I’m not sure I agree with any of that necessarily There are black people who are Nazi dude, tons of counter examples to play with.
I would say online anonymous speech, is very different from public speech and private speech. If you only make racists comments in your home, and body hears them, is that action? Or is that more akin to personal thoughts? Also, lots of people misread the intent of such things. If there was an online community of black users using the n word in a comical or therapeutic text… is that permissible? Certainly many people looking at that from the outside may think differently and fail to grasp the specific context.
Public speech is very different. It would be like public speaking, protest, or other such public acts. I’m not sure private discourse is an action. But it’s probably true if you made racist remarks your friends would not want to hang out with you… but then again maybe some of your friends would agree with you and you’d form a new closer friend group based on that. I’ve personally met many closeted racists (who identify as anti-racist publicly), a lot more than I’ve met openly public racists. Though I admit there is tonal shift has happened where public racism is more tolerated than it was a decade or two ago.
I’m also disagree though about offensive minorities though. in my experience of reddit, a lot of subs became dominated by loud offensive types as long as there was popular agreement and they used the ‘tolerance’ approach to push their toxic agendas. a lot of people love the ‘drama’ of loud offensive people pushing hateful agendas, as long as they do so ‘politely’ using euhapnisms and dog whistles. Challenging this type often resulted in mods banning you. Hell, I was banned from my local city subreddit last year for pointing out racism and sexism against my cities mayor being perpetuated by sock puppet accounts. But because I pointed these this out directly, I was told I was the racist one. Often ‘tolerance’ creates spaces where even the mention of the existence or pointing out of racist events or words is considered hate speech itself. It’s racist to acknowledge racism exists, in many big subreddits now. We’re supposed to pretend it doesn’t. And a lot of ‘polite’ racism is 100% tolerated as long as keywords aren’t used.
the main is issue is not that occasionally there are black nazis, really. Let’s table that for another discussion.
if you only make racist comments at home… is that an action?
In a loose definition, yes. However, again, to keep us on track here, I don’t think we need to focus on the exact definition of an extended qualia phenomenon in epistemology/alethiology.
I think its reasonable to assume we are talking about observed, lived and experienced phenomena by at least two conscious humans.
lots of people misread
that’s why I went with the n-word, hard R. There’s little to be misread.
I do find that kind of discussion tedious so if we’re going to get into “but what do we mean by a word? a thought? a person?” - I’m out, that’s sophistry that i find frustrating.
If there was an online community of black users using the n word in a comical or therapeutic text… is that permissible?
uno reversi: how does one ensure an online community of black users without moderation? doesn’t it presuppose a selection process to suggest that closed communities can exist? And if there is no moderation (/“censorship”) there is no “from outside” because no one can possibly be excluded.
maybe some of your friends would agree with you and you’d form a new closer friend group based on that.
kinda my point: racists find each other and piss in the pool until there’s only racists left. That’s only not a bad thing if you think racist communities should exist, or all communities should be racist - something i don’t think is worth debating.
, a lot of subs became dominated by loud offensive types as long as there was popular agreement and they used the ‘tolerance’ approach to push their toxic agendas
how is that disagreeing with me? that’s what I’m saying is the problem: if you don’t remove an issue, it compounds. Reddit has a level of moderation, and this statement seems to be saying that you should censor it more
frankly, that’s what I do. ever ‘group’ i have been a part of inevitable tips over into exclusionary thinking over time. they start open and welcoming, and then insecure people start taking over and policing people’s words and beahviors, and then I leave.
I also see the flipside, a established group gets criticized for not changing it’s discourse to be more ‘inclusionary’… but often those critics have no interest in joining, they just want to police from the outside because they too are insecure and controlling types of people.
Personally I don’t think it’s for me to tell other people how to live their lives, or what to say or think or do. Let racists be racist in their racist pool. I don’t believe in a social project of imposing my form of justice on other people, because to me that’s just authoritarian. I also regard a lot of contemporary ‘anti racist’ rhetoric as incredibly racist. I also don’t think certain words are universally wrong or offensive given they are used in context.
ke I don’t think Huck Finn is a racist book, but in 2025, a lot of people certainly seem to think that. Because of the use of a word they think is universally wrong, and they have no concept of context, historical or literary. Like, is a community about Huck Finn, pulling quotes from a book, racist? According to many ‘policies’ it would be. That’s insane to me.
