Support NeoGAF

[TheSHEEEP]

Is this an out of season....

 

[Whitesnake]

I did if you read the comments.

The only person you cited was the NZ shooter, who also claimed he was inspired by Pewdiepie, Spyro 3, and the Navy Seal Copypasta. You’d have to be water-headed to believe he represents anyone but himself.

Is that your only example?

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

If you think that banning innocuous hand-signs is going to combat any kind of radicalization, you're sorely mistaken.

It would at least bar them from certain platforms.

Nobody is radicalizing his belief-system through a mere hand-sign.

No, but thats also not the point of it. It is a dogwhistle for people who already have been radicalized.

Then of course, there's also the people who are not radicals, but simply enjoy getting a rise out of people, such as yourself.

Given the Christchurch terrorist was basically just your average 8chan shit poster I would argue that the line between trolls and terrorists is not clear cut at all. The way from "just kidding" to "50 victims" isn't that long.

You don't combat ideological radicalization through censorship, you combat it by attacking its ideas and arguments with formulating better arguments.

Deplatforming isn't censorship, though.
The Internet basically functions as the great equalizer for opinions, because its a tools that allows anyone to reach everyone with virtually no effort.
This sounds good at first, but its actually quite dangerous because opinions aren't equal and if nonsense or dangerous stuff are broadcasted to the masses that is not a good thing.

Also, its not like the kind of populism and relativism we've seen pop up on the right over the last 10 years is interested in finding out who has the "better arguments". They are interested in the most asinine and anti-intellectual discourse possible, because thats best for them.
They're operating on outrage, fear and ignorance and I don't see any value in having that as part of our political discourse.

Same reason why I think it's right for universities to reject certain speakers. If what you have to say is dumb shit, you do not deserve an academic platform. Thats not censorship but common sense.

 

[octiny]

Ugh, so many white supremacists playing basketball.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

It would at least bar them from certain platforms.


No, but thats also not the point of it. It is a dogwhistle for people who already have been radicalized.



Given the Christchurch terrorist was basically just your average 8chan shit poster I would argue that the line between trolls and terrorists is not clear cut at all. The way from "just kidding" to "50 victims" isn't that long.



Deplatforming isn't censorship, though.
The Internet basically functions as the great equalizer for opinions, because its a tools that allows anyone to reach everyone with virtually no effort.
This sounds good at first, but its actually quite dangerous because opinions aren't equal and if nonsense or dangerous stuff are broadcasted to the masses that is not a good thing.

Also, its not like the kind of populism and relativism we've seen pop up on the right over the last 10 years is interested in finding out who has the "better arguments". They are interested in the most asinine and anti-intellectual discourse possible, because thats best for them.
They're operating on outrage, fear and ignorance and I don't see any value in having that as part of our political discourse.

Same reason why I think it's right for universities to reject certain speakers. If what you have to say is dumb shit, you do not deserve an academic platform. Thats not censorship but common sense.

It is the height of ignorance and privilege to live in a society founded on freedom of speech, to be able to cast it aside in favor of authoritarian measures, and to not immediately suffer the consequences for your stupidity.

Thankfully, though, this ideology is falling out of favor for the brainwashed slop it truly is. Commie-Lite isn't nearly as invigorating as "true Communism", and as a result the ideology is growing lazier and fatter and more fragile with each passing day.

 

[petran79]

Well, yeah. The reasoning the terrorists have is that their group (white, christian, western people) is threatened by the influx of another group(brown/black, muslim people).
This entire white genocide nonsense is about putting their own identity into the role of the victim in order to justify a violent response.

Freud explained this mechanism in his "Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego" in 1921 and a little more than 10 years later his book became the blueprint for how Hitler radicalized 50 million Germans and brought them to commit unspeakable atrocities.
He did it by creating a group that revolves around a concept of identity(nation and race) and then he created scapegoats who presented threats to the integrity and generally to the interests of the group. And because the strict concept of identity always dealt with "the other" in a big way it was easy to dehumanize "the other" to the point where violence against them can be justified.

Yet Germans had no problem becoming alies with the Ustazi who were Slavs, in order to butcher other Slavs, even more brutally than the Nazi dsath squads. Or recognizing the Turks, the Fins and the Hungarians as members of the Aryan race too and adoring Mustafa Kemal.

In the end politics and national interests surpass the race fairytale.

 

[Three]

Then what in the flying f*ck are you doing in this topic about Blizzard essentially banning a hand-gesture because somebody showed it on stream?



So, what's your point? Other than stating the obvious only to imply that Blizzard's decision was correct. After all, that's the point of this discussion here.



