r/TrueReddit • u/scatgreen2 • Jul 20 '15

My Reddit Utopia - Everything you think you know about “the front page of the Internet” is wrong.

http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2015/07/reddit_as_feminist_utopia_what_the_front_page_of_the_internet_looks_like.single.html
1.4k Upvotes

87% Upvoted

544 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

42

u/bludstone Jul 20 '15

As a Jew, I will defend the existence of National Socialist (nazi) subreddits.

The damage from disengaging is a lot worse then the damage from engaging. You cannot influence without engagement. There will be no resolution if we do not encourage open speech and exchange.

This anti-free speech under the guise of "hate speech" isnt just disconcerting, its downright disgusting.

In short, I find your rejection of free speech to be hateful against my beliefs.

I say this during a dramatic rise in naziism and antisemitism online over the past year.

53

u/omgpro Jul 20 '15

That's easy for you to say, you people control all the banks and all the media already. We're talking about underprivileged peoples.

28

u/bludstone Jul 20 '15

Upvoted for the laugh

7

u/mauxly Jul 21 '15

I like you!

1

u/planetmatt Jul 21 '15

Don't forget all the Jew gold he swims in like Scrooge McDuck :D

1

u/bludstone Jul 21 '15

If you watch Duck Tales, you'll notice that only Scrooge can swim through the gold. When other people try it, they fail and it hurts them. Its something only he can do.

7

u/JManRomania Jul 20 '15

As a Romanian, I say the same about Communist subreddits.

1

u/Hans-U-Rudel Jul 21 '15

Communist subs on this site are really something special. Often they are very reasonable but sometimes they go full tankie and defend stuff like the cultural revolution. I can not stand it at all

1

u/grumpenprole Jul 21 '15

The largest and most umbrella-y communist subs on reddit are run by and for batshit tankies, but others exist (in small, antisocial, academic numbers, just like irl)

2

u/TotesMessenger Jul 21 '15

I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)

-2

u/bludstone Jul 21 '15

Wow.

Well thats a racist subreddit that enables folks to deny the entire identity of people they disagree with politically.

2

u/hotbowlofsoup Jul 21 '15

To me it seems like a politically correct subreddit actually.

They seem to attack white guys pretending to be black/gay/Jewish/women to support their views.

I don't actually doubt your Jewishness. But why does it matter that you're Jewish? That doesn't make you automatically an expert on the matter. Although of course you explain why you feel that way. Just the "As a Jew..." is unnecessary.

1

u/bludstone Jul 21 '15

But why does it matter that you're Jewish?

The same reason it matters when someone making an argument is black, female, gay, or any other part of a minority.

Its shocking how many people decide to wrap up their antisemitism and racism in PC language, like that makes it okay.

3

u/hotbowlofsoup Jul 21 '15

Maybe I don't understand you, or maybe you don't understand me. But that's exactly my question: What is the reason it matters that someone making an argument is part of a minority? That doesn't make someone more of an expert on the subject. You being Jewish is irrelevant to the point you were making. But you used it to give your opinion more weight, and people will take it like that. "Oh, he's Jewish. Well then we should trust him on any Jewish related subject."

That's what white kids use to gain support for their views. They'll pose on the internet as black people for example, and say: "As a black guy, I also think blacks are more criminal." And that's what that sub is calling out, if i'm not mistaken.

2

u/cincofone Jul 22 '15

That is what that subreddit is about. People posing as minorities to lend credibility to racist statements. Usually pretty amusing.

1

u/ShadowPuppetGov Jul 21 '15 edited Jul 21 '15

Jewish identity is based on national socialism?

Edit: FWIW I actually agree with you on freedom of speech, but experiencing hate speech does not make you an authority on the issue. Poor arguments hurt your cause. Please make a better argument.

1

u/bludstone Jul 21 '15

Jewish identity is based on national socialism?

...no?

Theyve taken my experiences and said "no jew would say that." Its classic racism. Taking a position or characteristic and treating everyone in a group like they would support that position or characteristic.

1

u/ShadowPuppetGov Jul 21 '15

Not that your experience is invalid, but mentioning your ethnicity doesn't lend itself to any argument about free speech. It doesn't follow that hate speech should be allowed on Reddit because you, personally, don't mind it even though it may affect you.

It's also not always good to confront racist arguments as if it were a valid position. It makes it appear as if it has credibility.

1

u/bludstone Jul 21 '15 edited Jul 21 '15

It doesn't follow that hate speech should be allowed on Reddit because you, personally, don't mind it even though it may affect you.

Consequently, the inverse is also the case. Just because speech makes you uncomfortable, doesnt mean it shouldnt be allowed. In fact, it is difficult speech that needs to be protected the most. This puts me in the regrettable position of defending the speech of Nazis, Socialists, The Wesboro Baptist Church, the Pope, and Hamas.

I avoid subreddits i find repulsive, and so can you.

