Substack is ok with its Nazi problem
December 23, 2023 2:51 AM Subscribe
After the Atlantic's expose Substack has a Nazi Problem, several hundred authors signed an open letter
Substackers against Nazis (previously). In response, co-founder Hamish McKenzie says that Substack is ok with hosting supremacist content (as well as transphobic and anti-vax authors) and that they will continue to profit from it.
This post was deleted for the following reason: Double. -- travelingthyme
In the last thread i_am_joe’s_spleen posted a link to a piece by Katie Notopolous which makes a really clarifying comparison between Substack and Etsy.
The latter expressly forbids the selling of Nazi merchandise. Besides the ethical good sense, it also is a sound business decision, because not many people would want to sell your art and crafts on a site that also sells swastika tea-cosies. Currently, Substack is selling swastika tea-cosies.
Or think of Substack as a bookshop. Would you want to buy books and magazines in a store with a large Nazi section?
A store that is, in fact, the premier venue for Nazi writing in the US?
Would you want your books sold there? I wouldn’t.
posted by Kattullus at 3:06 AM on December 23, 2023 [55 favorites]
The latter expressly forbids the selling of Nazi merchandise. Besides the ethical good sense, it also is a sound business decision, because not many people would want to sell your art and crafts on a site that also sells swastika tea-cosies. Currently, Substack is selling swastika tea-cosies.
Or think of Substack as a bookshop. Would you want to buy books and magazines in a store with a large Nazi section?
A store that is, in fact, the premier venue for Nazi writing in the US?
Would you want your books sold there? I wouldn’t.
posted by Kattullus at 3:06 AM on December 23, 2023 [55 favorites]
I'm not saying Hamish McKenzie and Chris Best are Nazi sympathizers.
I'm saying they're Nazi collaborators.
posted by AlSweigart at 3:26 AM on December 23, 2023 [105 favorites]
I'm saying they're Nazi collaborators.
posted by AlSweigart at 3:26 AM on December 23, 2023 [105 favorites]
The Atlantic sure is a place to post your exposé of a morally bankrupt website paying writers for the privilege of publishing their hate speech.
posted by polytope subirb enby-of-piano-dice at 3:27 AM on December 23, 2023 [28 favorites]
posted by polytope subirb enby-of-piano-dice at 3:27 AM on December 23, 2023 [28 favorites]
If the proliferation of Twitter clones since Musk started tanking it has shown us anything, it's that there are many possible venues for posting one's views online—too many, in fact. In this year of all years, there's no basis to the position that keeping a specific site unmoderated is the only possible way of protecting or enabling free speech.
Which means it just comes back to money. They're gambling that keeping their site safe for Nazis will bring in more money than keeping it safe for non-Nazis, because the two are fundamentally incompatible. I sure hope the next few months prove them wrong.
posted by rory at 3:32 AM on December 23, 2023 [24 favorites]
Which means it just comes back to money. They're gambling that keeping their site safe for Nazis will bring in more money than keeping it safe for non-Nazis, because the two are fundamentally incompatible. I sure hope the next few months prove them wrong.
posted by rory at 3:32 AM on December 23, 2023 [24 favorites]
What absolutely predictable shitfuckery.
I used to think that there must be just oodles of rich bigots throwing cash around that would make companies and the people that control them pander to these fictional assholes for profit. That it was the grinding wheel of capitalism and surely if confronted with the cruelty and absurdity on display people in power would, at the very least, pressure others into keeping their garbage to themselves. But the past… ugh, the past decade has shown me it doesn’t take much money at all.
Sure, there are big rich shadow groups full of supremacist special interest investors and other kinds of cartoon evil guys floating around, but for the most part it’s shit like this. Small time bigots making small time money giving slivers of that to CEOs of convenience products who just so happen to also be bigots. And so the bastards continue to grind on down, one micro transaction at a time. If only monetizing hate speech were as expensive a mistake to make as transgressing copyright laws.
posted by Mizu at 3:39 AM on December 23, 2023 [14 favorites]
I used to think that there must be just oodles of rich bigots throwing cash around that would make companies and the people that control them pander to these fictional assholes for profit. That it was the grinding wheel of capitalism and surely if confronted with the cruelty and absurdity on display people in power would, at the very least, pressure others into keeping their garbage to themselves. But the past… ugh, the past decade has shown me it doesn’t take much money at all.