You don't have a point other than that some people associate the hand-sign with racist ideology. Well duh... we certainly don't need you to tell us that.



That's rich coming from the person who is unable to formulate a coherent argument without constantly godwinning and invoking mass murderers. I've already explained to you, the fact that the New Zealand shooter used that hand-sign doesn't make it taboo for others to use it and it certainly doesn't imply that those who use it do so in the same way as the New Zealand shooter. So all of this is of absolutely no significance in the context of this discussion, other than to abuse the emotional connotations with this horrible incident only to manipulate other into swallowing your bullcrap.

I'm here saying that a meaning doesn't mean that actual racists don't use it for an alternative meaning and that it isn't simply a 4chan troll anymore? If it's so f*cking obvious then why don't you get it? As for not everyone using it is conveying the same meaning as the new zealand shooter, no shit, even I use it, what was that again about pointing out the obvious?

 

[strange headache]

No, but thats also not the point of it. It is a dogwhistle for people who already have been radicalized.

So by implication, the only people who positively view this hand-sign in a racist way are people who are already radicalized. Meaning that censoring this hand-sign won't to sh*t to combat radical ideology.

Given the Christchurch terrorist was basically just your average 8chan shit poster I would argue that the line between trolls and terrorists is not clear cut at all. The way from "just kidding" to "50 victims" isn't that long.

Funnily enough, 8chan is the result of your attempts at censoring certain views, creating just another secretive underbelly of society where these radical ideas are allowed to fester unhindered. Censor and deplatform all you want, it will never make ideas go away, on the contrary, it will only make them more popular. People certainly like their forbidden fruits.

Deplatforming isn't censorship, though.

You're right, it's ostracism and history has shown us time and time again that it doesn't work to combat ideas.

This sounds good at first, but its actually quite dangerous because opinions aren't equal and if nonsense or dangerous stuff are broadcasted to the masses that is not a good thing.

All opinions are equal, but rational arguments are not. A healthy and well-educated mind is not influenced by radical ideology and dehumanizing thoughts. Education is the best way to shield people from radicalization, but in order to do so, you need to confront them with these nefarious ideas so that they are able to recognize and disarm them.

Also, its not like the kind of populism and relativism we've seen pop up on the right over the last 10 years is interested in finding out who has the "better arguments". They are interested in the most asinine and anti-intellectual discourse possible, because thats best for them.

Well by supporting the deplatforming and censoring of ideas, you're also quite obviously very much uninterested in finding out the "better argument". If you have so little faith in the power of your truth that you absolutely must deplatform others, you're not showing confidence in your views, you're merely expressing fear that your faulty truth might not prevail.

I'm not afraid of these ideas, I counter them with reason by trying to create mutual understanding instead of vilifying and silencing my opponents. In the end, truth will prevail as it always does.

They're operating on outrage, fear and ignorance...

Just like you are.

If it's so f*cking obvious then why don't you get it?

What in the hell are you on about? I've told you numerous times by now that I recognize that certain people try to subvert the meaning of this hand-sign, hence why we should not play their silly game. I couldn't have made my whole argument if I were unable to recognize that, captain obvious.

 

[LordClansman]

Overwatch disgusts me more every day.

 

[Space Runaway]

Embarrassing decision at best.

 

[Domisto]

Is it possible to catch paranoid personality disorder through internet forums? Maybe someone should check with Norton?

 

[Three]

The only person you cited was the NZ shooter, who also claimed he was inspired by Pewdiepie, Spyro 3, and the Navy Seal Copypasta. You’d have to be water-headed to believe he represents anyone but himself.

Is that your only example?

No I've actually seen idiot kids using it but whatever. If you think it's just an internet thing still then more power to you.

 

[NickFire]

Something about jumping the shark or never going full retard.

 

[Three]

What in the hell are you on about? I've told you numerous times by now that I recognize that certain people try to subvert the meaning of this hand-sign, hence why we should not play their silly game. I couldn't have made my whole argument if I were unable to recognize that, captain obvious.

No you didn't. You made it seem like it was some internet crap which wasn't real and that me pointing out a symbol can be appropriated is me having no perspective and using hyperbole to suggest I was saying anyone using it is Hitler.

Yes because the national symbol of a very real totalitarian regime that was responsible for the systematic eradication of 6 million Jews is totally comparable to a couple of meaningless trolls on 4chan, who just want to rustle the jimmies of a couple of overly sensitive snowflakes that are falling for this sh*t. Get a sense of perspective, man! You are the ones giving these people power, not the other way round.

