Fascism/Antifascism and related topics

Post Reply New Topic

First one for The_Walrus.

What is your opinion on that video, Pepe?

It has been a bit since I watched that video, especially considering current discussion, but I am pretty sure that it is not anti-Antifa, nor saying they are similar things. And a little late right now for me to watch an old Philosophy Tube, especially considering the comment that Olly put about a week ago in the comments to watch the entire thing before commenting.

Every post standing against Antifa gets locked,and your called fascist for being against violent demonstration.

You have your answer,we all know what goes on.

OK,

I started to look for youtube clips of White Supremacists explaining their point of view.
After scrolling down, it became obvious that I was not going to have an easy time of it.

My understanding is that platforms such as youtube, Facebook, Twitter have a left-wing bias in that they filter out far-right-wing material.
Is this correct?
Or is it possible to find information that is unfiltered and not through the eyes of left-wing commentators?

And no, I am not interested in becoming a fascist.
I simply want to analyse, for my self, the thinking behind the movement.

Can anyone help?
Is what I am asking against WP policy?

The video is pro-Antifa.
Hence, my saying it was for The_Walrus.
I want to understand both positions.

The video has a position or two which may be in conflict with what I have heard elsewhere, in some areas.
And at least one point which seems to defy reason.
I have only watched it once and would like to see it again, but as you know, it is late, so tomorrow it is.

Is deleting content that promotes a racist worldview 'anti-right bias' or just 'anti-racist'? Not all right wingers are racist, so maybe white nationalism isn't an inherently right-wing position so much as just a position many on the right take - if that's the case deleting pro-WN content is merely anti-racist. Goldbug right wingers who want to post their economic fantasies don't have their content deleted, just the racists.

If you want a blond bodybuilder attempt to sound well-read and explain his white nationalist viewpoint in a terrible swedish accent , I think The Golden One still has a YT channel.

The social media platforms don't have a left bias per se. But far-right white supremacist content is not only violating "community guidelines" but also hate-speech legislation and laws against inciting violence and genocide. You can however watch far-right apologists until your eyes and ears bleed. Only, the apologists will not outright state that the Holocaust never happened, but if it were to happen, it would be justified, to paraphrase some far-right ideas. Watch Jordan Peterson to learn about how people get ehat they deservevand women should be sexy housewives. Or, yes, the golden one, they're basically the same. PragerU. Alex Jones. Fox news. Hell, they even have TV-shows, not just youtube channels. They're right wing, but not really far right.
If you want far right, you can always read Mein Kampf.
The lefties on YouTube are also more critics of the capitalism and the right than they are actual far-left activists or anything. Currently, it's capitalism coopting leftie anger to sell ad space.

A but of an older hbomberguy video.

Well, the problem is still there, for me.
I still want to understand White Supremacist views.

If I were a journalist,
One with ethics and integrity,
(Yes, I know, scarce as hen's teeth,)
Where would I find the information for my analysis?

The problem still exists.
And that problem is one of censorship.

BTW,
Even conservative, errr, conservatives have been targeted through the defunding of their channel.
These platforms *are* left-wing biased.
For the record, do you emphatically deny that?

Nope.
I am after bigger fish.

Presumably,
There are manipulators at the top, who use "Useful Idiots".
Wasn't it Stalin who used that term?
Hitler did the same.

Stalin and Hitler had the capacity to think clearly.
Thinking ethically is another matter.
Presumably, there are leaders of the white supremacist groups who can present cogent arguments.
I think that is a reasonable assumption.

Now that I think about it,
There is "Storm Front" if they haven't been taken off the internet.
I was hoping for something better, though.

So no one can assist me here?
Anyone?
Anyone at all?

You're still confusing their unwillingness to tolerate their platforms being used to spread bigotry with an anti-right wing bias. Why do right-wingers agree to terms of service and then feel they shouldn't be bound by the terms they chose to agree to?

There is a difference between censoring and deplatforming. That difference is why we should not teach Mein Kampf in schools or on children tv channels that have Play School. Just because someone has an opinion it does not give them the right to force that opinion on others, especially if it that opinion might be considered dangerous and audience may be impressionable to that dangerous opinions.

Whoever gets to decide if something is dangerous would be those who own that platform, and in high volume platforms may be decided by guidelines that the content creators should be aware of. The reason that these right-wing platforms have often found themselves being deplatformed is that that they break the guidelines, like spreading conspiracy theories that may lead audiences to commit violence, spreading hate against protected groups like minorities, and often twisting facts or outright lying in ways that do call for responsible platforms to correct them from spreading falsehoods. The platforms are not Left wing, they mostly care about money, it is just that these common Right Wing views like white supremacists are so egregious that they trigger breaking sensible guidelines and cannot explain themselves.

Left Wing content creators also find themselves at victim of defunding their content, where just talking about a topic could be mistaken as a problem, like speaking out against rape being mistaken as pro, or some other controversial topic. A lot of Left leaning channels realize that when talking about an important subject they are not going to make any money off of that video. A channel that likes to go over a bunch of funny memes or posts might know that their video with LGBT memes is not going to be recommended or be without ads, but will do it anyway because they think it is positive. The Left content creators have often found themselves just as punished as the Right ones, but it will be the Right wing ones complaining more because they love to be victims.

The Right see no problems with something like religious people going into schools and will lose their mind if there is an expression to not allow their cult leaders to try and brainwash kids. And then will also lose their mind at the concept of kids being able to learn about their bodies through safe and comprehensive sex-ed, or that they might have even come into contact with an LGBT person.

The problem still exists.
Where can I find what I am looking for?
Surely you don't expect me to use a non-primary source?
That is a last resort.

And yet left-leaning commentary, explaining Far-right-philosophies, are allowed.
Interesting.

BTW,
Is it a crime to use the "Dark Web" for research purposes?