5 votes

Norway mosque attack suspect inspired by Christchurch and El Paso shootings

49 comments

  1. [47]
    imperialismus
    Link
    This shows how quick the media are to jump on the latest boogeyman, 8chan, with no evidence. In fact the clearnet gateway to 8chan has been down for days, and the darknet version has reportedly...

    This shows how quick the media are to jump on the latest boogeyman, 8chan, with no evidence. In fact the clearnet gateway to 8chan has been down for days, and the darknet version has reportedly been experiencing limited uptime.

    Daily Dot says that the screenshot of the post allegedly by the shooter couldn't have been to 4chan either, because "the color scheme doesn't match". However, I made a comparison with a random OP from 4chan. The color schemes are visually indistinguishable, and any subtle differences in RGB values could be due to jpeg compression. The screenshot appears to be authentic, as it links an imgur album with numerous photos of Philip Manshaus, the man charged with the attack. Nobody has been able to locate an archived copy of the original post on any image board. Thus it seems impossible to conclude which one it was, although it doesn't seem impossible that it was 4chan. Many smaller sites also copy its design.

    Also, numerous news sources confidently stated that it was posted to 8chan, citing original sources that only mentioned an unnamed online forum.

    Anyway, regardless of which chan it was posted to, linking it to any particular image board is kind of a moot point. Shutting down an individual board only serves to give a small feelgood morality hit. I'm not saying these sites shouldn't be shut down, but it's not gonna help. Ten new ones just pop up and trying to whack them down is like trying to put drug dealers behind bars: It doesn't work. You can arrest a thousand dealers and a thousand new ones will just pop up in their place.

    The bigger issue is dealing with the dangerous culture which spawns these sites in the first place. Changing people's minds isn't something you can do by censoring them. Now, I'm not saying that censoring sites that encourage mass murder is wrong; merely that it's ineffective and fails to address root causes.

    While "which online cesspool did this would-be terrorist post to" might seem like an unimportant question, the fact that so many respected news sources would publish speculation as fact doesn't serve to increase my confidence in the media. Which is sad, because in the era of fake news, traditional media is still the most reliable source of information on current events short of peer-reviewed science.

    5 votes
    1. [41]
      cfabbro
      Link Parent
      I agree with you that the media not getting their facts straight before reporting on a story is annoying, counterproductive and even undermines their credibility... however: All the studies done...

      I agree with you that the media not getting their facts straight before reporting on a story is annoying, counterproductive and even undermines their credibility... however:

      I'm not saying these sites shouldn't be shut down, but it's not gonna help. Ten new ones just pop up and trying to whack them down is like trying to put drug dealers behind bars: It doesn't work.

      All the studies done on this suggest otherwise. Deplatforming works. Even though alternatives inevitably pop up, they all tend to have significantly less population (and audience) than the previous, since every time you force a community to move only the most devout make the effort to move with them... and even then not all will necessarily end up in the same place. So while it's not a perfect solution, it still works to undermine the hategroups' effectiveness at spreading their message and coordinating.

      10 votes
      1. [7]
        imperialismus
        Link Parent
        Your link doesn't do much to support your argument. It points out that the research on deplatforming is lacking, does not deal with long-term consequences, and there's a legitimate concern that...

        Your link doesn't do much to support your argument. It points out that the research on deplatforming is lacking, does not deal with long-term consequences, and there's a legitimate concern that doing it will further embitter and radicalize the hard kernel that remains on alternative platforms, galvanizing a persecution narrative. Further, there is quite a big difference between banning an individual from a mainstream platform like Facebook, Youtube or Reddit, and banning entire niche communities that were semi-obscure in the first place. The two are not the same phenomenon and it's plausible they would not have the same effects.

        On the other hand, it's an observable fact that taking down chans does not prevent deranged individuals from finding an audience for their hatred, or being inspired by other whackos.

        4 votes
        1. [6]
          cfabbro
          Link Parent
          Fair enough that it's as yet unclear whether it definitively works or not, but I think worth noting is that while searches for "Infowars" may have spiked in the aftermath of the deplatforming, the...

          Fair enough that it's as yet unclear whether it definitively works or not, but I think worth noting is that while searches for "Infowars" may have spiked in the aftermath of the deplatforming, the traffic to his content was still cut in half according to NYT:
          https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/04/technology/alex-jones-infowars-bans-traffic.html

          In the three weeks before the Aug. 6 bans, Infowars had a daily average of nearly 1.4 million visits to its website and views of videos posted by its main YouTube and Facebook pages, according to a New York Times analysis of data from the web data firms Tubular Labs and SimilarWeb. In the three weeks afterward, its audience fell by roughly half, to about 715,000 site visits and video views, according to the analysis.

