Jump to content

Protecting Second Life From Hate Groups Hiding & Organizing Here


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 107 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, Kenai Harbour said:

I certainly hope with all the other social media outlets that are banning hate groups, Trump, and their speech in light of the attack on our nation's capital that Second Life is not becoming a haven for them. What is Linden Lab doing to make sure they don't hide here?

To put back the topic in perspective.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 979
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

^^^This^^^ is what scares me.  The belief that people are no longer allowed to have their own opinions, their own thoughts and have to fall in line with one narrative, one ideology.   Newsflash,

When did have a political opinion become "hate speech"?

What exactly do you expect them to do?  As with most things that are against the ToS, they will act appropriately when and if it is brought to their attention.  They have given us, the residents, the

Posted Images

4 minutes ago, Doc Carling said:

That's just a number you found somewhere. Perhaps you should read the German version of the Wiki article I posted above. It says Hugenbergs Media Imperium controlled half of the German Press. And that's also the meaning of all serious German historians.

Mit seinem Hugenberg-Konzern, einem Medienkonzern, der die Hälfte der deutschen Presse kontrollierte, trug er mit nationalistischer und antisemitischer Propaganda maßgeblich zum Aufstieg der rechten bzw. rechtsextremistischen Parteien in der Weimarer Republik bei. 

See this is the problem who do you believe. One wiki in a different language says the opposite to another language and the Holocaust Museum says a different thing all together. I myself am not going to read multiple sources of conflicting data however will believe a more official source such as a Museum than a Wikipedia page. The Press in the Third Reich | The Holocaust Encyclopedia (ushmm.org)

Even if we use the data from the museum that there was 4700 newspapers in Germany at the time, your German wiki site lists less than 3% as owned by him (lining up with the Museum source) whilst claiming to own half? Wikipedia doesn't even have a source next to the claim he owned half. So given this discrepancy I still stand by what I said.

It will be a never ending argument so lets agree to disagree as it is way off topic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Talon Brown said:

there was one riot by conservatives

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlottesville_car_attack

I can find more if you need that...but like I said...I don't consider Trumpies to be conservatives although some in the Republican party will use them to further their goals/power.

Edited by Luna Bliss
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Chaser Zaks said:

I meant a reply that conveyed a meaningful response.

See my first reply where I say "fascist" is a dog whistle. I've seen anti-white/straight/etc stuff pushed into publicly funded campuses and schools, but that isn't of a concern to you, is it?

1. Why do you post not meaningful stuff?

2. Any kind of misinterpreted "political correctness" gets me enraged. I (please excuse my hate speech now) HATE it.

3. The wrongdoings on one side do not excuse the wrongdoings on the other side.

4. Fascism isn´t a dog whistle, it´s fascism. And nothing but fascism.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Vivienne Schell said:

1. Why do you post not meaningful stuff?

Probably because this thread feels full of brick walls, and I'm just not going to argue when I feel a argument is going to go to brick wall discussion, or is filled with "HA GOTTEM".

1 minute ago, Vivienne Schell said:

3. The wrongdoings on one side do not excuse the wrongdoings on the other side.

The issue here is, why has it only just become a problem? No one, not the news, popular websites, or political leaders condemned the violence and riots that occurred before, but suddenly they decided it is a issue and needs to be addressed.

4 minutes ago, Vivienne Schell said:

4. Fascism isn´t a dog whistle, it´s fascism. And nothing but fascism.

It is when I and many others get called fascist, or racist, or sexist, or whatever-ist when I try to explain a the opposing side view or as to why I oppose something, or just because someone doesn't like my views.

It is all about dehumanising. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization. If you dehumanize the opponent, it makes it so that their concerns mean nothing and their voice means nothing. See in this thread how so called "fascists" have been dehumanized, it is easy to say that they do not deserve the right to free speech.
Again, because people will take this out of context: I am not saying fascism is good, nor do I support it. When I say "Fascist" I am referring to the dog whistle that means "anyone with a right wing view".

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Drayke, I'm sorry but I just don't think you understand what has happened here in the US. I explained some of it to Talon.  You can't compromise with batsh*tcrazy   :(

I fully understand what has happened over there. Implying I don't is an insult to my intelligence (believe it or not I do have a little - not much though 😝)

My point was that it should be time to do the age old phrase Live and Let Live. At the moment with all the reactionary responses like the mass banning's on twitter, the removal of various platforms, the banning of trump, the threat of impeachment etc is just adding fuel to the fire. It makes it look to the rest of the western world and the eastern world that big tech and some people including political figures are enjoying adding that fuel.

Sure go after those that stormed congress, they were wrong, but removing access points for opposing thoughts, banning people just because they liked a qanon post etc (and never went to congress that day) isn't necessary and imo is a little extreme as they will just create another account anyway.