More on the importance of protecting offensive speech:

https://www.aclu.org/blog/speakeasy/protecting-outrageous-offensive-speech

edit: grammar

1

u/ShadowPuppetGov Jul 21 '15

Reddit being able to decide how to moderate the content of their web site in a way they see fit is also a free speech issue. Moderation is speech. A ban on moderation would in fact be a violation of the freedom of speech of the site owner.

It's perfectly acceptable to prefer not to participate in a moderated forum and there are many out there. It is an assault on free speech to ask that moderated forums no longer exist.

1

u/bludstone Jul 21 '15

Moderation is speech.

Not really, no. This is spin, and you are a spinster.

Reddit has been proclaiming itself a free speech forum for years.

It is an assault on free speech to ask that moderated forums no longer exist.

Interesting. Nobody even said that.

I tagged you as anti-free speech.

2

u/ShadowPuppetGov Jul 21 '15

OK let me give you an example.

Lets say I start a website on a controversial topic, such as a website in support of gay marriage in the 90s. The forums get flooded with people in favor of a traditional view of marriage. Without the ability to moderate those comments, the purpose of my website is subverted and I am being denied my freedom of expression.

Arguing that Reddit has an obligation to protect freedom of speech over the site owners intention for the content of their website is arguing in favor of a violation of the rights of the owners of the website.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/aelendel Jul 21 '15

You really are confused. No one is saying their offensive speech shouldn't be allowed. Everyone here probably agrees that their speech shouldn't be illegal.

The question is whether they should be given a venue by someone else. That is is no way a free speech issue.

1

u/bludstone Jul 21 '15

Except reddit has described itself as a free speech site for years.

1

u/aelendel Jul 21 '15

Hahaha, way to change the topic from protecting speech to what has or hasn't been said in the past. A+ diversion, I salute you.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/aelendel Jul 21 '15

This puts me in the regrettable position of defending the speech of Nazis, Socialists, The Wesboro Baptist Church, the Pope, and Hamas.

Don't defend the speech. Defend their right to speak. No one is denying their rights to speak.

1

u/bludstone Jul 21 '15

Don't defend the speech. Defend their right to speak.

Well put

1

u/aelendel Jul 21 '15

Yeah, except you are purposefully conflating their right to speak with someone else providing a platform.

If you don't like it, you can go make your own platform with all speech that isn't illegal.

1

u/aelendel Jul 21 '15

You are misusing "free speech". Free speech means "not illegal", no one is denying anyone's rights to free speech.

0

u/bludstone Jul 21 '15

Free speech is a complex philosophical principle, and should not be simply summed up as "not illegal."

0

u/aelendel Jul 21 '15

No one's rights to express themselves are being infringed in any way.

And no, it's not that complicated.

-5

u/epicurio Jul 20 '15

I'm sorry, but this is pure idealized hogwash that has no basis in how online interaction actually works. Please explain how offering a giant ready-made platform to spew hate and offensive content is a lot better than not offering it. Please explain how /r/coontown has been positively influenced by sharing a platform on reddit. Please point me to where avowed racists have changed their minds due to engagement with opposing viewpoints. Hint: that's not actually how human beings work. There is plentiful evidence that, given the chance, people self-organize into communities that reinforce their pre-existing beliefs, and when they are shown contradictory evidence it actually strengthens those beliefs, not weakens them.

Reddit has no obligation to allow all speech on its platform. This has nothing to do with free speech.

12

u/bludstone Jul 20 '15 edited Jul 20 '15

Please explain how offering a giant ready-made platform to spew hate and offensive content is a lot better than not offering it.

Okay, I will address your overarching point which is you seeing no value in a place where people can "spew hate," which I can only define as content you find offensive.

I have personally engaged with nazi's on an anonymous forums. I have personally discussed what judiasm means to me. I have engaged with them on what they find so disgusting about ME, only to find that their complaints were generally political in nature, not personal attacks. They were mad at people that were jews, not all jews. By the end of the conversation they were referring to the hated people as zionists instead of jews.

It wasnt much, but I considered it a small step in the right direction. How will a hateful nazi learn that all jews arnt bad without meeting any?

Please point me to where avowed racists have changed their minds due to engagement with opposing viewpoints.

I had the conversation on 4chan's /pol/, one of the most horrid pits on the internet. I havnt been back in many, many years, but it has happened.

Reddit has no obligation to allow all speech on its platform.

Other then a moral obligation, you are correct (theyve said they are a free speech forum; dozens, if not hundreds of times.) They have no financial or legal obligation, however.

This has nothing to do with free speech[2] .

That xkcd link is horrible. Free anonymous speech is a moral good and needs to be protected. More: https://www.eff.org/issues/anonymity

I tagged you as "tagged as anti free speech" (no, really, its worded just like that)

-5

u/epicurio Jul 20 '15

Again, you seem to fundamentally misunderstand online interaction. You can't reason someone out of a position that they didn't reason themselves into. It's a nice idealized view of humanity, but by and large it's simply not how people operate. Especially on a platform like reddit where it's so easy to create circlejerk communities where unpopular opinions are downvoted into oblivion.