          4 votes
          1. [5]
            chembliss
            Link Parent
            Of course the traffic was reduced. But that's supposed to be about reducing the ideas, and that doesn't seem to be happening, at all.

            Of course the traffic was reduced. But that's supposed to be about reducing the ideas, and that doesn't seem to be happening, at all.

            1 vote
            1. [4]
              Loire
              Link Parent
              What are your metrics? Your datapoints? Sources?

              What are your metrics? Your datapoints? Sources?

              3 votes
              1. [3]
                chembliss
                Link Parent
                As this is not a paper but a comment, no specific ones. That was my general perception of the situation, as everyone seems to be freaking out about the "rise of the right". In case I'm wrong, let...

                As this is not a paper but a comment, no specific ones. That was my general perception of the situation, as everyone seems to be freaking out about the "rise of the right". In case I'm wrong, let me know it. Maybe I am, as I realize I've trusted the media on this one.

                2 votes
                1. [2]
                  Loire
                  Link Parent
                  I'm not asking for 20 inline citations MLA style. The people you are arguing with are dropping cited stats that support deplatforming, while you are essentially replying: This is why internet...

                  I'm not asking for 20 inline citations MLA style. The people you are arguing with are dropping cited stats that support deplatforming, while you are essentially replying:

                  Well, okay, but I feel like actually "no".

                  This is why internet debates never end.

                  5 votes
                  1. chembliss
                    Link Parent
                    My arguments are unaffected by wether it's rising or not, and probably stronger if it isn't rising. Well, good, because I'm not against that. I haven't been arguing against that for a second, have...

                    My arguments are unaffected by wether it's rising or not, and probably stronger if it isn't rising.

                    cited stats that support deplatforming

                    Well, good, because I'm not against that. I haven't been arguing against that for a second, have said so explicitly several times, which are right here, in this same comment section.

                    This is a good example of how saying that deplatforming isn't a solution even if it's necessary gets automatically misrepresented as being "against deplatforming", because obviously anyone who doesn't say deplatforming will save the universe from the Big Crunch is against deplatforming and a free speech absolutist. I'm not arguing against deplatforming, so maybe debates won't end if one keeps assuming what others think or don't.

                    2 votes
      2. [33]
        chembliss
        (edited )
        Link Parent
        If deplatforming works (and if the Internet is being as crucial in this as the media say), why are we witnessing a rise of the far right? They have been kicked out of every main platform, and the...

        If deplatforming works (and if the Internet is being as crucial in this as the media say), why are we witnessing a rise of the far right? They have been kicked out of every main platform, and the movement is still growing, at least allegedly.

        Edit: and to push the argument a bit, if deplatforming works, how do most revolutions even happen? (Both "good" and "bad" revolutions, whatever the criteria are)

        E2: Also, something working doesn't mean it's a good solution, or even a solution.

        2 votes
        1. [28]
          cfabbro
          (edited )
          Link Parent
          Because deplatforming has only just started really occurring at scale... up until now the major social media sites have ignored most hatespeech and allowed incredibly shitty but not technically...

          If deplatforming works (and if the Internet is being as crucial in this as the media say), why are we witnessing a rise of the far right?

          Because deplatforming has only just started really occurring at scale... up until now the major social media sites have ignored most hatespeech and allowed incredibly shitty but not technically illegal behavior to continue to spread. Heck, even now most are still unwilling to truly deplatform anyone. E.g. Look at the whole Mitch McConnell account backpedal that Twitter just pulled:
          https://tildes.net/~news/gj4/twitter_unlocks_mitch_mcconnells_campaign_account_after_pressure

          6 votes
          1. [27]
            chembliss
            Link Parent
            The idea that "ideas spread" just like that is naive, at best. Yes, they spread if there are reasons for it to find a certain degree of acceptance, which is what's happening now. Leave that fact...

            The idea that "ideas spread" just like that is naive, at best. Yes, they spread if there are reasons for it to find a certain degree of acceptance, which is what's happening now. Leave that fact unattended and focus on censorship, and see the threat grow.

            1 vote
            1. [24]
              cfabbro
              Link Parent
              Ideas cannot spread in a vacuum. Without a platform they can still spread but it's significantly slower since then they rely on word of mouth, and there are mitigating factors at play there that...

              Ideas cannot spread in a vacuum. Without a platform they can still spread but it's significantly slower since then they rely on word of mouth, and there are mitigating factors at play there that don't exist online. E.g. You can get ostracized by your friends/family for expressing views they find abhorrent, or punched in the face if you shout your racist ideology on a soapbox in the park. And it's not "naive" to think that, it's pretty much established fact; The entire marketing and branding industry is testament to that.

