This story is archived
Propellertalk- Bigotry, The Internet, And You »
Posted by: Radiofreeeuropa 1 year, 11 months agoWhile it is true, the World Wide Web is an extraordinary bastion for the principals of free speech and the free exchange of ideas it can also be a breeding ground for hate and groups who seek to spread it. Shockingly, these types of sites are on the rise in recent times. It's a razor's edge that divides the issue of free speech from lurid racism an
Read Full Story at propellertalk.com »
Submitted By:
Radiofreeeuropa
All progress comes from unreasonable people.
Rats live on no evil star!
Wasilla: All I saw...
Sorry, just palindroming around with terrorists.
Are you still ...
Who Also Submitted:
This Story is Archived and Commenting is Closed
Comments: 392
-
Radiofreeeuropa
Jan. 31, 2008, 12:48 a.m.Hello all, it seems we've had quite a bit of conversation on this subject of late and we may in fact be 'talked out', but for better or worse we have another voice in the wilderness weighing in and reaching out. Some folks have claimed this subject is much ado about nothing, I beg to differ. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center there are 844 active hate groups hard at work here in the US. Click your state on the map and learn about some of them. I was very surprised when I first visited this site and looked at who was spreading hatred in my own state.
http://www.splcenter.org/intel/map/hate.jsp
-
eugenegerard
Jan. 31, 2008, 1:33 a.m.Liberty and freedom of speech do not mean that you can say anything you want. Feedom of speech bears a responsibility to be factual and truthful. When lies are spread or facts tweaked the very principal of freedom comes under attack.
Freedom is atwo edged sword. On one hand you can choose wrong. On the other you have a responsibility to do what's right. If you don't you could loose your Right to choose.
-
Radiofreeeuropa
Jan. 31, 2008, 1:42 a.m.True, sites that are presenting false information can be exposed. But here on propeller, what do you think the best approach to dealing with them is?
-
crespi
Jan. 31, 2008, 1:50 a.m.Actually the internet started out flooded with White Supremacy sites, Fundamentalist "Christian" sites and conservative hate pundits of the most extreme nature. (Many of which I have quoted on other threads.)
These have morphed into more "respectable" forms but are still horribly virulent.
When you offer to justify and encourage jealous hate, inferiority-complex rage, and scapegoating you get a lot of followers.
Iran was the most Democratic nation in the middle east in 1953. We toppled Mossadegh and put in the Shah. He was so hated it created the Radical Islam movement by pushing the population towards the Ayatollahs. NOW WE ARE SUPPOSED TO HATE IRANIANS AND WANT TO PREEMPTIVELY NUKE THEM.
That's how hate works on Americans, like a charm.
-
Radiofreeeuropa
Jan. 31, 2008, 2:12 a.m.Where does censorship come in to play if at all? Can [to use economic terms] "market forces" adjust the market?
-
Spadecaller
Jan. 31, 2008, 5:50 a.m.Great article!
Some of us are purists who condemn any form of free speech and there are others who would go to the opposite end of the spectrum and advocate censorship against anything that remotely appears to threaten the American way of life, whatever that is. I think both positions have their flaws.
Permit me the liberty of reaffirming my view; I will defend the first amendment rights of anyone -- including members of the neo-Nazi party, Aryan Nation, the KKK, or any of the 3000 hate groups, to assemble and march down our streets, but I will not belong to a blog site or an organization that gives them a platform, which "victimizes, harasses, degrades, or intimidates an individual or group of individuals on the basis of religion, gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, age, or disability." However, I do support anyone's right to comment on the threads, even when (I think) it is grossly inappropriate and mean-spirited.