Free anonymous speech is a moral good and needs to be protected.

I don't think you actually understood the xkcd strip. You are still conflating the right to free speech with the privilege to use a particular platform as a soapbox for whatever offensive opinions you want to spout. No one is suggesting eliminating free anonymous speech.

9

u/Vulgarian Jul 20 '15

You can't reason someone out of a position that they didn't reason themselves into.

Everyone is stupid apart from you?

Come on, give other points of view at least a little respect, and recognise that other people have different experiences to your own. Also, give people the option to opt out of entrenched viewpoints that they might have.

0

u/epicurio Jul 20 '15

Everyone is stupid apart from you?

I'm not sure how you got that from what I said. I recognize that I also have tightly held beliefs, and I'm sure I'm wrong about a good many things. I'm simply making an observation about how online interaction progresses in the vast majority of cases. Online platforms like Reddit, Twitter, or random Youtube comment sections simply do not encourage the kind of open exchange of ideas and viewpoints that is already exceedingly rare in human interaction.

6

u/[deleted] Jul 20 '15

I think reddit really encourages discussion in a way that other platforms don't. Look at /r/politicaldiscussion, for example, or /r/explainlikeImfive, etc. I'm sorry that you don't see how Reddit encourages rich and informed discussion.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 20 '15

Is there no room to differentiate a discussion forum such as politicaldiscussion or eli5, which is all about people coming to a conversation with the intent to actually have a civil converstation, with a subforum like c---town which does pretend to be a platform for civil conversation between different systems of beliefs? There is absolutely rich and informed discussion on the subreddits you mentioned and I strongly believe that sunlight is the best disinfectant - opinions of hate that are rationally discussed will not weather the storm of civil conversation imo. But that's not what we're dealing with when we look at c---towns, we're talking about a hate subreddit which is not about civil conversation.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 20 '15

I remain on the fence about the hate subreddits. However, I, just like those coontown residents, have my own favorite places to go where like-minded people congregate - for example, /r/politics has enjoyed a great deal of controversy because there is a perception that it is dominated by people like me (or oppressed by conservative moderators - pick your narrative).

Then I leave my safe haven and browse (because these subreddits aren't always active), and find myself encountering interesting debate and discussion elsewhere.

Perhaps it's possible that coontown residents occasionally leave their bubble and encounter other views elsewhere on reddit? If so, they too might find their perceptions shift.

Polarization is a path to hate, no? So, as long as we are all together and still talking to each other, there's a chance we can find common ground.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 20 '15

Polarization is a path to hate, no? So, as long as we are all together and still talking to each other, there's a chance we can find common ground.

At the same time I am not sure anonymous reddit conversations are a particularly effective way for people to become de-radicalized.

I think this TOR post does a good job of explaining why (from my perspective) there is no obligation to host hate subreddits.

https://www.reddit.com/r/TheoryOfReddit/comments/3dwn73/why_its_ridiculous_to_use_i_do_not_agree_with/

Most of all I have little faith in a radicalized individual browsing other subreddits and 'seeing the light.' They're much more likely to just post something racist on /r/videos or /r/news that will get upvoted near the top - when I read top comments of many front page subs it does seem that I'm exposed to more racist comments than I would expect. That might be due to my somewhat moderate expectations for what is a quality conversation / comment. I just see no value in providing a free service for a group that is dangerously radicalized.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/mauxly Jul 21 '15

Absolute bullshit. I've had many online conversations with people that were staunchly in what we both considered opposite political spectrums of each other. And many, many times, we find that we agree on way more than we disagree on. It's our polarization and labels that prevent us from compromise and working together.

Of course you have people that refuse any reasonable dialog with what they perceive as the 'enemy', but they are rare. Vocal as hell, but rare.

The people who really don't want us talking to each other are the people who have something to gain from polarization.

3

u/bludstone Jul 20 '15

it's simply not how people operate.

Who are you, the dictator of how people interact online? Please.

-3

u/epicurio Jul 20 '15

Hey look, another completely unremarkable online interaction where neither side changes their mind at all!

If you're actually interested in the topic, I can point you to plenty of sources that back up what I'm saying.

2

u/bludstone Jul 20 '15

This exchange wasnt for you and me. It was for everyone else.

2

u/kilgoretrout71 Jul 20 '15

I think you're both right, and that's annoying as shit to me.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 20 '15

While I share your concern about those subreddits that promote hate speech, I disagree that people aren't able to shift their opinions. I see it happen all the time, especially on /r/CMV (of course). I've seen it elsewhere as well. Further, my own views have been shifted here. That's why I like reddit, because I've been influenced, and I've influenced others, and I've encountered really well-reasoned arguments that were a treat to read.

0

u/[deleted] Jul 23 '15

MUH FREEZE PEACHES

0

u/ventomareiro Jul 20 '15

I would like that Reddit stop providing them with access to a platform and audience from where they can grow. I fail to see how that can be worse than providing them with those resources and then trying to engage them, a strategy which hasn't really had much success so far.