Just 4chan rustling jimmies of sensitive snowflakes by meaningless trolling. I was telling you that it has actually been picked up by the real idiots. Like the shooter. That rustled your jimmies though and here we are

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

It is the height of ignorance and privilege to live in a society founded on freedom of speech, to be able to cast it aside in favor of authoritarian measures, and to not immediately suffer the consequences for your stupidity.

Thankfully, though, this ideology is falling out of favor for the brainwashed slop it truly is. Commie-Lite isn't nearly as invigorating as "true Communism", and as a result the ideology is growing lazier and fatter and more fragile with each passing day.

Restricting access to reputable platforms isn't authoritarianism. And it also isn't new.
We wouldn't let astrologists speak at universities, we wouldn't let scientologists speak at universities, we wouldn't let anti-vaxxers speak at universities.
So why would we let climate change deniers and nationalists speak at universities?

I'm really glad this kind of debate hasn't popped up in Germany yet because Universities here chose their speakers according to merit, and this already rules out the right wing airheads.

Also, regarding this whole thing. Jordan Peterson for example specifically abandoned the academic platform he already had because his bullshit didn't fly there. He couldn't stand the academic scrutiny so he found a less critical audience online. And now he tries to use this audience and their fandom towards him to pressure Universities into giving him a platform again. Thats really pathetic, I have to say.

So by implication, the only people who positively view this hand-sign in a racist way are people who are already radicalized. Meaning that censoring this hand-sign won't to sh*t to combat radical ideology.

Every extremists goal is to normalize his extremist views. The best way to achieve that is by making them present in the public eye.

So no, this won't prevent radicalization, but it can help preventing further normalization and the radical views.

Funnily enough, 8chan is the result of your attempts at censoring certain views, creating just another secretive underbelly of society where these radical ideas are allowed to fester unhindered. Censor and deplatform all you want, it will never make ideas go away, on the contrary, it will only make them more popular. People certainly like their forbidden fruits.

I am always fascinated by this weird argument that basically states that "we only became Nazis because you were mean to us".
It's really one of the dumbest ones I have heard.

You're right, it's ostracism and history has shown us time and time again that it doesn't work to combat ideas.

Huh? The scientific method is basically a massive deplatforming schtick.

We formulated certain criteria an information has to meet for us to be considered worthwhile, everything else was deplatformed.

The enlightenment that ushered in modern times was nothing but a huge deplatforming effort.
It deplatformed the people who spouted nonsense without being able to back it up with a logical and evidence based line of argument.

All opinions are equal

That a "No." from me mate. And educated opinion will always hold infinitely more worth than an uneducated one, because ultimately every opinion is just the result of the level of information a person had and how that information got prioritized.

, but rational arguments are not. A healthy and well-educated mind is not influenced by radical ideology and dehumanizing thoughts. Education is the best way to shield people from radicalization, but in order to do so, you need to confront them with these nefarious ideas so that they are able to recognize and disarm them.

Okay. So start teaching the Frankfurt School of Thought in the US so people will be able to recognize Nazi ideology before they vote for it.

Well by supporting the deplatforming and censoring of ideas, you're also quite obviously very much uninterested in finding out the "better argument". If you have so little faith in the power of your truth that you absolutely must deplatform others, you're not showing confidence in your views, you're merely expressing fear that your faulty truth might not prevail.

Dude, I studied this shit. Thats like telling Buzz Aldrin that the only reason he isn't debating moon landing hoaxers is because he has so little faith in his own believes.
I don't want these opinions to have a platform because I already know them and already know what they are about and why they are harmful, dumb and wrong.

I'm not afraid of these ideas, I counter them with reason by trying to create mutual understanding instead of vilifying and silencing my opponents. In the end, truth will prevail as it always does.

How do you create mutual understanding with someone who rejects all evidence that doesn't line up with his preconceived believes, while at the same time accepting every nonsense as evidence as long as it lines up with his preconceived believes? Someone who lacks pretty much all necessary understanding of a field to comprehend a particular issue.

Just like you are.

Alright buddy.


What in the hell are you on about? I've told you numerous times by now that I recognize that certain people try to subvert the meaning of this hand-sign, hence why we should not play their silly game. I couldn't have made my whole argument if I were unable to recognize that, captain obvious.[/QUOTE]

 

[Enygger_Tzu]

Given the Christchurch terrorist was basically just your average 8chan shit poster I would argue that the line between trolls and terrorists is not clear cut at all. The way from "just kidding" to "50 victims" isn't that long.

