Forums / Discussion / Serious Debate

There so much to cover (racism, sexism, antisemitism, etc etc) that i'm just going to call it /pol/ism, stormfrontitis is also acceptable. It seems like the more an more each day its like people from /pol/ are slowly taking over other website, many neutral sites seem to be seeing a lot of these types of users and this ideology.

Websites That seem to be unaffected are sites like tumblr and deviantart. But that's only in part due to the mob mentality that those sites hole. Sites like yahoo, youtube, and many others have been infected by people who hold these ideals. I've even seen a few snippets of it on this site here and there.

So do any of you think its that bad? And if so how would one deal with such a thing.

I've have been seeing more SJWism more than /pol/ism but i would like to know what websites have /pol/ reached to.

well youtube and yahoo are big ones.

I think we should shut it down.

I think blaming /pol/ is an incorrect diagnosis here. The important thing about /pol/, and 4chan in general, is that nothing is to be taken seriously; everyone on 4chan is a troll, so they post deliberately inflammatory messages that they probably don't agree with irl.

The maniacs on Youtube and Yahoo, however, often actually believe in whatever insane ramblings they post. Since Youtube, Yahoo, etc. are very large sites where anyone in the world can post whatever they want anonymously, so the freaks will inevitably crawl out of the woodwork. Youtube and Yahoo are just statistically more likely to attract maniacs than any other site thanks to their size.

>"It seems like the more an more each day its like people from /pol/ are slowly taking over other website, many neutral sites seem to be seeing a lot of these types of users and this ideology"

People have different ideologies and views on life, those people exist in places all across the web, even on sites where you'd least expect. Because people don't think in the same avenue as yourself doesn't mean they are wrong, as a matter of fact you are wrong for believing that your view is the right view.

Are people still finding it difficult that other people think differently from one another…it's that diversity that makes the world what it is, a shithole yes, but would you prefer a 1984 scenario?

If you can't tolerate others then you will get nowhere fast

So, not condoning people who literally support going back to the Jim Crow days or even genocide is somehow a bad thing?

So what are you going to do about it?

Tolerate them?
Arrest them for their views?
Exile them for their ideologies, shunning them entirely?
That's persecution

Kill them all?
That's genocide

People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones

Did you even read my post? These aren't just people with different opinions; their "views" involve harming or killing innocents! They are fucking criminals! Preventing someone from committing a murder isn't "persecution," it's fucking common sense!

I read it and seeing as you did a classic "I'm-going-straight-to-an-extreme-example-with-this-one" tactic I got bored with it, then a bit annoyed with it before finally discarding it.

Do think I'm lacking in morales? you don't need to tell that when someone commits a murder they should be imprisoned for it, that sorta life rule has been going on since Lil' Jesus. Fuck sake

The point I was arguing was peoples inability to tolerate different opinions, sometimes ones that vary greatly from their own. If your tactic of winning the argument was to throw "buh murder" at me then I'm going to take me shit and leave the thread

Do you not realize that this thread is specifically about racists/sexists/anti-semites/etc., groups who advocate discrimination against minorities, if not outright violence? There is no one who is racist/sexist that doesn't advocate breaking the law, because the U.S. has laws against discrimination and hate crimes. When someone threatens to bomb a building on the Internet, they get arrested and sent to jail, because even if they had committed no crime, the intent to commit crime was clearly there. Shouldn't the same principle apply here?

The thing about freedom of speech is that it protects the speech you don't like just as much as it protects the speech you do; That's the only way it can work. Even if they are racist/sexist/hateful or what have you, they still have a right to say it. However good your intentions in silencing distasteful opinions such as this, do keep in mind that the Charlie Hebdo attacks were carried out in the name of silencing distasteful opinions as well, and it wasn't right to do there either. No opinion should be censored just because other people don't like it.

>you did a classic "I'm-going-straight-to-an-extreme-example-with-this-one" tactic

And I quote:

Nowhere did Snickerway advocate to "kill them all" or to "exile them for their ideologies." Seems to me like you're the one going straight to extreme examples.

Might wanna wipe that hypocrisy off your chin mate.

OT:
I'm not sure if I could say that "/pol/ism", as you call it, has become more prevalent over the years on different websites. I've always thought of it as something that's always been there.

I'm mostly just annoyed by the people crying "political correctness gone mad!!!1!111!" or "muh freedom of speech" whenever others call them out on their racist or sexist bullshit. Freedom of speech means you're allowed to say whatever you want (with exceptions like slander, fighting words, etc.), but it doesn't mean freedom from social consequence. It seems to me like these people just want to be racist/sexist/hateful dicks without other people calling them out on it.

