Cis white tech bros resisting the urge to patronizingly mansplain to minorities what is best for them challenge level: Impossible

#substacknazis

Subtoot of the Substack CEO saying that they don't want to deplatform Nazis because ... somehow deplatforming Nazis hurts Nazi's victims???

If you actually feel like reading this pathetic bullshit statement, https://infosec.exchange/@JessTheUnstill/111619921215990352

And no, I'm not talking just about conservatives or Republicans, I'm talking LITERAL SWASTIKA COVERED PAGES kind of nazis.

If your platform bans consenting adults posting pictures of their own bodies and their interactions with other consenting adults bodies but does not ban Nazis, you can't tell me that you don't censor content. You do censor content, you're just okay with Nazis.

@JessTheUnstill@infosec.exchangNazis are not some sort of magical beings that multiply in the dark, they seek light/attention so they can multiply and platforming them and providing a financial incentive for being a nazi definitely increase both the wealth and power of nazis. Nazis don't magically function differently than other people when it comes to money, exposure, celebrity influencers and power.

@JessTheUnstill Exactly fucking this. 😡​

@JessTheUnstill

I’m leading an involuntary celibate life.

Seeing images of a certain nature depresses me.

That’s why I appreciate content warnings so much.

My tastes should have nothing to do with what other people post except actual nazis.

Block away instances, please.
Block away.
I’ll report and block the ones you all haven’t seen yet.

My point isn't that everyone needs to host porn on their website - people are allowed to choose what sort of content they host or not. But you can't say "we don't think we have the right to censor content we find reprehensible" in the same breath you say "we are censoring content that shows human beings doing exceedingly normal and healthy human being sorts of things with one another".

@Pagan_Animist

@JessTheUnstill

And they're hiding behind the bullshit of "Actually, debating the merits of Nazism in the 'marketplace of ideas' is much better than deplatforming them"

Fucking wtf

@ksawatsky Yup ...

https://substack.com/@hamish/note/c-45811343?r=1l2ykb&utm_medium=ios&utm_source=notes-share-action

@JessTheUnstill @ksawatsky

Well done #HamishMckenzie of #Substack!
Hamish wins the Crappy #NaziEnabler Award for 22 Dec 2023.
Every Crappy Award comes with tinea, dandruff and bad breath for the recipient.

Hamish, are you as #ShamelessAsDonaldTrump?

@JessTheUnstill Good lord, this is such incredibly stinky bullshit.
I can't even with these people.
I guess now we'll get to see how many of the open-letter signers (many of whom are cis white men) who swore they'd leave Substack if the Nazis weren't kicked off, actually leave, now that their bluff has been called.

@JessTheUnstill I'm sure there are pictures of consenting adults you'd rather not see, plus some of those pictures are illegal to distribute in many jurisdiction. So is Nazi propaganda, but, it may be different jurisdiction. Oh and ... "censorship" is when you go to jail for saying something. Platform choosing not to distribute content is something else.

@pavel @JessTheUnstill this differentiation is almost meaningless in a context where, in most developed countries in 2023, corporations essentially ARE the government. They funnel information to the government, & they have outsized influence on which laws get passed, which judges get elected, etc. In the US in particular, this is a very obvious & serious problem, & it has to affect the conversation around censorship as well.

@pavel @JessTheUnstill shit, a big part of the myriad anti-adult content & anti-sex work policies being enacted by so many companies is because MASTERCARD, one of only THREE!! Major payment processing companies, doesn't want companies using its service until they fulfill several requirements regarding adult content that go way beyond any actual laws on the matter. So most platforms would simply rather yeet all of the adult content than navigate Mastercard's dumb & excessive terms.

@pavel @JessTheUnstill again, there are three such entities whose protocols are in common usage: Visa, Discover, & Mastercard. Not doing business with Mastercard is not a choice many businesses can make, or if they could, they won't, because it's more lucrative just to remove all adult content (which btw goes way beyond your basic porn).

The effects of this have been vast. And in a country where corporate terms are hardly regulated at all, what corporately say effectively becomes law.

@pavel @JessTheUnstill how can corporate influence over what kind of content is allowed to be hosted on any given website meaningfully different than "true" censorship in such a climate?? Isn't this essentially the crux of why companies refuse to take any meaningful action against hate speech, because they acknowledge that what they choose to host or not to host is functionally law?

@itsmeholland @JessTheUnstill Feel free to travel to Russia, and say that you don't like the war. Heck, maybe even holding blank paper will be enough. You'll quickly learn difference between censorship and not spreading content. Yes, there's difference between corporations and governments.

@pavel @JessTheUnstill DUDE. In the US literally hosting content that supports sex work can be illegal because of SESTA-FOSTA. There are laws being PASSED that schools can't fucking TEACH about queer people or racism. Yeah, i fucking know what censorship is, dingus. "It's worse other places" is not a valid response to an out of control corpiratocracy where corporate sensibilities LITERALLY are setting the tone for laws that become reality. Fuck off.

@JessTheUnstill @jwz 💯 .. and credit card processors are okay with it too. Maybe that’s a place to chip away at this, but also fuck that site in particular.

My point isn't that everyone needs to host porn on their website - people are allowed to choose what sort of content they host or not. But you can't say "we don't think we have the right to censor content we find reprehensible" in the same breath you say "we are censoring content that shows human beings doing exceedingly normal and healthy human being sorts of things with one another".

@JessTheUnstill that is an excellent point! Thank you!

@JessTheUnstill It boils down to the legitimacy. I cannot host any of it - regardless of whether I consume it or not. I cannot legally forward sexual content nor can I legally make it available online where minors might have access to it.

Of course laws differ between countries - but the gist of it is - you can't make a blanket statement like that.

@thor

> you can't make a blanket statement like that.

Sure I can. I just did.

And you just made a blanket statement about the sorts of statements I'm allowed to make.

Both Nazis and Porn are illegal in some countries. Both are legal in the USA where Substack is located. Substack has made an editorial decision to only host one of those two categories of content.

@thor @JessTheUnstill Your point is pretty much moot. It is illegal in some jurisdictions to publish or promote Nazis and yet Substack continues doing so because they find it both profitable and morally acceptable to do so.

@JessTheUnstill re-reading your thread, I think I missed an important piece of the thread. Sorry about that. You're actually speaking FOR censoring the Nazis - not against censoring the pr0n. I get that. And agree.

@thor Right - companies can decide what content they choose to host based on any number of different factors. Local laws, advertiser requirements, trying to cultivate a particular community, personal preferences, etc. Nobody is COMPELLED to host any and all content. I'm just angry at Substack to claim bullshit about how they don't feel like they should have to censor Nazis at the same time that they constantly censor many many other types of content.

We all know it's bullshit - they're perfectly able to censor Nazis, they just have chosen not to.

@JessTheUnstill @thor

Legality has little to do with what you host on YOUR site. You can chose what you allow. There is no “free speech” issue on a privately run system. In the US, the second amendment applies only to the government and what it allows.

@jered @JessTheUnstill CC processors do not, to say the least, have a good track record on being arbiters of ethics. Giving them even more veto power is contraindicated.