The more you poke a bear the more chance you have it attacking you.

I read today in a comment section of a newspaper (yes I know, but bear with me) that the some members of the right are now claiming that the reactionary measures taken after the riot such as the demand for trumps removal now before his 2 weeks are up is an attempt to ensure that those armed marching threats the FBI are taking seriously happen so Democrats can change your right to bear arms law.

Now I am not saying this is the case but the more fuel you put on that fire the more outlandish conspiracy theories are going to get and the more underground and extreme those reactions will get to stop those conspiracy theories playing out. In other words the more batsh*tcrazy people will get.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

One can not argue or try to make sense with fanatics.

That is the logic for the other social media outlets to ban groups that foment and spread lies to justify their fanaticism.

Be the Trump cultists, the Stalin cultists or in fact any other cult that survives by misinformation and hate.

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Chaser Zaks said:

Probably because this thread feels full of brick walls, and I'm just not going to argue when I feel a argument is going to go to brick wall discussion, or is filled with "HA GOTTEM".

The issue here is, why has it only just become a problem? No one, not the news, popular websites, or political leaders condemned the violence and riots that occurred before, but suddenly they decided it is a issue and needs to be addressed.

It is when I and many others get called fascist, or racist, or sexist, or whatever-ist when I try to explain a the opposing side view or as to why I oppose something, or just because someone doesn't like my views.

It is all about dehumanising. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization. If you dehumanize the opponent, it makes it so that their concerns mean nothing and their voice means nothing. See in this thread how so called "fascists" have been dehumanized, it is easy to say that they do not deserve the right to free speech.
Again, because people will take this out of context: I am not saying fascism is good, nor do I support it. When I say "Fascist" I am referring to the dog whistle that means "anyone with a right wing view".

Nothing against upright conservatives. But one must call the enemy by the name and not excuse extremist excesses caused by psychotic illusions (stop the steal!) - which were undoubtedly incited by the president of the Unites States of America - by calling this "conservative".

It´s character is straight out anti-democratic and (yes!) fascist and fits into the scheme of the "Alt Right". Labeling this "conservative" or even "republican" is an insult to any upright conservative. It´s not about dehumanising. Unfortunately all dictators are human. And all their supporters are.

Edited by Vivienne Schell
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Drayke Newall said:

I fully understand what has happened over there. Implying I don't is an insult to my intelligence (believe it or not I do have a little - not much though 😝)

My point was that it should be time to do the age old phrase Live and Let Live. At the moment with all the reactionary responses like the mass banning's on twitter, the removal of various platforms, the banning of trump, the threat of impeachment etc is just adding fuel to the fire. It makes it look to the rest of the western world and the eastern world that big tech and some people including political figures are enjoying adding that fuel.

Sure go after those that stormed congress, they were wrong, but removing access points for opposing thoughts, banning people just because they liked a qanon post etc (and never went to congress that day) isn't necessary and imo is a little extreme as they will just create another account anyway.

The more you poke a bear the more chance you have it attacking you.

I read today in a comment section of a newspaper (yes I know, but bear with me) that the some members of the right are now claiming that the reactionary measures taken after the riot such as the demand for trumps removal now before his 2 weeks are up is an attempt to ensure that those armed marching threats the FBI are taking seriously happen so Democrats can change your right to bear arms law.

Now I am not saying this is the case but the more fuel you put on that fire the more outlandish conspiracy theories are going to get and the more underground and extreme those reactions will get to stop those conspiracy theories playing out. In other words the more batsh*tcrazy people will get.

We are in crisis mode right now. More attacks are planned, and we really don't know what's going to take shape after the election because the batsh*tcrazy people have increased in number and are empowered in ways they weren't before.  I can't say I know what should be done at this point, but it's definitely not time to "live and let live"  as you said -- we are at the dangerous, crisis stage and may be for some time.

In crisis mode sometimes force and extreme measures are needed, even if it "pokes the bear" and has the potential to create more conspiracy theories. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Drayke Newall said:
47 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

Drayke, I'm sorry but I just don't think you understand what has happened here in the US. I explained some of it to Talon.  You can't compromise with batsh*tcrazy   :(

I fully understand what has happened over there. Implying I don't is an insult to my intelligence (believe it or not I do have a little - not much though 😝)

I wasn't insulting your intelligence. I just think living in a country enables one to understand it better -- there are missed nuances when one does not grow up in a country or keep track of the day-to-day news. Not that a scholar living outside a country couldn't understand some matters better than certain individuals living in their own country ...that is possible. But in general there are so many points missed when not living in the place you're trying to evaluate.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Luna Bliss said:

We are in crisis mode right now. More attacks are planned, and we really don't know what's going to take shape after the election because the batsh*tcrazy people have increased in number and are empowered in ways they weren't before.  I can't say I know what should be done at this point, but it's definitely not time to "live and let live"  as you said -- we are at the dangerous, crisis stage and may be for some time.