              And yes, there are underlying issues that cause those ideologies to take root, which also need to be addressed... but deplatforming is still a step in the right direction since it slows down their spread. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

              4 votes
              1. [23]
                chembliss
                Link Parent
                There will always be places, both online and offline, for the dissemination of those ideas. I don't think we really disagree on deplatforming, we both think it's necessary, even if we wouldn't...

                There will always be places, both online and offline, for the dissemination of those ideas.

                I don't think we really disagree on deplatforming, we both think it's necessary, even if we wouldn't want it applied to the same extent.

                The point, however, is that deplatforming doesn't need much defense now. Most people agree with it, and the media push it day and night. On the other hand, comparatively few people are saying that there are deeper, core issues that deplatforming won't solve and could even worsen it if left unaddressed. In fact, the norm is a reaction as if one were against deplatforming. So you have the root part not only unattended, but any discussion on it actively being discouraged, as it challenges the simplistic narrative of an epic struggle between Good and Evil.

                Where should one make the emphasis?

                1 vote
                1. [22]
                  cfabbro
                  (edited )
                  Link Parent
                  And yet there is still significant pushback, particularly from the right side of the political spectrum, but even amongst free speech absolutist advocating centrists and leftists. For now,...

                  Most people agree with it, and the media push it day and night

                  And yet there is still significant pushback, particularly from the right side of the political spectrum, but even amongst free speech absolutist advocating centrists and leftists.

                  Where should one make the emphasis?

                  For now, deplatforming, IMO. It's an easier first step to take, will have an immediate tangible effect and until we can get the majority of people (and the platforms + government) to actually agree to it (which is a struggle already), how can we possibly hope to address the much more complicated underlying issues that cause those systemic issues to arise? Addressing poverty, income inequality, gun control, etc. is significantly harder and even when addressed and appropriate legislation is passed will likely take a decade or more to have any tangible effect.

                  Deplatforming is a banaid solution, there is no denying that IMO, but sometimes you need to first apply a bandaid before the wound can heal properly. ;)

                  p.s. Not to mention the fact that until deplatforming is widely adopted, far right fake news and misinformation is going to keep being rapidly disseminated which makes the other more complicated issues harder to deal with rationally and objectively.

                  4 votes
                  1. [16]
                    chembliss
                    Link Parent
                    And there will be more and more as long as only this is put forward, and as long as the discussion on the roots of this keeps being silenced when it tries to go beyond the existence of social...

                    pushback

                    And there will be more and more as long as only this is put forward, and as long as the discussion on the roots of this keeps being silenced when it tries to go beyond the existence of social networks.

                    until we can get the majority of people to agree that it's a good idea

                    There's no "until", that only will come when the root issues have been understood and addressed, because the pushback comes mainly from the same place.

                    Addressing poverty, income inequality, etc. is significantly harder

                    If it's harder than the deplatforming thing, I agree. But I think those issues you mention are part of the root. If the decision is between pushing the government and giant corporations for insufficient and probably counterproductive patches and taking the issue in our hands (and that means having us the discussion instead of waiting for the editors of The Guardian to do so), my decision is clear. When the sickness is in the core of society, trying to just extirpate it will just make it worse. You may need to contain it, but that's just an extremely temporary patch, and if it's pushed as "the solution" it will be too late when reality itself forces us all to acknowledge that it wasn't.

                    Far right accelerationism is based precisely on the idea of causing the maximum degree of tension, censorship and official condemnation towards them, knowing that the reactance that ensues will drive more people to them.

                    About your PS: the spread of ideas isn't something separated from the growth of the issues, of the tension and of the movement. Refer to what I wrote about revolutions, it doesn't work long term.

                    1 vote
                    1. [9]
                      cfabbro
                      Link Parent
                      Huh? When/where are discussions on the root causes being silenced? IMO you're relying on strawmen and false dichotomies here. BOTH deplatforming and the root causes can and often are being...

                      Huh? When/where are discussions on the root causes being silenced?

                      IMO you're relying on strawmen and false dichotomies here. BOTH deplatforming and the root causes can and often are being discussed, and ideas for addressing them suggested. And just because someone suggests or supports deplatforming does not mean they are unaware of the root causes either, and there is nothing wrong with discussing one without the other.

                      And I also don't buy the whole "if we focus on the easier to accomplish solution first we will run out of time" argument... since that's precisely how triage works. You save as many people as you can by treating the easiest cases first, (which is this case is by deplatforming which reduces the potential for more people to be radicalized) then deal with the harder cases later (the systemic issues).

