Twitter suspends alt-right accounts

[Zeke_N.Destroi]

@Bricker

…I have railed at the mocking and derision leveled by the left, because in my view it led to the Trump election. But if my own snark fueled that fire, and it probably did, then I have myself to blame for adding to the problem.

my emphasis

[hijack] Are you someone with some degree of national prominence or influence? If so how much effect do you feel you had?

If not, then how do you figure you meaningfully “fuelled that fire”? [/hijack]

[marshmallow]

@MostlyClueless

The greatest marketing trick white supremacists pulled was getting called “alt-right”.

More like the alt-reich.

Guess ThelmaLou and Knowed Out aren’t big fans of alt-rock.

Alt-right was supposed to be an umbrella term covering disparate factions outside the right wing establishment, such as anti-globalists, neo-monarchists, and the dark enlightenment. In my experience it’s basically just a mainstreamed version of 4chan’s /pol/ culture.

[BlankSlate]

Twitter banned ISIS accounts a while back. How is this any different?

[jtur88]

@dracoi

This is such total nonsense.

If the alt right had something truthful and non-hateful to say, they have a million places from which to shout it out. As it stands, they’re stuck with a well-known website, some radio talk shows and an office in the White House, which permits them to say anything they want, regardless of how false and hateful it is.

My post is about the change in the nature of the venue in which people conduct their affairs, including but not limited to exercising rights. Increasingly, those “million places” are dominated by corporate ownership, whose rights trump personal liberties.

And, not to be an apologist for the alt-right (which I’m not), there is a profound difference between “truthful” and that which any particular speaker holds dear, including those of us who post here. Yes, I know: total nonsense. Not necessary to keep repeating.

[Kyrie_Eleison]

@jtur88

My post is about the change in the nature of the venue in which people conduct their affairs, including but not limited to exercising rights. Increasingly, those “million places” are dominated by corporate ownership, whose rights trump personal liberties.

Yeah, we need to return to the days when the government provided printing presses and ink to anyone who had something to say.

[iamthewalrus_3]

@dracoi

This is such total nonsense.

If the alt right had something truthful and non-hateful to say, they have a million places from which to shout it out. As it stands, they’re stuck with a well-known website, some radio talk shows and an office in the White House, which permits them to say anything they want, regardless of how false and hateful it is.

It’s not nonsense.

No one is claiming that Twitter’s move is going to silence the alt-right. As you point out, they have plenty of venues for their rage.

But it is a problem that there’s no protected free speech venue on the internet. There is only finding a company that agrees with your message (or at least doesn’t disagree strongly enough to kick you off).

Free speech rights always come into play for unpopular speech. No one who’s saying generally agreeable things needs the protections of free speech. The fact that the alt-right are a bunch of hateful fucktards is almost necessary for a substantive free speech issue to arise.