(continued)
-
canadianrancher57
Jan. 31, 2008, 8:08 a.m.Free speech is a wonderful freedom and I question at times whether it is right to censor anything. On this site we have a terms of use agreement statement but if it was followed to the letter we would not have many articals to view or comment on. Many who comment on the site or post stories have links to support the story or their views so it means they are usually not alone in what they believe, whether it is the true is determined by what I consider is our greatest right and that is the right to thought, this is one right that cannot be takesn away by any one. The right to thought allows us to come to a conclusion on a topic but it means we must have access to all the facts whether they are considered truthful or not. Before you jump on me about this statement just think back to before the start of the Iraqi war, society was presented information which was not true and yet the majority accepted it. (Continued)
-
canadianrancher57
Jan. 31, 2008, 8:19 a.m.Many comments that are made on this site are prejudice but in a way that is acceptable, a simple example of this is the story last summer of the religious tractor pull event, which still today gets references toward those who attend such events, They have been painted with a brush which most of them would oppose. The reason for my participation on this site is as a social interaction with people as well as a search for questions I have. I will continue to look for the truth in many areas and if it means viewing stories that may be offensive to some I hope this will not be held against me. One belief I have is, there is little danger in questioning a person or his beliefs but if you want a fight insult that person and his beliefs. I chose to question, hopefully it is safer.
-
tchef
Jan. 31, 2008, 8:37 a.m.It's an unfortunate truth that there are always going to be haters out there. Even if we all became the same color and practiced the same religion some one would still find a reason to blame all their problems on some one else. It's easier to do than to find the real root of the problem.
Great article. I know I for one don't just blindly vote on stories just because they where sent to me. I rarely sink anything unless I find it really offensive.
-
Shadowolf
Jan. 31, 2008, 8:44 a.m.Blind hate is stupidity,no matter WHOSE T-shirt they're wearing...(My own antipathy of NeoConArtists is not blind;it's reasoned!!!)
Seriously; I learned the hard way not to go toe-to-toe with hatemongers and agents provocature...someone starts baiting you and getting in your face back off and report them...
-
2sidestoeverything
Jan. 31, 2008, 9 a.m.A very good article thank you Radio for submitting this. I also enjoyed reading the post above.
-
Bkumm
Jan. 31, 2008, 10:04 a.m.Great article Radio and well said all.
The question really becomes where is the line drawn between freedom of speech and freedom from speech that we find offensive?
My position on the issue is difficult to articulate without a long discussion so suffice it to say that I do not support, condone or approve of prejudice in any of its myriad forms. On the other hand, I am a firm believer in the moral right to do anything that does not actively harm another. So, while there are things out there that may harm you in an emotional way, you are not required to hear, see or be around them. Therefore, I think those of us for whom this issue is an issue of personal harm should confront it if they so choose. On the other hand, those of us that do not find this an issue of personal harm should also do as they see fit.
I fully respect both opinions in this matter.
-
Commodore1
Jan. 31, 2008, 10:15 a.m.Yes, now the idiots in the hate groups can reach all the other idiots who want to join. Why can't they try something challenging and try being nice, accepting and respectful. Hating is just too easy and it has no rewards.
-
tehranchik
Jan. 31, 2008, 11:32 a.m.Information=knowledge. If you take even the smallest bit of information away, you've taken taken some knowledge with it. I want that information. I want to be able to make my own choices---not someone elses. I don't want to risk being taken down a path I might not have chosen, because someone else deems it hateful. I want be able to deal with it, face it, understand it.
When I see information disappear it makes me think about book burnings.
My vote on propeller means many things: I've been there, I've read the article, I think it needs discussion, I agree with the article or I disagree with the article but want others to see it to have a conversation about it. So--please hold your 'hater' remarks inside your own heads.
-
sumptuousdigs
Jan. 31, 2008, 11:39 a.m.There is a phrase that someone shared with me decades ago that hasn't surfaced on these threads, and describes a subliminal motive for prejudice or bigotry quite succinctly. "Effortless superiority". Commodore1, that is reward enough for some.
-
Bkumm
Jan. 31, 2008, 11:48 a.m.That a great term. "Effortless superiority". It's what some people have experienced for a long time.
-
sumptuousdigs
Jan. 31, 2008, 11:44 a.m.As a matter of fact, whole nations have elevated themselves above the rest, just by believing the others are 'less than'.
