Here's a compilation from verified accounts only: https://i.imgur.com/nkN539Q.png
Vast majority of these accounts were never banned and many of the tweets are still up today.
Vast majority of these accounts were never banned and many of the tweets are still up today.
Edit: Although apparently someone else was able to. Maybe imgur is giving a different image to mobile? I tried with both Firefox and chrome on Android.
Some should be deleted. "End white people" is arguably a call to violence akin to what gets the right banned.
Some lack context. The first one, for instance, still exists but it's a reply to a tweet that doesn't. It's possible this is sarcasm.
Some are clearly in bounds, like, what's Jack May's tweet saying that should be against the rules? (Third column). Or Lena Dunham arguing that we're not causing the extinction of white men? Or someone saying, "can you cite a recent example of a figure expressing racism against white people?"
And then there are all the "I hate white people" comments. Personally we're likely to disagree about them. I think it's important to contextualize history and who has power when you moderate. Punching up is different than punching down, in my opinion. It's different to say "I hate the wealthy" and "I hate the poor". "I hate a minority" is different than "I hate the majority [who have a history of being oppressors]". I think it's really tacky for these folks to tweet this, and it's not something I'd tweet, so for me it falls into a grey area. I can reasonably see your argument that these are the same as, e.g., "I hate gay people" because it's expressing hate based on identity.
If Twitter went the way of saying "expressing hate towards an group based on traits they cannot control is against the rules" I'd say that I don't think that's nuanced enough, but I could live with it.
Thanks for sharing a source, it was interesting to dive in here.
Prejudice is the internal feeling that another group is inferior. Nearly all of the tweets above exhibited prejudice.
Discrimination is acting on that prejudice. Feeling someone is inferior is one thing, acting on it is a notable different thing. Again, nearly all the tweets there were discriminatory. No disagreements from me.
Here's where we'll disagree:
Racism is discrimination with social power. There's a clear difference between a weak, powerless group discriminating and a powerful group discriminating. In both cases, the discrimination is absolutely wrong. Discrimination against white folks is wrong. But it's clear there is some type of discrimination against a race where the powerful impact the minority disproportionally. Sentencing of criminals, for instance.
The phenomenon of disproportionate impact absolutely exists, but we can disagree whether that should be the definition of racism. That's fine. If you believe racism is "any discrimination based on race", then yes, these tweets would be racist. If you believe "racism is discrimination based on race with a systemic power imbalance", then no, most of these tweets are not racist.
I believe both definitions are valid and cultural. I'm happy to engage with your definition if it's different. Both definitions are in common use, and obviously clash, but I think it's useful to say, "which definition are we using, and using that definition, would these tweets be racist?"
There's no need for you to throw jabs or make sweeping generalizations. We, you and I, can chat politely about this.
What about sentencing for prison? Or discipline in school? Or rejection of job applications? All of which have favorable outcomes for white people.
The point is that white folks benefit from systemic advantages (usually).