                      Far right accelerationism is based precisely on the idea of causing the maximum degree of tension, censorship and official condemnation towards them

                      So? It's a failing and ultimately self-defeating strategy IMO. The vast majority of the Western world's population (even Americans) understand that censorship of certain abhorrent ideas is a necessary evil, which is why libel and hate speech laws exist in the vast majority of the Western world. Same goes with gun control. Same goes with most far right ideas. American legislators are just, once again, currently playing catch-up.

                      5 votes
                      1. [8]
                        chembliss
                        Link Parent
                        I know. Yes, but no one would focus on triage when facing a pandemia. It would be done, yes, but wouldn't be the focus. Now, almost anywhere. I answered about that in one of the replies to my...

                        just because someone suggests or supports deplatforming does not mean they are unaware of the root causes

                        I know.

                        You save as many people as you can by treating the easiest cases first

                        Yes, but no one would focus on triage when facing a pandemia. It would be done, yes, but wouldn't be the focus.

                        When/where are discussions on the root causes being silenced?

                        Now, almost anywhere. I answered about that in one of the replies to my previous comments. I don't know if silenced has the right implications in English, maybe drowned would be better.

                        It's a failing and ultimately self-defeating strategy

                        It doesn't seem to be failing, by the moment. We'll see in the future, you may be right, because the truth is that the danger of the far right is being constantly overestimated, and we aren't "marching towards fascism".

                        The vast majority of the Western world's population (even Americans) understand that censorship of certain abhorrent ideas is a necessary evil

                        That works while the vast majority considers those ideas to be abhorrent. If that couldn't change, there would be no problem and those ideas would never spread. But if there is fertile grounds for those ideas already, censorship can strengthen them if done too much or done wrong.

                        1 vote
                        1. [2]
                          VoidOutput
                          Link Parent
                          Well, citation needed then. You're being very vague. That's gonna be a big oof from me. We now have far right presidents in the US, Brazil, Hungary, Russia, Israel, Japan, Italy, Turkey, and many...

                          Now, almost anywhere.

                          Well, citation needed then. You're being very vague.

                          It doesn't seem to be failing, by the moment. We'll see in the future, you may be right, because the truth is that the danger of the far right is being constantly overestimated, and we aren't "marching towards fascism".

                          That's gonna be a big oof from me. We now have far right presidents in the US, Brazil, Hungary, Russia, Israel, Japan, Italy, Turkey, and many more countries. Antisemitism is rising all across the world.

                          4 votes
                          1. chembliss
                            Link Parent
                            Yes, I know. To be honest I shouldn't have get involved into this conversation now, I'm not in a good moment, but it seems I can't help it. And as that's a whole other discussion, I won't say much...

                            You're being very vague.

                            Yes, I know. To be honest I shouldn't have get involved into this conversation now, I'm not in a good moment, but it seems I can't help it. And as that's a whole other discussion, I won't say much about it, next time I bring it up, because I will, I'll be more specific.

                            That's gonna be a big oof from me.

                            Then wouldn't you agree that

                            It doesn't seem to be failing, by the moment.

                            ?
                            Anyways, that's a different discussion as well.

                            1 vote
                        2. [5]
                          cfabbro
                          (edited )
                          Link Parent
                          Huh? That's exactly the situation when you do want the majority of medical professionals focusing on triage. The CDC is tasked with worrying about coming up with a cure, since that requires very...

                          Yes, but no one would focus on triage when facing a pandemia. It would be done, yes, but wouldn't be the focus.

                          Huh? That's exactly the situation when you do want the majority of medical professionals focusing on triage. The CDC is tasked with worrying about coming up with a cure, since that requires very specific expertise to accomplish. Which is still appropriately analogous to this radicalization situation, IMO.

                          It doesn't seem to be failing, by the moment.

                          That's because the news likes to focus on the negative events that get them views, but if you look at the polling and demographic shift that is occurring, in large part due to this right wing accelerationist strategy, you can see that it is indeed backfiring spectacularly. The vast majority of Americans, especially Minority and Millennial Americans who have been most directly effected by this violence, are now in favor of deplatforming, strict gun control laws, hate speech laws, etc.

                          2 votes
                          1. [4]
                            chembliss
                            Link Parent
                            On the analogy, I probably choose a bad one, as it's become clear I don't know enough about it, and analogies only make communication easier when both parties understand them to be an adequate...

                            On the analogy, I probably choose a bad one, as it's become clear I don't know enough about it, and analogies only make communication easier when both parties understand them to be an adequate representation of the main aspects discussed. So sorry about that, I'll think of a better one, and feel free to tell me if you don't feel it's a good one.

                            you can see that it is indeed backfiring spectacularly.

                            I hope, and I agree I probably have been influenced by the fear mongering of the media. Although I'd say that the views and ads are only half of the reason, the other half being political interests.

