You're proposing to remove a very large, very alienated group's last public channel to express themselves peacefully. This risks further escalation. This is compounded with the stark contrast to how the protests were handled this summer.
2020 - https://foxsportsradio.iheart.com/content/2020-11-23-nfl-pla...
2012 - https://www.nfl.com/news/david-akers-closes-twitter-account-...
Still up: https://cdn.cnsnews.com/styles/article_big/s3/2021-01/Arthur...
They didn't damage property, either. Nor did they impede the democratic process which we all put so much stock in. There's just absolutely no equivalence between these two events. I don't know if that was your intent or not, but there's absolutely no comparison.
- What the pro-Trump crowd did on 2021-01-06 at the capitol building is essentially the same as what the anti-Kavanaugh crowd did on 2018-10-04 at the Hart Senate Office Building.
- And so, the actions themselves have not escalated; what has escalated is our sensitivity to them in that we no longer deem them as "OK".
? Or am I totally misreading you? Because if I understood you correctly, um, see what 'benmaraschino wrote.
On the other hand, Capitol police killed 4 unarmed citizens. If this were a BLM rally, and those people were black, we would never hear the end of it. We'd have to "say their name," irrespective of the circumstances of their death.
The woman who was killed on video is effectively nameless. She won't receive any encomiums or major press coverage.
- https://www.uscp.gov/media-center/press-releases/loss-uscp-c...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:White_American_riots_...
And as someone who lives in one of those areas of the country constantly scorned, belittled, and caricatured, I can say with confidence that you do not want those people to act in kind to Antifa.
There's been a lot of living vicariously through Antifa/BLM lately with portions of society that want to "stand for something." It's the same mentality as people who wear Che Guevara t-shirts but complain when the wifi on their plane isn't available.
On the other side of that is a enormous, peaceful, patriotic section of U.S. society that is heavily armed and competent with those armaments.
If you make this segment of society feel as if they are the enemy of the country they love, it will be a disaster. If there is ever armed conflict between urban areas vs everyone else, "everyone else" in the U.S. will win overwhelmingly.
These people demand Constitutional rights while trampling all over that very document.
They are not “patriots,” they are traitors.
What we're seeing is this being used as a blunt instrument to suppress the non-extremist components of that disagreement.
That "non-extremist" component is patriotic. It is extremely large and also very angry. Treating them as if they are the same as the people who did this is ill-advised.
I remember back in third grade when kids would argue about how their dad would beat the others’. As I grew up, I realized that that’s not how conflicts work, and certainly not how they’re won.
Please tell that to the Afghanis.
This isn't about some civil war, it's about what would happen if Red State America decided it wanted to behave like Blue City America has been for the last year. People talk about "Proud Boys" as if that's equivalent and I just have to roll my eyes.
There is an immense reservoir of anger within America in people who feel overlooked and the system is stacked against them. If they receive the downsides of civil strife even though they haven't participated in violence, they might decide they want the upsides of civil strife as well. This culture, unlike the sadly tolerated insurrections of Antifa, has the ability to have real power through violence if it ever came to it.
Point being, if your goal was genuinely to bring awareness to and address some real suffering in your community, you’d just do that; get out on the street, break a few windows, punch a cop, petition for legislation, like BLM does. That’s called civil disobedience. “Insurrection” starts when you try to override and overrule the very fabric of the system, like the federal legislature.
> The elite media class of academics, influencers, celebrities, and journalists who make up the #resistence, spent all summer saying "riots are the language of the unheard," as a way of excusing and justifying violence, vandalism, and riots in the streets
This thread will help you remember: https://twitter.com/wokal_distance/status/134693785297048371...
> UPDATE: The calls for violence over on Parler are getting much, much worse.
> There are now open calls for the murder of police officers and planning for violence on January 20th
> This obviously severely violates the law, much less the @AppStore and @GooglePlay rules.
Who on earth says they need or deserve a "public channel to express themselves"? The world seemed to get by just fine before social media existed, and I have no doubt we'd all be perfectly fine if it were gone tomorrow. If the white supremacists are stuck going back to physically mailing letters around and struggling to organize that's a net win for society...
Where exactly did you come to the conclusion they're expressing themselves peacefully? So far we've had the Capitol stormed, and a thwarted attempt at kidnapping and murdering a state governor. Neither of those two events are anything resembling "peaceful".
This is prime "Free Speech for Me - But Not for Thee".
You're making a very easy generalization. Not any significant portion of people expressing themselves contributed to any of the events you are mentioning. It's funny because you can read the exact same thought process from the opposite side, against say the BLM protests.
