Hacker News Reader

Comment by skoskie | Hacker News Reader

I think you nailed it, but I want to reframe it just a little.

There have always been limitations on free speech, especially when it presents a danger to others. That’s exactly what the talking heads are doing, and their speech absolutely should be limited.

But as with so many harmful things, we humans tend to only be good at reacting to immediate threats while ignoring those that kill us slowly. Think dietary decisions.

If you call for violence, you get in trouble, but if you spend months pushing propaganda meant to inspire violence, you get away with it. We’ve got to recognize the cumulative effects are the same and react accordingly.

View on HN

Do you think YouTube should suppress Black Lives Matter content? They've inspired, you know, actual violence, with disinformation.

Would you mind providing an example of that?

The disinformation is the notion that police are targeting black people (they're not). The entirety of BLM is built on disinformation. The violence is widespread and easy to find evidence of. There's plenty here, just scroll back to late May:

https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/media

I was going provide a long list of specific examples but I am very skeptical it would have any effect, I'd rather not waste my time.

What I asked for was an example where BLM is calling for violence. What you've provided was evidence of protests - some violent, some not - in the name of various causes.

What you've now basically claimed, is that none of these protests have any legitimacy - violent or not. What you've explicitly claimed is the notion that police don't disproportionately act violently towards minorities. Why do you say BLM is built on disinformation?

Edit: there is just footage of the Paris protests thrown in there for good measure? Do you even know why people are protesting in Paris right now? Come on, man, I'm willing to look over your sources but don't just throw someone's twitter profile at me, shrug and go: "If you don't believe this then clearly nothing will convince you."

"I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of this, which this margin is too narrow to contain"

The only disinformation here is you saying "violence is widespread" and that police is not targeting black people. If so, how do you explain these findings?

https://www.pnas.org/content/116/34/16793#sec-2

I wouldn't consider Andy Ngo to be the good source for unbiased information, he's known to selectively edit and splice videos[1] he posts.

[1] https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/andy-n...

Viewpoints are fine.

Advocating violence is not.

Your comment makes me wonder what the reaction would be if one political side starts screaming, without any evidence, "Bleach is effective against the virus! Drink it right now, guys! MSM is not talking about it, or even downplaying it, because they want you to take the vaccine and be controlled by Bill Gates".

Well in effect QAnon is probably spreading crazy shit like this, but QAnon is way way more fringe than the current "won't-admit-Joe-Biden-won" movement, which comprise a lot of the "R"-branded people, a lot of them are even allowed on Fox News.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com