                            2 votes
                            1. [3]
                              cfabbro
                              Link Parent
                              Yeah, things do get messy when we rely on analogies... so sorry for starting us down that path with the bandaid one. p.s. I hope it's true as well... I know things seem bleak but the numbers...

                              Yeah, things do get messy when we rely on analogies... so sorry for starting us down that path with the bandaid one.

                              p.s. I hope it's true as well... I know things seem bleak but the numbers definitely seem to have shifted rather dramatically recently. And I think this is largely due to that right wing accelerationism making it impossible for people to stick their heads in the sand and ignore the problem anymore. However, I am not an expert in this area either, so who knows. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Thanks for the stimulating discussion, in any case. :)

                              2 votes
                              1. [2]
                                chembliss
                                Link Parent
                                I use analogies all the time, so no problem on that, I'm as guilty as you haha. And thanks for the discussion too! Sorry if I have been too vague or scarce at the end.

                                I use analogies all the time, so no problem on that, I'm as guilty as you haha.

                                And thanks for the discussion too! Sorry if I have been too vague or scarce at the end.

                                2 votes
                                1. cfabbro
                                  Link Parent
                                  No worries, it's an extremely complicated, nebulous and somewhat unprecedented issue so sometimes analogies, even as imperfect and easily misinterpreted as they may be, are all we have as laymen...

                                  No worries, it's an extremely complicated, nebulous and somewhat unprecedented issue so sometimes analogies, even as imperfect and easily misinterpreted as they may be, are all we have as laymen to communicate our understanding of them.

                                  2 votes
                    2. [6]
                      VoidOutput
                      Link Parent
                      Okay, I'll bite. What are the roots and how is discussion on this being silenced?

                      and as long as the discussion on the roots of this keeps being silenced

                      Okay, I'll bite. What are the roots and how is discussion on this being silenced?

                      3 votes
                      1. [5]
                        chembliss
                        Link Parent
                        The roots? I don't know, and that's why we should discuss it. As far as I see, we have a working class which is being pushed more and more into uncertainty and worse living conditions. Seeing no...

                        The roots? I don't know, and that's why we should discuss it. As far as I see, we have a working class which is being pushed more and more into uncertainty and worse living conditions. Seeing no future produces fear, despair and anger, anger which can be very easily turned against different people or people who are just slightly better off than you are. I understand how a white worker who is struggling to make ends meet can be easily turned against immigrants, or maybe against preachy college professors, politicians and news anchors that call him privileged and oppressor. The same goes not only the other way around, but in many different ways around.

                        I could be wrong, and this is by no means a detailed explanation of what I think about it, which anyways wouldn't be a complete explanation at all. What is clear it's that our society, as a whole, globally, is facing serious problems at its very foundations. Either we discuss it and try understanding what's going on beyond "Russia", "the right", "the Internet" and other bogeymen, or we are going to keep getting trapped.

                        How is it being silenced? By making any attempt to discuss it seem like an attempt to defend or somehow justify the far right, their actions or their alleged "right" to publish calls to murder. Here conversation is more thoughtful, so it's easier to discuss it. But it's a rare case, and even here one has to repeat every two sentences that one's not attempting to justify anything, or to oppose this or that measure. In my college I get called a "fascism apologist" for saying this stuff, and that's it pretty much.

                        1 vote
                        1. [4]
                          VoidOutput
                          Link Parent
                          What you're looking for is the field of sociology. If you want to understand the root causes you need to read the literature in that field. It is far from being silenced, studies are conducted all...

                          What you're looking for is the field of sociology. If you want to understand the root causes you need to read the literature in that field. It is far from being silenced, studies are conducted all the time.

                          2 votes
                          1. [3]
                            chembliss
                            Link Parent
                            No, I'm not looking (just) for sociology, as sociology has a limited scope that can't address the phenomenon as a whole. It probably can't be globally understood by a single person, and every time...

                            No, I'm not looking (just) for sociology, as sociology has a limited scope that can't address the phenomenon as a whole. It probably can't be globally understood by a single person, and every time we come together to take in our hands the betterment of human society, we are addressing it.* Ultimately, the responsibility of stopping this madness lies in no other but each and every one of us. If I wasn't convinced of that I wouldn't be writing here, or anywhere.

                            * I'm not trying to say sociology is useless, or that can't address specific problems. It can and it does, regardless of what I could say.

                            1 vote
                            1. [2]
                              VoidOutput
                              Link Parent
                              I fear you don't understand what sociology is. Quoting a dictionary, it is "the study of human social behavior, especially the study of the origins, organization, institutions, and development of...

                              No, I'm not looking (just) for sociology, as sociology has a limited scope that can't address the phenomenon as a whole.