Sure, there are big rich shadow groups full of supremacist special interest investors and other kinds of cartoon evil guys floating around, but for the most part it’s shit like this. Small time bigots making small time money giving slivers of that to CEOs of convenience products who just so happen to also be bigots. And so the bastards continue to grind on down, one micro transaction at a time. If only monetizing hate speech were as expensive a mistake to make as transgressing copyright laws.
posted by Mizu at 3:39 AM on December 23, 2023 [14 favorites]
Surely this
posted by chavenet at 3:43 AM on December 23, 2023 [7 favorites]
posted by chavenet at 3:43 AM on December 23, 2023 [7 favorites]
Substack has been this way from the start. What I find disingenuous are the writers who are just now realizing Substack is this way, when these complaints against its friendliness to nazi and nazi-adjacent partners were there almost from day one.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 4:17 AM on December 23, 2023 [12 favorites]
posted by kittens for breakfast at 4:17 AM on December 23, 2023 [12 favorites]
They're gambling that keeping their site safe for Nazis will bring in more money than keeping it safe for non-Nazis, because the two are fundamentally incompatible.
If there was actually more money to be made from Nazis than non-Nazis, every McDonalds would be flying a swastika flag already. I think this is driven by politics more than profits, the latter is just more PR-friendly.
It's also not a coincidence that so many freedom of speech absolutists jump to defend Nazis first and foremost.
posted by slimepuppy at 4:34 AM on December 23, 2023 [31 favorites]
If there was actually more money to be made from Nazis than non-Nazis, every McDonalds would be flying a swastika flag already. I think this is driven by politics more than profits, the latter is just more PR-friendly.
It's also not a coincidence that so many freedom of speech absolutists jump to defend Nazis first and foremost.
posted by slimepuppy at 4:34 AM on December 23, 2023 [31 favorites]
I think this is driven by politics more than profits
I guess it depends whether one sees them, per AlSweigart above, as Nazi sympathisers or Nazi collaborators. Plenty of room to hate both!
They seem to be gambling that there's plenty of money to be made if denying Nazi sympathies is enough to keep both sides as customers. (Hence "we don’t like Nazis either—we wish no-one held those views", and no flying of Nazi flags themselves.) The attempt will only work if insufficient numbers of people call them on it, though, so fingers crossed that they lose that bet.
posted by rory at 4:48 AM on December 23, 2023 [3 favorites]
I guess it depends whether one sees them, per AlSweigart above, as Nazi sympathisers or Nazi collaborators. Plenty of room to hate both!
They seem to be gambling that there's plenty of money to be made if denying Nazi sympathies is enough to keep both sides as customers. (Hence "we don’t like Nazis either—we wish no-one held those views", and no flying of Nazi flags themselves.) The attempt will only work if insufficient numbers of people call them on it, though, so fingers crossed that they lose that bet.
posted by rory at 4:48 AM on December 23, 2023 [3 favorites]
First they came for the Nazis
and I did not speak out
not only because I am not a Nazi
but because if they should come for anyone
let it be the Nazis
posted by chavenet at 4:50 AM on December 23, 2023 [73 favorites]
and I did not speak out
not only because I am not a Nazi
but because if they should come for anyone
let it be the Nazis
posted by chavenet at 4:50 AM on December 23, 2023 [73 favorites]
Buying popcorn for when the inevitable hack and leak happens.
posted by Dr. Curare at 5:07 AM on December 23, 2023 [8 favorites]
posted by Dr. Curare at 5:07 AM on December 23, 2023 [8 favorites]
"I just want to make it clear that we don’t like Nazis either—we wish no-one held those views. But some people do hold those and other extreme views. Given that, we don’t think that censorship (including through demonetizing publications) makes the problem go away—in fact, it makes it worse." — Hamish McKenzie
First rule of being a nazi: always say you're against nazis.