The Christchurch terrorist was your average false flagger, actually, but thanks for taking the bait.

 

[Sqorin Hammerfarf]

Restricting access to reputable platforms isn't authoritarianism.

Huh? That is literally the definition of authoritarianism....

Juan Linz's influential 1964 description of authoritarianism[2] characterized authoritarian political systems by four qualities:

1. Limited political pluralism, that is such regimes place constraints on political institutions and groups like legislatures, political parties and interest groups;
2. A basis for legitimacy based on emotion, especially the identification of the regime as a necessary evil to combat "easily recognizable societal problems" such as enemies of the people or state, underdevelopment or insurgency;
3. Minimal social mobilization most often caused by constraints on the public such as suppression of political opponents and anti-regime activity;
4. Informally defined executive power with often vague and shifting, but vast powers.

I'd like to draw your attention to number 3. And number 1. And number 2. What the heck, number 4.

 

[Whitesnake]

No I've actually seen idiot kids using it but whatever. If you think it's just an internet thing still then more power to you.

So you cannot provide examples except one insane shitposter-turned-killer and some “idiot kids”?

 

[Three]

So you cannot provide examples except one insane shitposter-turned-killer and some “idiot kids”?

I'm not a conspiracy theorist. If the person wasn't an insane person then they wouldn't be a white supremacist now would they. They would not be a notable person but if that killer is not an indication that they are using the symbol outside a 4chan troll then what is? Not everyone walks around with a swastika tattoo either but you would be dumb to suggest neo nazi groups aren't about.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Restricting access to reputable platforms isn't authoritarianism. And it also isn't new.
We wouldn't let astrologists speak at universities, we wouldn't let scientologists speak at universities, we wouldn't let anti-vaxxers speak at universities.

All of those standpoints have been allowed to speak, which allows them to be disproven. Universities should actually be the FIRST place where those ideas are brought up because -- ideally, assuming the university is a good one -- the overwhelming evidence and intellectual curiosity will shred the wishy-washy ideas that don't have any real world application. Universities would be able to destroy bad ideas and prevent them from spreading through society at large. This would achieve the goal you are hoping to achieve.

The fact that gender studies are offered at universities demonstrates that these institutions have already given up on their responsibility to provide this sort of environment. When academia celebrates its own ignorance, that should be a red flag to any intelligent person.

So why would we let climate change deniers and nationalists speak at universities?

Indeed, why should we let identity-politics ideologues speak at universities?

I'm really glad this kind of debate hasn't popped up in Germany yet because Universities here chose their speakers according to merit, and this already rules out the right wing airheads.

Quite the opposite: it sounds like your country's policy has turned you into a bigoted airhead who can't handle a diversity of ideas and cannot argue properly.

But I mean.... at least you're smug too.

Also, regarding this whole thing. Jordan Peterson for example specifically abandoned the academic platform he already had because his bullshit didn't fly there. He couldn't stand the academic scrutiny so he found a less critical audience online. And now he tries to use this audience and their fandom towards him to pressure Universities into giving him a platform again. Thats really pathetic, I have to say.

You have an inaccurate recollection of how that happened. Jordan Peterson's ideas are hardly new and could be argued against within the university environment. Instead, people ostracized him and mischaracterized his standpoints. If anything, Peterson was applying "academic scrutiny" to what was happening to his field and the ideologues started shrieking at high volume (as usual).

This information is easily readable, easily sourced, easily argued, easily proven or disproven, all without society collapsing into smoldering ash. On the other hand, these artificial bubbles of "intellectualism" you are proposing just breeds more brainwashed "educated" idiots who are incapable of rational thought, internal consistency, or creatively generating change and profit.

Of course, the best you can do is resort to things like "that's really pathetic".

No, what's pathetic is you spending paragraphs to say nothing, assert nothing, prove nothing. You are clapping words together like an ape who found a box full of colorful magnetic letters. But GAF is not your refrigerator and we are not your Mommy who pats you on the head (or writes you a certificate) when you accurately parrot the same stupid ideology that caused these problems.

If you are unable to function in society without seeing danger in a hand gesture, then you are the height of privilege. There is no time in human history that such fragile, unintelligent, timid individuals would've been able to survive until the modern age.

 

[LucidFeuer]

I don't understand why we are failing as a society to clearly call out the extremism, danger and aggression on liberty from people like Blizzard or Twitter?

WHY?

 

[strange headache]

No you didn't. You made it seem like it was some internet crap which wasn't real and that me pointing out a symbol can be appropriated is me having no perspective and using hyperbole to suggest I was saying anyone using it is Hitler.