                              I fear you don't understand what sociology is. Quoting a dictionary, it is "the study of human social behavior, especially the study of the origins, organization, institutions, and development of human society". It is perfectly suited to this.

                              3 votes
                              1. chembliss
                                Link Parent
                                It is not suited, as this is not about just "studying" the society as if we were out of it. That's a whole different topic anyways, we'll surely have more opportunities to discuss it.

                                It is not suited, as this is not about just "studying" the society as if we were out of it. That's a whole different topic anyways, we'll surely have more opportunities to discuss it.

                                1 vote
                  2. [5]
                    chembliss
                    Link Parent
                    On a side note: have you ever been involved in stopping a drunk friend who's fighting someone? Yes, you have to be firm, attempt to physically block him and maybe even hit him. But what makes him...

                    On a side note: have you ever been involved in stopping a drunk friend who's fighting someone? Yes, you have to be firm, attempt to physically block him and maybe even hit him. But what makes him really stop and not hit you back is that, even if you're physically blocking him, you are gentle, talking to him and reminding him he doesn't really want that. If you just hit him as hard as you can, or if you are not gentle, he will fight you and you will be forced to fight him as well.

                    1 vote
                    1. [4]
                      cfabbro
                      (edited )
                      Link Parent
                      As a matter of fact, yes, I have... have you? Because in my experience of having a raging alcoholic of a best friend for 25 years (who unfortunately recently died) that is not an effective way to...

                      As a matter of fact, yes, I have... have you? Because in my experience of having a raging alcoholic of a best friend for 25 years (who unfortunately recently died) that is not an effective way to stop a drunk person from fighting. The only way to stop my buddy from fighting was to literally bear hug him, pinning his arms to his body and carry him away from the confrontation until he calmed down. Being gentle and using words wouldn't have done jack shit to stop him, and in fact would more than likely result in me getting popped in the scuffle, which I also know from experience.

                      2 votes
                      1. [3]
                        chembliss
                        Link Parent
                        Yes, I have too, that's why I was saying it. That's what I'm talking about. Maybe gentle is not the word here, but you don't start hitting him on the face, and at least the "until he calms down"...

                        Yes, I have too, that's why I was saying it.

                        bear hug him, pinning his arms to his body and carry him away from the confrontation until he calmed down.

                        That's what I'm talking about. Maybe gentle is not the word here, but you don't start hitting him on the face, and at least the "until he calms down" part I did it talking while holding him. In my experience, it's necessary to talk to him while you hold him if you want to avoid him fighting you instead.

                        Maybe it's just my experience. It doesn't really matter, it just was an attempt of analogy of using force without fighting, and not relying solely on force to solve the situation. I could have talked about judo, but I have never practiced it.

                        1 vote
                        1. [2]
                          cfabbro
                          Link Parent
                          You're right, you don't him them in the face, but you do remove them from the situation that is making them react so angrily... which is remarkably analogous to deplatforming, wouldn't you say?...

                          You're right, you don't him them in the face, but you do remove them from the situation that is making them react so angrily... which is remarkably analogous to deplatforming, wouldn't you say?

                          p.s. I actually did practice Judo back before I tore my LCL in a fight and had to have reconstructive knee surgery. ;)

                          1 vote
                          1. chembliss
                            Link Parent
                            Hm, I wouldn't say it's analogous, but to be fair that's partly a limitation of the analogy. But I don't think the fear that is fueling the spread of far right ideas is caused by far right forums...

                            Hm, I wouldn't say it's analogous, but to be fair that's partly a limitation of the analogy. But I don't think the fear that is fueling the spread of far right ideas is caused by far right forums (or whatever similar), what those do is provide a simple explanation with simple solutions. That's why I agree they should be deplatformed, but as long as the fear is there and unaddressed, and its causes unknown and ignored, they will grow. And if it isn't the far right, there will be similar things, ultimately you need nothing besides anger and despair to decide to kill.

                            1 vote
            2. [2]
              AnthonyB
              Link Parent
              I don't see how this is necessarily an either/or issue. Shutting down vile communities while simultaneously combating the underlying causes of this movement should go hand-in-hand. Also, in...

              I don't see how this is necessarily an either/or issue. Shutting down vile communities while simultaneously combating the underlying causes of this movement should go hand-in-hand. Also, in response to your previous post in this thread: the largest and most mainstream outlets that push far-right/white nationalist ideologies are the places like Fox News, Breitbart, and POTUS's twitter sphere. Until the mainstream media fully acknowledges that, smaller places like 8chan will continue to be the scapegoat, and we wont see much of an impact by taking those places down.

              1 vote
              1. chembliss
                Link Parent
                I don't, either. I'm just worried that the media will be successful in pushing it as the solution, and even more because I don't think they have any real interest in stopping white supremacism,...