Second rule of being a nazi: Always share your profit and your platform with your nazi collaborators.
posted by UN at 5:13 AM on December 23, 2023 [29 favorites]
First rule of being a nazi: always say you're against nazis.
Second rule of being a nazi: Always share your profit and your platform with your nazi collaborators.
posted by UN at 5:13 AM on December 23, 2023 [29 favorites]
I mean seriously. If you go out of your way to say 'I choose to give money to nazis because it's the right thing to do' there's no adjoining statement that excuses you — you're the nazi, period.
posted by UN at 5:22 AM on December 23, 2023 [21 favorites]
posted by UN at 5:22 AM on December 23, 2023 [21 favorites]
I'd just like to point out that substack has always been a very welcoming place for transphobes and other bottom feeders as well.
I get that Nazis are the matinee villain we can all agree to hate, but the place is a cesspit even without them.
posted by signal at 5:39 AM on December 23, 2023 [20 favorites]
I get that Nazis are the matinee villain we can all agree to hate, but the place is a cesspit even without them.
posted by signal at 5:39 AM on December 23, 2023 [20 favorites]
I've been reading Barbara F. Walter's How Civil Wars Start, and she has a chapter about how much of the current global unrest is literally just down to expanding Facebook access around the world. The minute some kind of threshold is crossed with enough people getting on Facebook, politics starts getting agitated. I had not really grasped what happened in Myanmar and how directly related it was to the spread of social media. Hamish McKenzie is just wrong. Censorship does make the problem go away, because the problem is ease of access, repetition, reinforcement, and organization, leading to an acceleration and consolidation of these extremist groups.
In the last thread I expressed some uneasiness with the effort to get leftist and queer authors off the platform--essentially asking them to take the hit, to be demonetized and censored, as a "we'll show you!" to Substack. I still don't think that's really the right approach. (Also, this is the internet we're talking about, and every successful site ends up collapsing under the pressure to grow and be profitable, so I assume it's only a matter of time for Substack as well.) But as a society, we will either figure out how to build a social-media immune system that isolates and decelerates these movements, or...well, we won't have a society anymore.
posted by mittens at 5:51 AM on December 23, 2023 [43 favorites]
In the last thread I expressed some uneasiness with the effort to get leftist and queer authors off the platform--essentially asking them to take the hit, to be demonetized and censored, as a "we'll show you!" to Substack. I still don't think that's really the right approach. (Also, this is the internet we're talking about, and every successful site ends up collapsing under the pressure to grow and be profitable, so I assume it's only a matter of time for Substack as well.) But as a society, we will either figure out how to build a social-media immune system that isolates and decelerates these movements, or...well, we won't have a society anymore.
posted by mittens at 5:51 AM on December 23, 2023 [43 favorites]
I feel like even from a cold, calculating business perspective this is questionable.
You either antagonize your base so much that more leave than you would have lost in banning hate speech (like everyone leaving a pool after a dog poops in it). Or you refuse to ban it because it's already such a big part of your business that you couldn't take the loss (the pool is already just full of shit).
I'm not sure which is worse.
posted by Flaffigan at 5:54 AM on December 23, 2023 [5 favorites]
You either antagonize your base so much that more leave than you would have lost in banning hate speech (like everyone leaving a pool after a dog poops in it). Or you refuse to ban it because it's already such a big part of your business that you couldn't take the loss (the pool is already just full of shit).
I'm not sure which is worse.
posted by Flaffigan at 5:54 AM on December 23, 2023 [5 favorites]
Is this really about money?
Genuine question as I don't know anything about Substack.
Seems much more likely that it's the standard reason: straight white cis guys and similar people recognise the threat to their privilege so they go all freeze peach?
posted by Zumbador at 6:06 AM on December 23, 2023 [4 favorites]
Genuine question as I don't know anything about Substack.