But I also don’t believe in white washing our history the way a lot of people on the left, and on the right, seem hellbent on doing.
I’m not sure I agree with any of that necessarily There are black people who are Nazi dude, tons of counter examples to play with.
I would say online anonymous speech, is very different from public speech and private speech. If you only make racists comments in your home, and body hears them, is that action? Or is that more akin to personal thoughts? Also, lots of people misread the intent of such things. If there was an online community of black users using the n word in a comical or therapeutic text… is that permissible? Certainly many people looking at that from the outside may think differently and fail to grasp the specific context.
Public speech is very different. It would be like public speaking, protest, or other such public acts. I’m not sure private discourse is an action. But it’s probably true if you made racist remarks your friends would not want to hang out with you… but then again maybe some of your friends would agree with you and you’d form a new closer friend group based on that. I’ve personally met many closeted racists (who identify as anti-racist publicly), a lot more than I’ve met openly public racists. Though I admit there is tonal shift has happened where public racism is more tolerated than it was a decade or two ago.
I’m also disagree though about offensive minorities though. in my experience of reddit, a lot of subs became dominated by loud offensive types as long as there was popular agreement and they used the ‘tolerance’ approach to push their toxic agendas. a lot of people love the ‘drama’ of loud offensive people pushing hateful agendas, as long as they do so ‘politely’ using euhapnisms and dog whistles. Challenging this type often resulted in mods banning you. Hell, I was banned from my local city subreddit last year for pointing out racism and sexism against my cities mayor being perpetuated by sock puppet accounts. But because I pointed these this out directly, I was told I was the racist one. Often ‘tolerance’ creates spaces where even the mention of the existence or pointing out of racist events or words is considered hate speech itself. It’s racist to acknowledge racism exists, in many big subreddits now. We’re supposed to pretend it doesn’t. And a lot of ‘polite’ racism is 100% tolerated as long as keywords aren’t used.
the main is issue is not that occasionally there are black nazis, really. Let’s table that for another discussion.
In a loose definition, yes. However, again, to keep us on track here, I don’t think we need to focus on the exact definition of an extended qualia phenomenon in epistemology/alethiology.
I think its reasonable to assume we are talking about observed, lived and experienced phenomena by at least two conscious humans.
that’s why I went with the n-word, hard R. There’s little to be misread.
I do find that kind of discussion tedious so if we’re going to get into “but what do we mean by a word? a thought? a person?” - I’m out, that’s sophistry that i find frustrating.
uno reversi: how does one ensure an online community of black users without moderation? doesn’t it presuppose a selection process to suggest that closed communities can exist? And if there is no moderation (/“censorship”) there is no “from outside” because no one can possibly be excluded.
kinda my point: racists find each other and piss in the pool until there’s only racists left. That’s only not a bad thing if you think racist communities should exist, or all communities should be racist - something i don’t think is worth debating.
how is that disagreeing with me? that’s what I’m saying is the problem: if you don’t remove an issue, it compounds. Reddit has a level of moderation, and this statement seems to be saying that you should censor it more
so leave the pool?
frankly, that’s what I do. ever ‘group’ i have been a part of inevitable tips over into exclusionary thinking over time. they start open and welcoming, and then insecure people start taking over and policing people’s words and beahviors, and then I leave.
I also see the flipside, a established group gets criticized for not changing it’s discourse to be more ‘inclusionary’… but often those critics have no interest in joining, they just want to police from the outside because they too are insecure and controlling types of people.
Personally I don’t think it’s for me to tell other people how to live their lives, or what to say or think or do. Let racists be racist in their racist pool. I don’t believe in a social project of imposing my form of justice on other people, because to me that’s just authoritarian. I also regard a lot of contemporary ‘anti racist’ rhetoric as incredibly racist. I also don’t think certain words are universally wrong or offensive given they are used in context.
ke I don’t think Huck Finn is a racist book, but in 2025, a lot of people certainly seem to think that. Because of the use of a word they think is universally wrong, and they have no concept of context, historical or literary. Like, is a community about Huck Finn, pulling quotes from a book, racist? According to many ‘policies’ it would be. That’s insane to me.
But I also don’t believe in white washing our history the way a lot of people on the left, and on the right, seem hellbent on doing.