Once a people are 'less than', they become easy prey. Take their wealth, their culture, their deemed more desirable people as your own, and denigrate and destroy the rest.
-
Klarissa
Jan. 31, 2008, 12:32 p.m.One of the reasons I signed on to Propeller was to hear the "other side".
I want to know that there are people out there who are anti- someone or some thing. When I've read the hateful posts (hang him, or I'll supply the bullets) I feel that I need to know that there a people out there who have extreme feelings and are very vocal about it. I may neg them, but never block them.
Hearing all of your opinions helps me to know what I should be doing to help keep our country free and perhaps a better place.
-
sumptuousdigs
Jan. 31, 2008, 1:42 p.m.Exactly Klarissa!
Hearing the other side is one of the best things about posting text! One may be outnumbered, but can't be muzzled or shouted down.
The most difficult thing for me, is to not get angry at times. When I feel that, then I may have a vulnerability. It's not always the case, but it may expose some bigoted feelings of my own.
I have an aversion to zealots, and the closed minded, and zelously and single mindedly pick fights sometimes. LOL! This generally exposes my intolerance of differing opinions. I have friends at work that hold diametrically opposing viewpoints on some issues. I think mine are 'better than'. I have to remember that 'I' am not 'better than'.
-
AntiNeoCon
Jan. 31, 2008, 2:01 p.m.You could add "talk radio" to the list pretty easily. Most of it is extremely biased and slanted, filled with messages of hate and lies.
-
KISA452a
Jan. 31, 2008, 2:15 p.m.This is a great post. The problem is that "those in power" (here that is Propeller people) tend to consider themselves "right. They see no problem suppressing the other side (not always but we all know it happens to an extent)because they are "right". For instance. It used to be ok to say bad things aboutgays. Now you can't speak negatively (according to the rules). Soon, you will only be able to say positive things. Or choose your own personal "special group".
This is the problem with censorship. You DEMAND that people in power force their thoughts onto you. If you agree with them, that seems like a good deal because they shut down your opposition. But remember, those in power change. Next time they will come and take away your rights. So, before you agree to censorship against anything, just realize you have given the green light to have yourself censored in the future when people disagree with you.
-
Truzseeker
Jan. 31, 2008, 3:39 p.m.its frustrating when you can't post a story such as this... http://money.cnn.com/2008/01/30/news/internatio...
-
1-2-Oscar
Jan. 31, 2008, 3:41 p.m.Finally!
Finally the leadership is in place to effect a "Cultural Revolution" on this site. This will enable Propeller to take a "Great Leap Forward."
-
Spadecaller
Jan. 31, 2008, 6:03 p.m.What I find disheartening is that when we discuss the subject of bigotry on Propeller, it only remains civil as long as no one discusses his or her specific experiences with it.
After posting my story about bigotry on Propeller, I observed how people get hurt.
One individual for example, reacted "passionately" to a blatant attack on homosexuality. The word "homo" is an epithet and a slur. Most of us know that. It was sad to see how many people dismissed this behavior. That is not to say that there were not some who acknowledged the insult and showed their support.
There was obvious hurt that occurred. The target of this oppression lashed back with several paragraphs of discourse. However, most members remained silent, denied its importance, or pretended that "words don't hurt."
(continued)
-
Spadecaller
Jan. 31, 2008, 6:08 p.m.If words can't hurt then there is no need for the Terms of Use at all.
Nonetheless, I have noticed that some of us either identify with the guilt of the oppressor or the pain of the victim. Either way, a problem exists and it is most often neglected.
When anyone dares to admit they feel hurt, they are accused of being "overly sensitive." Sometimes they are accused of having a persecution complex.
Resistance to facing the harms that people do to each other perpetuates more of the same. When will begin to get honest?
-
Shankari25Comment has been removed: Retracted by user
The first 276 comments are shown. Show all 392 comments »
Submit a Story
Advertisement