Oh for Christ's sake, stop it with your selective reading. I've expressly stated that some idiots use that hand-sign as a racist symbol, but they do so in order to get a rise out of people such as you. Hence why you're giving them power over our means of expression, which is exactly what these people want.

Also, how about you actually start addressing the arguments that I've made, instead of going around in circles? The only thing you've managed to convey so far is that certain people use that sign for nefarious reasons and for that you're creating a big stink in this topic as if those who disagree with you were too stupid to recognize that.

Just 4chan rustling jimmies of sensitive snowflakes by meaningless trolling. I was telling you that it has actually been picked up by the real idiots. Like the shooter. That rustled your jimmies though and here we are

Are you denying that some people use it to be edgy in order to rile people up? Again, you keep droning on about your mass shooter and Nazis, completely disrespecting the context of this discussion, which is Blizzard's decision to ban this hand-gesture. What does any of this sh*t have to do with this?

The shooter also watched PewDiePie, but that doesn't mean that he's actually guilty of spreading white supremacist views. It's the same with this hand-sign. None of that stuff matters in the context of this discussion, so stop it already instead of making a fool out of yourself.

The reason why you keep circling back to this is simply because you have no leg to stand on, because you simply don't know how the audience member in that video used this hand sign. Blizzard implied this meaning by banning it, making it something that it's not intended to be. It's as simple as that.

I'm really glad this kind of debate hasn't popped up in Germany yet because Universities here chose their speakers according to merit, and this already rules out the right wing airheads.

Lol sure, that's why people like Thilo Sarrazin are allowed to hold lectures on German universities:

Der Hochschulrat, das Rektorat, der Senat und die Philosophische Fakultät der Universität Siegen bekennen sich zur Wissenschaftsfreiheit gemäß Artikel 5 GG. Vor dem Hintergrund der Freiheit von Forschung und Lehre betrachtet es die Universität Siegen deshalb grundsätzlich nicht nur als legitim, sondern als begrüßenswert, wenn sich ihre Angehörigen auf wissenschaftlicher Basis auch mit politisch umstrittenen Positionen und Meinungen auseinandersetzen. Der Diskurs ist ein wichtiges Privileg und eine wesentliche Alternative zu bloßer Ausgrenzung oder Sprachlosigkeit. Folgerichtig gab es und gibt es keine Bestrebungen, das Seminar zu unterbinden.

Also, regarding this whole thing. Jordan Peterson for example specifically abandoned the academic platform he already had because his bullshit didn't fly there.

Peterson has authored or co-authored more than a hundred academic papers and has been cited over 11.000 times. Stop speaking out of your rear end.

Every extremists goal is to normalize his extremist views. The best way to achieve that is by making them present in the public eye. So no, this won't prevent radicalization, but it can help preventing further normalization and the radical views.

Normalization happens if you rob people of the ability to engage with ideas in a critical manner. This requires not only critical analysis but also confrontation with the subject matter at hand.

I am always fascinated by this weird argument that basically states that "we only became Nazis because you were mean to us". It's really one of the dumbest ones I have heard.

Nazism happened because people lost the ability to think critically for themselves, falling instead into blind obedience. You'd be well advised to read Hannah Arendt's accounts on the Eichmann process in Israel and her notion on the "banality of evil".

Huh? The scientific method is basically a massive deplatforming schtick.

The scientific method is based on critical rationalism, not deplatforming you absolute dolt.

The enlightenment that ushered in modern times was nothing but a huge deplatforming effort. It deplatformed the people who spouted nonsense without being able to back it up with a logical and evidence based line of argument.

No, it was the attempt at a free marketplace of ideas where arguments had to content based on their merit. This is why free speech was so important, because without it, initially unpopular ideas like the theory of evolution would not have survived the censorious attempts of the Christian Church. Enlightenment was all about challenging traditional views in light of new scientific and empirical evidence, not about deplatforming.

That a "No." from me mate. And educated opinion will always hold infinitely more worth than an uneducated one, because ultimately every opinion is just the result of the level of information a person had and how that information got prioritized.

Opinions are like assh*les, everybody has got one. They are entirely subjective. Informed and reasoned arguments on the other hand... well that's something completely different.

Okay. So start teaching the Frankfurt School of Thought in the US so people will be able to recognize Nazi ideology before they vote for it.

They way you present your ideas merely reinforces my impression that you have no idea what the Frankfurt School actually stood for, other than they were leftist intellectuals. Most of my arguments are based on Habermas' view on deliberative democracy, where political and social decision-making must be done according to the better argument through an openly accessible pluralistic public debate. That's how political decisions are legitimized, from the bottom up not from the top down.