Yes it should. The problem is that they would need proof of intent to commit crimes in order to arrest people for that reason, which works for bomb threats because they're overt declarations, but what should happen is the government devises some way to precisely monitor individuals' thoughts and opinions so that they can arrest people for racism, sexism, and other forbidden viewpoints.

What, are you talking about this?

Arresting someone for some vague notion of "intent" to commit some nebulous, undefined potential "crime"?
What you're saying might make sense in some parallel world where everyone is completely serious in everything they say, like before Ricky Gervais invented lying. But how many has really dark humor, whether from professional comedians or anonymous web users, involved things like racism, genocide etc? And in the case of the bomb threat, you are right in that it's a crime, but the prosecution would first have to prove that the intent to actually commit the crime was there. If not, then it would at the most be a pretty short sentence for something along the lines of "disturbing the peace".
Also, how exactly do prove beyond a reasonable doubt "racism" in an individual objectively? Because I've seen so much bullshit reasons for why so-and-so is actually a racist that it just plain boggles my mind.
Other than that, I affirm what Cipher_Oblivion said.

The reality, TripleA9000, is that we're living in the most enlightened world that there's ever been. (Sometimes too "enlightened" in my opinion, but that's neither here nor there.) There will always be stupid and evil fucks- it's just best not to worry about it.

this thread is specifically about racists/sexists/anti-semites/etc., groups who advocate discrimination against minorities, if not outright violence? There is no one who is racist/sexist that doesn’t advocate breaking the law

That's a bit of a generalization. Who are you to judge them, you don't understand their circumstances or the goings on in their lives, they live in a different world to you, this is highly evident after seeing your views why can't they have theirs.

U.S. has laws against discrimination and hate crimes

The US is probs the most diverse country on the planet, I'm not surprised they have laws in place to stop people tearing the shit out of each other, it's a unique case. A US citizen would probably have difficulty understanding the the case of racism in places overseas where countries are mostly made up of either one or two solid cultural groups and races.

When someone threatens to bomb a building on the Internet, they get arrested and sent to jail, because even if they had committed no crime, the intent to commit crime was clearly there. Shouldn’t the same principle apply here?

So your saying that because someone has racist/sexist/whatever tendencies they are almost certainly going to commit a big crime, and that simply having those view is equal to actually stating that you was capable of committing a crime and doing it?

That's crazy, man. Seriously, that's you think that because someone doesn't like [insert object of persecution here] that they are going to almost certainly commit a crime against them. There's a big difference between having a racist view and threatening an airline on twitter with a bomb. The words "Thought Crime" are echoing about my head reading that

@shapaza

>"Might wanna wipe that hypocrisy off your chin mate."

Yeah "kill them all” “exile them for their ideologies.” I take it you completely missed me nodding at past happenings throughout history when giving my alternatives. Good job m80.

@Cipher_Oblivion
I was just about to make that point, took the words straight out of my mouth

It depends. If some asshole believes that "all homosexuals should die" or "homosexuals don't deserve jobs" (whatever bullshit these people support), they have the right to advocate these beliefs. But if someone starts going around advocating "kill/harm/discriminate against all homosexuals", or they say something like "from now on I'm going to discriminate and harm gay people", then I'd imagine the law could interfere.

this is nothing new, these backwards "white power" mentalities have been on sites like yahoo a long time ago.

Tbh it seems /pol/ just made it popular, back before that, we would see this mentality and instantly shun it, dismiss it or stuff like that.

with the rise of /pol/, this just helped people who already tthought like that to say "hey, im not alone on this" and make it easier for them to push said mentality.

also im sure 1 or 2 trolls go around trying to incite this shit

overall is just the internet being the internet, /pol/ might be shit when it comes to beliefs, but i hardly think 80% of the users are able to do anything, its all just bragging so i dont worry much.

or ban them from the site. You're not violating any of the rights, you're just saying they can't post here.

I'd just like to point out that there already seems to be an umbrella term for racism, sexism, homophobia, etc: Catagorism.

It's not just on the web. Far-right politics are on the rise everywhere in the world. From antisemites and islamophobes in Europe, to ISIS in the mideast, Boko Haram in Nigeria, homophobia in Africa in general and ethnic tensions in East Asia.

This is probably a reaction to the economic problems and social disruption caused by globalization.

Holy generalizations, Batman!

Calling ISIS and Boko Haram "far-right" shows off just how limited the two-directional political scale is when applied to the rest of the world, especially when you also include "islamophobia" in your list.
Also, I'm preeeeeeeeety sure that antisemitism in Europe is at an all-time low. Just guessing.

But, but muh freedom of speeches! Freedom of speech means that I can call black people and gay people subhuman trash and that you can't say anything about it!

/s

Let them spread. Maybe they'll trigger the SJWs to death. You know its for the best. Once the fire has consumed all the fuel it will die out.

Remember kids. Speak loud enough and the internet will think you are more powerful than you are.