In crisis mode sometimes force and extreme measures are needed, even if it "pokes the bear" and has the potential to create more conspiracy theories. 

And Iran said the other day that they plan to blow up congress during the inauguration. Are they banning the Iranian president on twitter for making a threat? Are they going about to ensure that all Iranians have their twitter accounts banned just in case they use it to plan the attack?

No. It is a threat and you deal with the threat as much as you can. Over reacting like the left are doing in mass banning's, removing platforms, threatening to remove the president before his time is up (which is asking for trouble imo) etc is not 'crisis mode' it is 'there goes the chicken without his head mode'.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Drayke Newall said:

See this is the problem who do you believe.

Very true it always depends on the source which one quotes. I choose wiki because the articles mirrors whats a kind of official opinion here in Germany and also what I learned in school. If I want I can find numerous other sources which say the same and present them here. But what is that worth? You will just present in return other sources which state something different. So I fully agree, it will be a never ending argument. But we are not alone. Seems nowadys the fronts are so hardened that a consensus about almost everything isn't possible anymore.

Edited by Doc Carling
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Cinos Field said:

 expressing them in public and trying to put them into practice?

Those are 2 different things.  Everyone is not only entitled to their opinions, but they are entitled to express them in public.

It becomes an issue when, during the expression of their opinion, they start calling for violence.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Drayke Newall said:
11 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

We are in crisis mode right now. More attacks are planned, and we really don't know what's going to take shape after the election because the batsh*tcrazy people have increased in number and are empowered in ways they weren't before.  I can't say I know what should be done at this point, but it's definitely not time to "live and let live"  as you said -- we are at the dangerous, crisis stage and may be for some time.

In crisis mode sometimes force and extreme measures are needed, even if it "pokes the bear" and has the potential to create more conspiracy theories. 

And Iran said the other day that they plan to blow up congress during the inauguration. Are they banning the Iranian president on twitter for making a threat? Are they going about to ensure that all Iranians have their twitter accounts banned just in case they use it to plan the attack?

No. It is a threat and you deal with the threat as much as you can. Over reacting like the left are doing in mass banning's, removing platforms, threatening to remove the president before his time is up (which is asking for trouble imo) etc is not 'crisis mode' it is 'there goes the chicken without his head mode'.

We'll just have to disagree here. They should have banned these people long ago.  People who want to murder others and circumvent Democracy should have their freedom limited because it protects my freedom. We should all have the freedom not to be murdered at Capitol buildings throughout the US.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Drayke Newall said:

And Iran said the other day that they plan to blow up congress during the inauguration. Are they banning the Iranian president on twitter for making a threat? Are they going about to ensure that all Iranians have their twitter accounts banned just in case they use it to plan the attack?

No. It is a threat and you deal with the threat as much as you can. Over reacting like the left are doing in mass banning's, removing platforms, threatening to remove the president before his time is up (which is asking for trouble imo) etc is not 'crisis mode' it is 'there goes the chicken without his head mode'.

Yes; lets nuke Iran before Biden takes the presidency then perhaps trump can remain in power.

If that is your argument, well no more words needed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Drayke Newall said:

Over reacting like the left are doing in mass banning's, removing platforms, threatening to remove the president before his time is up (which is asking for trouble imo) etc is not 'crisis mode' it is 'there goes the chicken without his head mode'.

Since when are straight out capitalist companies and corporations labeled "left"?

There must be something wrong with your idea of what "left" and "right" is. Or has Twitter been nationalised by the deep state? Did imiss something?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Doc Carling said:

Very true it always depends on the source which one quotes. I choose wiki because the articles mirrors whats a kind of official opinion here in Germany and also what I learned in school. If I want I can find numerous other sources which say the same and present them here. But what is that worth? You will just present in return other sources which state something different. So I fully agree, it will be a never ending argument. But we are not alone. Seems nowadys the fronts are so hardened that a consensus about almost everything isn't possible anymore.

I think part of the problem is that so many equate fascism with Hitler and the right wing while in reality what Hitler was doing was working towards what he called true socialism. Much of what he was doing has more parallels in the alt left movement than in the right wing. The left like Hitler is working towards shutting down the voices of everyone but that of itself with the intent of becoming a one party democracy as no other party will be left with a platform to voice on.

Fascism as many understand it now, is an alt left movement.

https://medium.com/@The_LockeSmith/were-hitler-and-the-nazis-politically-left-or-right-wing-e9fcc9d3ab1e

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Drayke Newall said:

The more you poke a bear the more chance you have it attacking you.

We have let the bear run amok for months, gorging on digital stupid juice. And whaddayaknow, it attacked us anyway. Time to put the bear down.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 107 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...