That was a pretty bold assumption on your part, and couldn't be any further from the truth. I don't participate on Twitter or Facebook, and I'm getting by just fine. Somehow I don't feel my freedom of speech has been in any way limited. So I can tell you with 100% certainty that you can in fact get by just fine without having a "public channel to express yourself".
>You're making a very easy generalization. Not any significant portion of people expressing themselves contributed to any of the events you are mentioning. It's funny because you can read the exact same thought process from the opposite side, against say the BLM protests.
It doesn't actually matter if it was "a significant portion" - they allowed the organization of what became a violent protest and will likely be de-platformed as a result. Freedom of speech doesn't apply to private companies. I have literally no idea what BLM has to do with any of this other than you're making another poor assumption that I'm OK with violent protests if it's by a certain group. You'd be wrong.
You can speak for yourself with regards to your need for social media or platforming of any kind. Just remember that where we're going, there are no limits. Next you're off HN. Next is hosting providers. Then it's the internet (ISPs). So sure, they're all private companies but to ignore that fundamental impact is odd to say the least.
I will assume then, that you also concluded that BLM supporters as a group did not "express themselves peacefully" as there were plenty of linked violence, in aggregate well beyond what we witnessed a few days ago. It would be a breath of fresh air if that was really the case but I struggle to find consistency of principle among people these days and making that comparison is an attempt to highlight that.
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
* 5 months ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24082241
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quis_custodiet_ipsos_custodes%...
If you want to have some moral higher ground, win them over with your virtue. Yes, it's incredibly hard. But it is not a hypocritical bullshit like this 'paradox'.
I am an advocate for Apple allowing side loading, but that is a different argument than requiring the App Store to host specific software.
I thought not.
Also, Antifa was planning an attack on the white house after election day.
July 22, 2020: "As they have for the past 53 days, violent anarchists continue to riot on the streets of Portland as federal law enforcement officers work diligently and honorably to enforce federal law by defending federal property and the lives of their fellow officers.
Attacks on federal personnel and property overnight have included attacks on Law Enforcement officers with commercial grade fireworks, hard projectiles, and lasers – which can cause permanent blindness. Last night violence was even more aggressive than previous nights as rioters once again tried to set fire to the federal courthouse and actively tried to breach the entrance of the courthouse. Rioters are also employing tactics that force federal officers to leave the Hatfield Federal Courthouse, setting them up to be attacked with lasers and projectiles."[2]
Perhaps these do not meet your narrow definition, yet violent attacks on our other branches of federal government seem fairly analogous if not of the same magnitude as Wednesday's assault. Are you suggesting Apple would/should allow apps where users organized violent assaults such as these on the executive and judiciary - just not against the Capitol building as Congress is in session?
[1] https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/george-floyd-protests-05-31...
[2] https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/07/22/portland-riots-read-out-...
If there are no consequences, they'll only get the message that they can do whatever they want and things will only get worse.
It won't change a single thing, at best, those elected official will be considered traitors / pussies.
The worst thing Republicans can do is pretend it's all business as usual and force these people to choose between 'the evil Democrats' (who they won't support, ever) or 'our guy who might try a coup here and there but at least is on our side'.
Really just planning to excuse myself from politics for the next few years.
It's not "extremism" if, from the point of view of History, you're on the winning side, in that case, it's "heroism".
Trump acted like a clown, but he's hardly the only agitator in this mess. The entirety of 2020 has been a shit show from all sides, and near as I can tell no one is interested in backing down.
Trying to equate people rioting on the streets with an organized pseudo-coup-by-proxy is ridiculous and it just sounds like you are trying to give one side an excuse by using whataboutism.
Oh spare me the faux sanctimony. No one was "organizing a coup" it was a bunch of dipshits getting in over their heads.There is nothing inherently sacred about the capital buildings.
You are trying to downplay this as if it was just some goons setting an empty Denny's on fire, but you know exactly what was happening and who was in that building at the time they broke into it.
You're going to need to explain exactly how the right is "alienated".
> last public channel
You're going to need to explain what right they have to an audience or for other entities to provide time/effort/money giving them a voice.
> This risks further escalatation
Oh good. "More violence if we don't get our way"? You're literally saying "deplatforming them in response to incitements and planning of violence will lead to further violence" as an argument why we should allow that to continue?
> This compounded with the stark contrast to how the protests were handled this summer.
I'm sure Trump will be pushing for "10 YEARS FEDERAL PRISON" for protests at this federal building, any minute now.
This is just wrong and a sloppy way to insult "half the US population". This sort of attitude contributes to the tribalism that is creating so much division.
https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20201022/mask-use-by-america...