Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Because if you do engage with them you can figure out why they think those things and try to change their views.

Have you tried to do this? Because I've tried. It doesn't seem to work.

> Speech and actions are two different things.

Speech inspires actions. If you're smart about something, you'll want to stop bad behavior while its still "speech", and not yet an "action".

> People can talk about hanging wall Street bankers all they want, but that becomes illegal the moment that this becomes violence.

Maybe it should be illegal before the violence breaks out. You know, to prevent violence, instead of reacting to it.



> Have you tried to do this? Because I've tried. It doesn't seem to work.

Yes, I have talked to many people that hold views that are labeled as "white nationalist" and engaging with them can change their views. Case in point, I managed to convince people to support immigration tied to employment. I sought to understand why this person opposed immigration, and learned that they feared that immigrants would become dependent on social services. So I made the point that immigration policy can be structure in a way to avoid state dependence.

You often won't be able to make them pull a total 180, but you can usually make them more nuanced in their opinions.

> Because I want to live here, a location I've lived my entire life, they believe that I "don't tolerate whites"? This is ridiculous on the face of it.

You're right, it is ridiculous. But that's what they believe. And if you treat them with intolerance (which is what you've been trying to justify throughout this thread) you're only reinforcing that belief.

> No, seriously. Go try arguing against a white nationalist for a while. Its utterly hopeless to get them to change their opinions.

Not with this kind of attitude, it isn't. But actually try and engage meaningfully, understand why they believe the things they do, and show them that you are willing to tolerate them even though they don't want to tolerate you and the chances of changing their minds improves considerably.

> Maybe it should be illegal before the violence breaks out. You know, to prevent violence, instead of reacting to it.

You'll have to start by repealing the first amendment. And after you do, there will be people that will seek to label your views as violent and ban them.


> Case in point, I managed to convince people to support immigration tied to employment

I appreciate your honesty, but that's not what I'm talking about. Immigration or anti-immigration is a solid political subject but its "safe". That's the stuff normal people talk about.

The white-nationalist stuff I literally cannot beat is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Replacement and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_genocide_conspiracy_theo...

Have you ever met someone who believed in The Great Replacement or White Genocide? Its basically a conspiracy theory: these people are not rational anymore. No amount of arguing can convince them otherwise. I'm Asian. Just talking with a white-nationalist reminds them of the Great Replacement. Just seeing me enforces their viewpoint.

Yeah, being tolerant of other viewpoints works... when the other person is also a good person at heart. But when you meet truly despicable nutjobs on the white-national spectrum, you lose hope in that "tolerance" viewpoint rather quickly. The only option I've concluded from my experience in that matter, is to censor them and prevent them from recruiting more people.

I dunno, maybe you can figure out a better plan. But I'm perfectly willing to use the censorship button to mitigate this problem. And unfortunately, I don't think I have any better option.


> Have you ever met someone who believed in The Great Replacement or White Genocide? Its basically a conspiracy theory: these people are not rational anymore. No amount of arguing can convince them otherwise.

What is your plan for these people then? Kill them? Put them in reeducation camps? Deport them?

Like it or not, these people exist and they're not going anywhere. We can either:

1) be intolerant towards them, thus making them form their own communities and grow more and more extreme because they're surrounded by like minded people.

2) be tolerant towards them, and try to change their beliefs.

Do you think that thes people are more likely to change their views if the rest of society is intolerant towards them and the only people they talk to are other white nationalist? Or if society does act treat them with tolerance, and they interact with more non-white-nationalists.

If we treat them with intolerance, then the only community they will find is with other white nationalists. If we do this, the problem is going to get worse and there are going to be more attacks.


Tolerance doesn't somehow prevent white supremacists from forming their own communities or becoming more extreme. If anything, it encourages them to continue doing so, because tolerance is a signal that society will accept their behavior and beliefs as normal, and that there will be no negative social consequences for them, at least until their plans for mass murder become action.

And white nationalists talk to non-white nationalists all the time. That's how they recruit new white nationalists. They're not ignorant of the arguments made against their beliefs - they're well aware, and yet they reject those arguments and persist, because irrational beliefs can't be rationalized out of. Most conspiracy theories would vanish in a puff of logic if that's how people worked.

Simply letting them organize where they will to spread their hatred unabated on any and every available platform, and then only politely and respectfully trying to convince them that their plans to throw the perfidious Jews into the ovens is a bad idea isn't going to do anything but push the Overton window of tolerance for their intolerance in their direction.


> What is your plan for these people then? Kill them? Put them in reeducation camps? Deport them?

Censor them, and prevent them from recruiting more. Wipe them off of Youtube, Facebook, and Twitter. Ban hate-speech.

> 1) be intolerant towards them, thus making them form their own communities and grow more and more extreme because they're surrounded by like minded people.

And take down these communities as they pop up. Its like weeding, you gotta keep knocking it down. I don't expect perfection. But make it a hassle for them to organize.


> Censor them, and prevent them from recruiting more. Wipe them off of Youtube, Facebook, and Twitter. Ban hate-speech.

Again, not possible unless you repeal the first amendment. Not really possible even if you do, since TOR exists.

> And take down these communities as they pop up. Its like weeding, you gotta keep knocking it down. I don't expect perfection. But make it a hassle for them to organize

Do you realize that part of the reason why these people hate immigrants is because they think immigrants hate them and want to get rid of them? Referring to them as "weeds" that need to be purged is playing straight into their narrative.

Knock down their communities and they will see it as proof of their persecution, and use this censorship to appeal to more peole. Deprive them of the ability to use words, and they will use violence.

White nationalism has been around for over a century. The attacks only started to accelerate when they started getting deplatformed. Make no mistake, this approach has been making them more violent and it will make them even more violent if it continues.


1st Amendment only applies to US Government. It doesn't apply to webpage administrators. As such, it is certainly possible for Youtube, Facebook, and Twitter to start to clamp down on the subject.


The daily stormer runs its own website. Genuine white nationalists have been kicked off Facebook and YouTube for a long time now.

You cannot knock down these communities. It is not possible without drastically reducing civil liberties. Freedom of speech and association are not going away. The only viable option to engage and attempt to change their views.


> The daily stormer runs its own website.

I know. But that website is hosted somewhere, and maybe we can convince those hosts to take it down.

> The only viable option to engage and attempt to change their views.

And you're free to attempt to do that at Daily Stormer / Stormfront / any other website where they pop up. But I'm telling you that trying to convince them doesn't seem to work.


> I know. But that website is hosted somewhere, and maybe we can convince those hosts to take it down.

And then they will set up their own servers. Or move to Gab. Or go to TOR. You can't keep people from communicating on the internet. It's not possible. Countries like mainland China have spent a lot more time and money trying to do it, and it doesn't work.

And even if you do somehow manage to kick them off the internet, they'll organize through regular mail. The daily stormer was (and I think still is) a print publication. The post office legally cannot stop them from using the postal service.

> And you're free to attempt to do that at Daily Stormer / Stormfront / any other website where they pop up. But I'm telling you that trying to convince them doesn't seem to work.

I'll take something that "doesn't seem to work" over something that is actively making things worse. Again, these communities have only become more extreme and more violent the more that society has tried to shut them down.

"Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate, only love can do that."




Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: