Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

> a manifesto inspired by the fascist manifesto

This is literally not true.



sort by: page size:

The phrase

> Only those on the far right believe this

I as hyperbolic as the phrase you are critical of, and equally absurd.


> but a purpose-built platform for conspiracies and hate speech.

That's just false.


>Frankly I'm struggling with the fact that there are links to that fascist shitrag

Maybe we should gather and burn its print copies /s

It's an article. Enjoy it or not on its own merits.


> It's hard to imagine "ideology" being relevant to the vast majority of reddit...

This is egregiously incorrect.


> pro-trump neo-fascists

all credibility lost.


>It's hilarious because it's so vague

It's not hilarious, it's the modus operandi to keep things vague so that they can hide behind apologists when called out. Like hiding behind decentralization to minimize the implicitly organized behavior of antifa. It's disingenuous and subversive. Then again I suppose subversion is the point...


>And it’s not inaccurate to use the F word...

>It's really amazing that the political faction obsessed with deploying a union of state and corporate power to silence their political opponents has somehow convinced itself that they're the ones fighting -- rather than constructing -- a fascist order.

https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1477738083684880384

Not to mention the indefinite suspension of civil liberties in favor of the "new normal" of a bio-security state.


> So when people like the author start claiming that Andreesen is "embracing fascism" it rings a little hollow. It's more like a trendy VC firm is chasing trends and trying to appear hip. I don't think there's much more to it than that and over-analyzing whatever manifesto they pump out this year to seem relevant is missing the point.

When someone with his power and wealth starts quoting proto-fascists among other far right-wing figures, even ridiculous ones like Ayn Rand, I think we need to start paying attention.


> I refused an interview from google and facebook, they questioned my sanity.

You were prematurely anti-facist.

(It's an old phrase: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/premature_antifascist )


>Supporters

>They don’t endorse anything on this page, but they love the internet.

Seems like a false flag.


> from a purely algorithmic standpoint

You could use the same argument on any extremist site.

Algorithm can parse content. It probably has list of bullshit related keywords. Just the title:

> Marxist analysis, international working class struggles & the fight for socialism


>Can you point me out to left leaning content that gets demonetized

This is a false equivalence. For all the flaws of Antifa and woke culture, they aren't the ones advocating violent insurrection against democratic government in the United States and the murder of Republican law makers for being traitors to the cause. Not as satire or comment, but literally.

I would contend that it is not surprising that one of these sides is encountering more problems with posting guidelines than the other.


> This, uh, looks like a semi-propaganda website.

In agreement with im3w1l, simply attacking the website is pure argument ad hominem.


> Correct. The word that these so called 'journalists' are looking for is more like 'authoritarian' rather than 'fascism' or 'Nazism'.

> Even by reading the article, it already suggests that the authors were spending too much time playing Nazi-related computer games in VR to bother even knowing what fascism is.

This is rich. The article's author (singular) is Jason Stanley. He's a frequent writer on the topics of propaganda and authoritarianism, and has written books on political philosophy and fascism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason_Stanley


> I'm not very familiar with Richard Spencer. Can show me an example where he self-describes as fascist? I couldn't find anything relevant on the wikipedia page. Ditto with breitbart being "obviously fascist".

Richard Spencer is essentially, a Nazi, his philosophy lines up pretty damn perfectly: https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Richard_Spencer#Everything.27s...

Breitbart is one of the major nodes in the new wave of cryptofascism that we have: https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Alt-right, https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Breitbart.com


> Milo Yiannopoulos advocates for practices that would literally kill people, in addition to advocating for pedophilia and getting very close to Nazi talking points.

You should be able to post some links illustrating this. I expect he says a lot of things that sound like that but which really aren't on closer inspection. Traditionally the political wings produce fan fiction of the other side and heavily paraphrase whatever the other side says.

Are you aware that Milo Yiannopoulos does not claim to be on the far right and they don't think he is either? His political orientation is best described troll-wing.


>It propaganda for fascists, and a machine of hate, targeting the mental inept.

Funny. I would have said the same about nearly every primary left-leaning media outlet.


> What Meta is doing is wrong

The very first example in the report is "river to the sea" which is arguably a dog whistle for genocide. Parts of liberal Europe have banned this slogan.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_the_river_to_the_sea#Lega...


> Another was a version of Hitler’s Mein Kampf, rewritten in feminist jargon

So rewritten it's difficult to identify how it's connected to Mein Kampf.

https://thesocietypages.org/cyborgology/2018/10/09/nothing-s... - "I read through their article Our Struggle Is My Struggle: Solidarity Feminism as an Intersectional Reply to Neoliberal and Choice Feminism and then went through the chapter of Mein Kampf this article is supposed to be mimicking ... and couldn’t find a single phrase that matched."

Or from https://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2018/10/why-the-grieva... - "However, the account of this given by the hoaxers is rather dishonest. Their re-writing of the text was so extensive that even a side-by-side comparison of the texts failed to show much similarity between them. Moreover, the part of Mein Kampf in question was making rather general claims about how to respond to (perceived) oppression. But to read the hoaxers’ account of things you’d think a Nazi diatribe had been published by a feminist journal with just a few words changed. And that’s not the case at all."

> What do 400-odd cases matter, after all?

It would be nice to put that in context, rather than make a rhetorical flourish.

That context should include the politics around UNC's decision to deny Hannah-Jones tenure.

next

Legal | privacy