are the ones actually engaging in Nazi-like behavior.

We'll just ignore the fact that the person you're calling a Neo Nazi in this particular case is Steven Crowder.

 

True. But I bet they still show Hitler's speeches and The Triumph of Will.


But then again, I still wonder about those afraid of ideas. What’s their fear? Reason can't defeat irrationalism?

It is this intolerance of hate and fear that worries me; somethings deserve hate and earn the violence they receive.

 

Yet have no problem with algorithms that recommend videos that contain naked or semi-naked children.

https://twitter.com/Max_Fisher/status/1135529605530411008

 

It most definitely is a private platform. It is a monetized service for voluntary users.

What is an issue however is that private social media platforms by their nature provide public forums for one to many communications with virtually no regulation other than the private company's "policies", which are almost always oriented to maximizing eyeballs and revenue.