                I don't see how this is necessarily an either/or issue.

                I don't, either. I'm just worried that the media will be successful in pushing it as the solution, and even more because I don't think they have any real interest in stopping white supremacism, but in containing it. A lurking threat is an excellent political tool.

                2 votes
        2. [4]
          VoidOutput
          Link Parent
          First of all, I feel like there is a lot still left to deplatform. We have numerous communities or channels up on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Reddit, etc... Second, there is such a thing as...

          First of all, I feel like there is a lot still left to deplatform. We have numerous communities or channels up on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Reddit, etc...

          Second, there is such a thing as inertia. You can't do a bit of deplatforming and expect everything to go poof.

          Third, how is a revolution analogous to deplatforming??

          Lastly, something working absolutely does mean it is a solution, and I don't see anyone claiming that it is the best solution.

          2 votes
          1. [3]
            chembliss
            Link Parent
            On the first point, I wouldn't agree everything racist or far right has to be deplatformed. On the second point, it's a reasonable idea, but the article which you linked to doesn't mention that...

            On the first point, I wouldn't agree everything racist or far right has to be deplatformed.

            On the second point, it's a reasonable idea, but the article which you linked to doesn't mention that effect happening here.

            On the third point, before revolutions the people usually are facing the strongest censorship. Forbidding reunions and publications about certain topics, and even mentioning them, is exactly deplatforming. I said "good" or "bad" revolutions because I'm not trying to say white supremacists who advocate murder are facing unjust censorship. But if deplatforming worked, one would expect any revolution to be impossible, especially when the "deplatforming" has been in any social space possible, not online. As a side note, we should stop treating Internet as something radically different to the "real world". Instead of talking on a cafeteria, we're talking at Tildes.

            Lastly, probably cutting the head off every white supremacist would work better than any deplatforming, at least in the same short term deplatforming could have any effect. And it wouldn't be just "not the best solution", it would be totally unacceptable and long term harmful. Shutting down sites like 8chan is not unacceptable, but the main argument here is that it's not a long term solution, and could be harmful long term, especially if it's the main focus. And, right now, it's the main focus.

            1 vote
            1. [2]
              VoidOutput
              Link Parent
              That is a completely different point. Whether or not you agree they should, most have not been deplatformed so far. I don't expect the article to mention that effect because it's just a general...

              On the first point, I wouldn't agree everything racist or far right has to be deplatformed.

              That is a completely different point. Whether or not you agree they should, most have not been deplatformed so far.

              On the second point, it's a reasonable idea, but the article which you linked to doesn't mention that effect happening here.

              I don't expect the article to mention that effect because it's just a general rule. Movements pick up steam. If you stop one or two leading figures but the ideas have taken hold on a percentage of the population, you can still expect these to propagate anyway, albeit at a reduced speed.

              Forbidding reunions and publications about certain topics, and even mentioning them, is exactly deplatforming.

              No. The definition of deplatforming is to prevent someone from utilizing a platform to express their opinion. [1] What you're talking about is political oppression which is generally understood to be enacted by a state figure as opposed to deplatforming which is done by private companies. One is very, very different from the other and much more dangerous.

              And it wouldn't be just "not the best solution", it would be totally unacceptable and long term harmful.

              If you think it's not the best solution that's fine. If you think there are harmful effects in the long term that's fine. The fact is that inaction poses a greated risk still. Again, nobody argues that this is the best solution. The most we can say it that this is a solution which costs relatively little, is easy to pressure companies into doing (arguably a better form of political power in our capitalist democracies) and silences some of the most vile people on the Internet. Are there long term effects ? Maybe, I don't know the literature on this well enough. But until we're shown that deplatforming is worse than doing nothing, I'll continue to advocate for deplatforming. Remember that the alternative is alt-right ideas being spread unchecked. The marketplace of ideas will not save us.

              Also as an end note, deplatforming has got to be the most milquetoast measure against far-right figures and we're still getting pushback on that holy crap.

              [1] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/deplatform

              2 votes
              1. chembliss
                Link Parent
                On deplatforming: that really depends on your definition of platform. I don't see any reason to limit it to the Internet: a newspaper, a pamphlet, a bench on a square and a cafeteria are platforms...

                On deplatforming: that really depends on your definition of platform. I don't see any reason to limit it to the Internet: a newspaper, a pamphlet, a bench on a square and a cafeteria are platforms too. I have discussed elsewhere the fact that an Internet oligopoly makes it similar to a State figure, just less accountable, predictable and coherent.

                And of course there's pushback. If there weren't pushback it would mean that there is not a social situation adequate for the spread of far right ideas, and deplatforming would be almost unnecessary.