Dude, I studied this shit.

What a nice fallacious and desperate appeal to authority you made there. You can't even discern the difference between an opinion and an argument. What makes you think I'm not a studied or academic person? I'm done here, because quite evidently you seem to understand only half the stuff you've claimed to have studied.

 

[Whitesnake]

I'm not a conspiracy theorist. If the person wasn't an insane person then they wouldn't be a white supremacist now would they. They would not be a notable person but if that killer is not an indication that they are using the symbol outside a 4chan troll then what is? Not everyone walks around with a swastiska tattoo either but you would be dumb to suggest neo nazi groups aren't about.

There are plenty of pictures of skinheads with nazi tattoos.

You’re still trying to avoid giving me examples of confirmed white supremacists using the okay sign as a symbol related to white supremacy.

The NZ shooter said and did as many things to piss off and confuse as many people as possible. Again, you’d be water-headed to believe he represents anyone other than himself.

 

[NickFire]

Someone needs to tell Blizzard about the Neo Nazi's decision to poop every single day going forward. If they keep letting people participate who poop more than 2 times a week, they are now condoning neo nazi's.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Someone needs to tell Blizzard about the Neo Nazi's decision to poop every single day going forward. If they keep letting people participate who poop more than 2 times a week, they are now condoning neo nazi's.

"Vox: How the Poop Emoji has become an Alt-Right symbol of hate"

 

[CyberPanda]

Blizzard should ban future celeb endorsements for their software then, too. Political correctness can eat my crap.

 

[CyberPanda]

Is this satire? I can't tell...

Its real.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Oh blizztards lol

Alt-right Pepe loving nazi!

 

[Dr. Claus]

I can't believe people are actually trying to defend the concept that the "OKAY" hand gesture is a racist dogwhistle. Just... amazing. Thank you for giving me a laugh today and to never take you seriously in the future.

OT: Blizzard has been making dumbass decisions for years now and this... this is just the icing on the cake of idiocy. I am so disappointed to see one of my favorite developers becoming... this.

 

[DeepEnigma]

That is not the "okay" symbol, that is the "otay" one.

Common misconception.

 

[Dacon]

Just because the origins of the hand gesture were not racist, it doesn't mean its not been adopted as a racist gesture now. It's pretty much seen now as a white power thing. But, like I said... Context. That stupid cow Zina Bash during the Kavanaugh hearings? Racist. Clear as day. It was being done for no reason at times, just because she was on camera. Don't give me the "she was asked a question" stuff either, because that's a one time excuse. You don't sit there with it on your arm for ages. The video above? Racist. Those stupid whitehouse intern on that photo? Racist. These were people that knew about the sign, knew about what it meant on both sides of the fence, and did it anyway. However, Bill Mother Fucking Clinton doing it, or Obama doing it, while talking... Not racist. Why? Because it was done before it was ever seen as a racist symbol, or hell, it was simply just the way they move their hands when talking. Why would Obama be flashing a white power symbol anyway?

Its all about the context, the use and the time. Its nothing about offended leftists, lol (thanks for showing what side of the fence you are btw), its more so about the way once something, no matter how innocent it was beforehand, is adopted for the wrong reasons... You just don't fucking do it. End of story.

I bet you're one of those clowns who gets upset about swastikas in Japan.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Relevant:

 

[CyberPanda]

Relevant:

 

[Three]

There are plenty of pictures of skinheads with nazi tattoos.

You’re still trying to avoid giving me examples of confirmed white supremacists using the okay sign as a symbol related to white supremacy.

The NZ shooter said and did as many things to piss off and confuse as many people as possible. Again, you’d be water-headed to believe he represents anyone other than himself.

I didn't avoid shit.
I gave you an example of a famous known white supremacist using it in the media. You dismiss it and ask for more. Sure I can find pictures if experience is nothing but here is the thing. If I show you pictures would you just say they are saying OK and that guy likes the letter W a lot? Luckly most social platforms remove the completely obvious hate groups from their platform and the ones that aren't obvious have plausible deniability at all times with that symbol.

 

[Gavin Stevens]

I bet you're one of those clowns who gets upset about swastikas in Japan.

I actually have no idea what this means and assume it’s some meme bollocks I haven’t heard of.

 

[Three]

I actually have no idea what this means and assume it’s some meme bollocks I haven’t heard of.

I think he means you think a manji is a nazi symbol but I'm sure you understand context better than most in this thread.

