Glad to hear it. This is a silly debate. Let them have their Facebook group, their twitter hashtag, their IRC channel, whatever. If you think they're idiots then simply don't click links that take you to their content.
Leave them to it: especially as it means wer can see who holds such opinions and ignore them :)
Or look at this another way: if someone started a "Kill thenduks" Facebook group dedicated to justifying why killing you would be a good idea, and good for the world... how'd you feel about that?
You're right, though, that the issue is deeper than free speech. What I gather from Facebook's position is that it wont shut down a group just because of the beliefs of it's members... that doesn't prevent them from moderating the content itself according to their terms of use.
Young, impressionable minds (kids) can't form their own opinions and deduct logical conclusions based upon presented facts; they will simply believe what they read, and they shouldn't be reading that.
Sorry, but when his excuse comes out the debate is over. The children will be fine, just like they have been fine for all of human history. They survived as slaves, through depression and wars, and every other thing history has thrown at them. A random group on facebook posting about a revisionist stance that almost 99.99% of people know to be insane isn't going to hurt "kids". I'm glad facebook is allowing free speech on their platform. As many have stated, this is a private entity and it is within its rights to pull the content. I'm glad they are not. I would prefer my child to see this and see how horrible these people are then pretend they don't exist.
It's not just kids who shouldn't be reading this material, it's all kinds of impressionable people who don't compare facts before forming opinions. It's hard to argue that this kind of hate speech will benefit more people than it will hurt.
Im not saying that is an excuse not to ban the groups: but as a reason FOR banning the groups it is ignoring the elephant in the room :)
If you are affraid to do the right thing, then you are enabling the wrong thing, which makes you just as guilty of the consequences.
Suggesting all holocaust deniers are anti-semitic and want jews dead is as bad if not worse stereotyping.....
(indeed I would classify it as worse: many Holocaust deniers are simply delusional and historically uneducated, or brainwashed. Branding them anti-semitic and hateful is a considered opinion in the face of reasonable evidence. And, well, hateful.....)
For instance, we like to believe the general German populace in WO II was innocent, because they were powerless or in the dark. The fact is that they were taken in by Hitler and are guilty of that, but the painful truth of the way this happened is that it could happen to most of us. In 'most of us', I include myself: I can perfectly dream up scenario's in which I become Eichmann, despite what I am saying now. I'm no stranger to fear or prejudice and given a convincingly presented threat from the outside, who knows how you react to protected your loved ones?
Finally, their are two types of 'the right thing'. There is the morally right thing, based on principles and there is the morally right thing, based on the goal to be achieved. These often do not overlap, especially not when we have to acknowledge our oh-so-human shortcomings.
I wonder what they will do when a group of radical Muslims start an anti American group. Would the tone of the responses here be different then?
BTW, I think those without scruples are always a step ahead of us: the tools already exist and are used as effectively as they can get away with.
From that standpoint we agree.
I wonder what they will do when a group of radical Muslims start an anti American group. Would the tone of the responses here be different then?
Well, that will be an interesting day. :)