view the rest of the comments
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
Who is calling for such things?
And as for banning books, are you sure it's the left that's doing that? Because I can share some links with you...
https://www.theatlantic.com/culture/archive/2014/03/a-twitter-hashtag-probably-doesnt-prove-feminists-want-to-kill-all-men/359493/
Almost every extreme view will likely have someone pushing those ideals through xitter at some point. Whether or not those posts gain any sort of traction or represent a greater movement could still be up for debate.
Quick note: this isn't meant to support or oppose any side or position. Just putting information out there addressing the question that was posed.
I can't read past the paywall, but it looks like that hashtag was meant to be sarcastic. Denying the Holocaust, praising Hitler, saying racist things... those are not done with sarcasm.
Would you accept other hate speech provided it's qualified as "sarcastic"? How should xitter determine sarcastic messages vs serious ones?
And saying the entirety of that hashtag was used sarcastically is incredibly presumptuous. How would someone prove to you that it was used at least once seriously?
I would say that entirely depends on how it's worded. This was a parody of another hashtag that was being used sarcastically. I would not call that hate speech in any way. I'm sorry, but "killallmen" is clearly not meant the way the hate speech being allowed on Twitter is meant now. There's a world of difference. It's not even comparable.
So your original question was "What is left wing hate speech?"
Regardless of whether it's comparable or as prevalent as right wing hate speech should be moot. You were provided examples and I showed an instance of it actually occurring.
Again. Not defending or opposing one side or the other nor commenting or implying some frequency or severity of posts.