 

[Dacon]

I didn't avoid shit.
I gave you an example of a famous known white supremacist using it in the media. You dismiss it and ask for more. Sure I can find pictures if experience is nothing but here is the thing. If I show you pictures would you just say they are saying OK and that guy likes the letter W a lot? Luckly most social platforms remove the completely obvious hate groups from their platform and the ones that aren't obvious have plausible deniability at all times with that symbol.

You know what white supremacists also do? Wave at each other, have sex, celebrate holidays, drink milk, breathe air, etc.

Are you going to stop doing these activities because of their association with white supremacy? Hell Ted Bundy ate steak for his last meal, better stay away from that red meat!

How do people not see how retarded this logic is?

 

[Whitesnake]

If I show you pictures would you just say they are saying OK and that guy likes the letter W a lot?

Yes, unless you can prove otherwise. If you think making an ok sign by itself makes someone a white supremacist, I have pictures of Obama that will blow your mind.

Luckly most social platforms remove the completely obvious hate groups from their platform and the ones that aren't obvious have plausible deniability at all times with that symbol.

Sounds like some conspiracy-theorist shit to me.

You’re gonna have to explain who these people are. On the first pic I see a MAGA hat and a shirt calling antifa “commies”, and on the second pic the only person I recognize is that guy from Breitbart.

Just because you don’t like their politics doesn’t mean they’re white supremacists.

 

[Barnabot]

Relevant:

When people start to see some facts pushed by some other people who are trying to seek the truth but the former are also told to consider these facts as lies by their own preacher just to defend themselves and their ideology from the facts.

 

[Gormless Noodle]

How does 4chan keep getting away with it?

 

[CyberPanda]

How does 4chan keep getting away with it?

Meme magic. And lots of unified autism.

 

[TyphoonStruggle]

 

[Three]

Yes, unless you can prove otherwise. If you think making an ok sign by itself makes someone a white supremacist, I have pictures of Obama that will blow your mind.



Sounds like some conspiracy-theorist shit to me.



You’re gonna have to explain who these people are. On the first pic I see a MAGA hat and a shirt calling antifa “commies”, and on the second pic the only person I recognize is that guy from Breitbart.

Just because you don’t like their politics doesn’t mean they’re white supremacists.

My mind won't be blown because I'm not an idiot and can understand context. The FBI designated some of these groups as 'extremists with ties to white nationalism'. What do you know they all really seem to like the OK sign too must just be their love for 4chan.

https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/inside-miami-alt-right-and-proud-boys-chapter-10945821

Like I said it's somewhat obvious when somebody is telling you they are OK and when an actual racist is.

 

[Sqorin Hammerfarf]

Like I said it's somewhat obvious when somebody is telling you they are OK and when an actual racist is.

It's a good thing we have you around to let us know. You are the racist whisperer.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

My mind won't be blown because I'm not an idiot and can understand context. The FBI designated some of these groups as 'extremists with ties to white nationalism'. What do you know they all really seem to like the OK sign too must just be their love for 4chan.

https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/inside-miami-alt-right-and-proud-boys-chapter-10945821

Like I said it's somewhat obvious when somebody is telling you they are OK and when an actual racist is.

No, it's not "somewhat obvious" because most rational people don't share your delusion that you can tell what a person's secret motives are by looking at a hand gesture.

The okay sign is also widely used in "The Game", which is a facet of internet culture I'm sure you're unaware of because you're sheltered enough to believe the okay sign has been poisoned by neo-Nazis. It shows up in photos, in memes, and so forth because it's an inside joke. It's actually a pretty dumb inside joke, too, which is why it is so widespread. It's a common-enough joke that tech nerds (or are they secretly white supremacists?!? ) would troll one another with it IRL several years ago.

So, not only is it a pretty lame inside joke, it's also an old inside joke.

To put it in absolutely simple, straightforward terms, the whole paranoia about "sign is a white supremacist symbol" is proof that The Left Can't Meme. The okay sign is a joke, an internet thing, an empty and harmless gesture. No amount of pearl-clutching or virtue signaling will magically grant the okay sign a racist connotation. This is, of course, ignoring the far larger and far more commonly accepted use of the gesture to simply mean "okay" or "approval", sometimes sarcastically.

You and the handful of white supremacists are both on the same side of this issue: you desperately push your opinion on what the okay sign should mean and are too naive to realize that your ignorance on the topic renders your opinion meaningless.

 

[strange headache]

My mind won't be blown because I'm not an idiot and can understand context. The FBI designated some of these groups as 'extremists with ties to white nationalism'. What do you know they all really seem to like the OK sign too must just be their love for 4chan. https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/inside-miami-alt-right-and-proud-boys-chapter-10945821

Stop derailing the discussion with your strenuous associations, we're neither discussing the Proud Boys, nor the NZ shooter here, but Blizzard's decision to ban a hand-sign. Not to mention that the FBI never classified the Proud Boys as an extremist group as you claim. Gavin is a professional provocateur, if anything he'd be exactly the person using such a hand-sign to troll gullible fools like you.

You sound like one of these conservative scaremongers from the 70s or 80s who thought D&D with its satanist symbols was a gateway to Satanism and everybody who listened to Heavy Metal a Nazi. You're like the Tipper Gore of this decade desperately flailing against people like Frank Zappa.

Like I said it's somewhat obvious when somebody is telling you they are OK and when an actual racist is.

It really doesn't seem all that "obvious" when you even can't even tell us whether you think the hand-sign in that video was racist or not and if Blizzard's decision was correct.

 

[Whitesnake]

My mind won't be blown because I'm not an idiot and can understand context. The FBI designated some of these groups as 'extremists with ties to white nationalism'. What do you know they all really seem to like the OK sign too must just be their love for 4chan.

1. What groups? Are you trying to say that’s who the people in the picture are? Wha are you talking about?
2. White nationalism isn’t the same as white supremacy, despite what your chosen pundits will have you believe.

https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/inside-miami-alt-right-and-proud-boys-chapter-10945821

How does this link relate to the conversation? It’s an article talking about miami Proud Boys and the “alt-right”. At no point is any hand gesture brought up.

Like I said it's somewhat obvious when somebody is telling you they are OK and when an actual racist is.

Lol.

You just use it as a bludgeon to call someone racist.

Obama does it? Who cares.

Some guy in a MAGA hat does it? Must be a white supremacist neo-nazi doing sign language to alert the alt-right motherbase.

 

[Three]

1. What groups? Are you trying to say that’s who the people in the picture are? Wha are you talking about?
2. White nationalism isn’t the same as white supremacy, despite what your chosen pundits will have you believe.

How does this link relate to the conversation? It’s an article talking about miami Proud Boys and the “alt-right”. At no point is any hand gesture brought up.



Lol.

You just use it as a bludgeon to call someone racist.

Obama does it? Who cares.

Some guy in a MAGA hat does it? Must be a white supremacist neo-nazi doing sign language to alert the alt-right motherbase.

The hand gesture is there in the link in all the photos. The gesture predates 4chan too. If it is some crazy elaborate hoax then fine but it is fucking stupid because it gives the actual fuckers plausible deniability at all times. Yo dude I was just flashing it because I'm joking and you're so gullible. Don't mind that mass murderer he is not one of us we are only showing that symbol to joke about. If that's the case fine but shit is getting real. I'm not even surprised he was a pewdiepie fan either because he probably saw the clothes he was selling and thought he is one too.

 

[EviLore]

The hand gesture is there in the link in all the photos. The gesture predates 4chan too. If it is some crazy elaborate hoax then fine but it is fucking stupid because it gives the actual fuckers plausible deniability at all times. Yo dude I was just flashing it because I'm joking and you're so gullible. Don't mind that mass murderer he is not one of us we are only showing that symbol to joke about. If that's the case fine but shit is getting real. I'm not even surprised he was a pewdiepie fan either because he probably saw the clothes he was selling and thought he is one too.

Plausible deniability for what exactly? Selfies on Instagram?

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

The hand gesture is there in the link in all the photos. The gesture predates 4chan too. If it is some crazy elaborate hoax then fine but it is fucking stupid because it gives the actual fuckers plausible deniability at all times. Yo dude I was just flashing it because I'm joking and you're so gullible. Don't mind that mass murderer he is not one of us we are only showing that symbol to joke about. If that's the case fine but shit is getting real. I'm not even surprised he was a pewdiepie fan either because he probably saw the clothes he was selling and thought he is one too.

Nah, shit is not "getting real". If you honestly believe there's a rapidly-rising sentiment of white supremacy seizing power in our country, you need to step away from the internet, turn off CNN, leave the college campus, and join the rest of us in the real world. You're being frightened by the same people who claim to know the real truth on all this Russiagate nonsense.

Snap out of it. If the media was so dead-wrong about Russiagate, is it possible they've been misrepresenting other issues? You seem to get your information from the news sources that told us there was a Russian pee-pee tape of our president.

It's time to let the delusion go and join us over here in reality.