                1 vote
    2. [2]
      CALICO
      Link Parent
      It's definitely not from 4chan. The topic number is far too low, 4chan has been around a long time.

      It's definitely not from 4chan. The topic number is far too low, 4chan has been around a long time.

      2 votes
      1. imperialismus
        Link Parent
        Interesting. I'm not a regular user of the site so I wouldn't know. However, the original article's argument was based purely on the color scheme, which is what I pointed out. Their conclusion...

        Interesting. I'm not a regular user of the site so I wouldn't know. However, the original article's argument was based purely on the color scheme, which is what I pointed out. Their conclusion that it was "Endchan" was entirely based on the color scheme matching and supposedly not matching 4chan or other chan sites.

        2 votes
    3. [3]
      chembliss
      Link Parent
      Not only that, but even the El Paso shooter didn't upload directly to 8chan but to Instagram, and it was quickly re-uploaded to 8chan. Exactly, and it's a shame that one even needs to clarify...

      Also, numerous news sources confidently stated that it was posted to 8chan, citing original sources that only mentioned an unnamed online forum.

      Not only that, but even the El Paso shooter didn't upload directly to 8chan but to Instagram, and it was quickly re-uploaded to 8chan.

      I'm not saying these sites shouldn't be shut down

      Now, I'm not saying that censoring sites that encourage mass murder is wrong

      Exactly, and it's a shame that one even needs to clarify that, but in the current atmosphere any pointing that there are deeper causes than 8chan is taken to be a defense of 8chan staying online.

      The bigger issue is dealing with the dangerous culture which spawns these sites in the first place. Changing people's minds isn't something you can do by censoring them.

      Indeed! There's a common and dangerous view that most people are cattle that simply follows the ideas of the propaganda they're most exposed to. There may be some truth on the propaganda part, but social change (for better or for worse) is about ideas flourishing in people. Propaganda can work as a seed, but seeds only grow when the soil is adequate for them. And this doesn't mean that we need to tolerate the dissemination of calls to murder, but just fighting that dissemination isn't helpful, long term. It even gives them a halo of justification, specially in a world where the mainstream discourse is often extremely hypocritical and murderous too, just look at the exaltation of the Army that takes place almost in every country. Or how some people say that in case 8chan is up again, the US government should pressure Philippines to shut it down, them being "good allies of the US". Never question why the US is "good allies" of a murderous regime which has killed thousands of its own citizens, 8chan is top priority.

      the fact that so many respected news sources would publish speculation as fact doesn't serve to increase my confidence in the media

      And rightly so. I agree that mainstream media are generally the most reliable source, and that makes them even more dangerous. They don't openly lie (usually), they manipulate in ways that are much more subtle, starting with them deciding what is news wothy and what isn't.

      1 vote
      1. [2]
        Deimos
        Link Parent
        I've seen you say this a few times—what's the source for it? This article showed that he accidentally uploaded a letter with his name on it from the Dean of Students Office at his college first,...

        Not only that, but even the El Paso shooter didn't upload directly to 8chan but to Instagram, and it was quickly re-uploaded to 8chan.

        I've seen you say this a few times—what's the source for it? This article showed that he accidentally uploaded a letter with his name on it from the Dean of Students Office at his college first, and then posted the manifesto. I don't see why anyone would have that letter or have done that if they were reposting from Instagram.

        Or do you just mean that he personally posted to both, Instagram first?

        3 votes
        1. chembliss
          Link Parent
          I honestly don't remember where I read it. Allegedly he uploaded to Instagram first, and I do remember 8chan owner saying the reuploader wasn't the same but was almost immediate, so it's like that...

          I honestly don't remember where I read it. Allegedly he uploaded to Instagram first, and I do remember 8chan owner saying the reuploader wasn't the same but was almost immediate, so it's like that it was him with a VPN.

          1 vote
  2. [2]
    nacho
    Link
    The reason media is getting this all wrong is that Norwegian press generally doesn't name platforms to lead others to a "manifesto" The original post was made to endchan, which is where a lot of...

    The reason media is getting this all wrong is that Norwegian press generally doesn't name platforms to lead others to a "manifesto"

    The original post was made to endchan, which is where a lot of 8chan refugees have gone. The site has been down since Saturday despite the endchan twitter account reportedly saying to multiple media outlets that the site would be up "shortly" Sunday.

    Here's a link to the original post: https://endchan.xyz/pol/res/73841.html

    5 votes
    1. chembliss
      Link Parent
      It seems a sensible approach, not only to not lead to the manifesto but also to not promote the platform.

      It seems a sensible approach, not only to not lead to the manifesto but also to not promote the platform.

      2 votes