Seems much more likely that it's the standard reason: straight white cis guys and similar people recognise the threat to their privilege so they go all freeze peach?
posted by Zumbador at 6:06 AM on December 23, 2023 [4 favorites]
Yeah, signal, there's a link to some discussion of Substack's transphobic, disinformation, and anti-vax authors in the post, although I could have highlighted more that this is not a new problem for them. They also do censor what they publish on their site -- adult-content is not welcome on Substack, for instance. Maybe they can blame their payment processors for that restriction, but Substack is certainly doing more to protect Nazis than the rights of sex workers to earn income.
posted by autopilot at 6:07 AM on December 23, 2023 [8 favorites]
posted by autopilot at 6:07 AM on December 23, 2023 [8 favorites]
So many writers are using Substack because it’s free. It’s free because of vc money. Vc money seems to be mostly controlled by right wing libertarian Faschismus sympathisers. I’m not saying these things are connected, but its certainly a coincidence.
posted by The River Ivel at 6:10 AM on December 23, 2023 [20 favorites]
posted by The River Ivel at 6:10 AM on December 23, 2023 [20 favorites]
Substack has an open thread on Thursdays. I brought up the Nazi proliferation on its platform and the moderator merely liked my comment.
posted by DJZouke at 6:16 AM on December 23, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by DJZouke at 6:16 AM on December 23, 2023 [2 favorites]
How much of this sort of thing can be attributed to a "hedging bets" policy? I mean, the idea that if and when the right-wing authoritarians take over in this country, one ends up on the side of the victors and able to stay in business, avoiding the Brown Shirts (Polo shirts maybe in this case) smashing the metaphorical printing presses?
posted by anguspodgorny at 6:24 AM on December 23, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by anguspodgorny at 6:24 AM on December 23, 2023 [4 favorites]
I’m sure there were people back in the early ‘90s who foresaw the potential (and in hindsight, inevitable) downside to the internet’s ability to amplify anyone’s voice and bring like-minded people together, but all I remember is the boundless optimism. Turned out Homer Simpson was right.
posted by The Card Cheat at 6:33 AM on December 23, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by The Card Cheat at 6:33 AM on December 23, 2023 [3 favorites]
It's also not a coincidence that so many freedom of speech absolutists jump to defend Nazis first and foremost.
Because the very very very first response they'll get is a Reductio Ad Hitlerium anyway?
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 6:41 AM on December 23, 2023
Because the very very very first response they'll get is a Reductio Ad Hitlerium anyway?
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 6:41 AM on December 23, 2023
I wonder how much of this is that for substack, identifying Nazis seems too much like work.
posted by Nancy Lebovitz at 6:45 AM on December 23, 2023
posted by Nancy Lebovitz at 6:45 AM on December 23, 2023
I wonder how much of this is that for substack, identifying Nazis seems too much like work.
Zero? Because there are plenty of people out there, starting with the Atlantic, who will happily and for free point out the Nazis pooping in the pool.
posted by chavenet at 6:58 AM on December 23, 2023 [8 favorites]
Zero? Because there are plenty of people out there, starting with the Atlantic, who will happily and for free point out the Nazis pooping in the pool.
posted by chavenet at 6:58 AM on December 23, 2023 [8 favorites]
Substack has always been shit and I stopped subscribing to new newsletters, regardless of how interesting they are to me, because of it. After Hamish wrote his post, I actively unsubscribed from every one that I'd been following since before I became aware of their issues. Then, I emailed all the authors to tell them why I was unsubscribing from the newsletters-that-I-enjoy.
I'll miss Logo Archive most of all.
posted by dobbs at 7:01 AM on December 23, 2023 [7 favorites]
I'll miss Logo Archive most of all.
posted by dobbs at 7:01 AM on December 23, 2023 [7 favorites]
I like Substack has a Nazi opportunity by Popehat.
posted by Slothrup at 7:02 AM on December 23, 2023 [16 favorites]
posted by Slothrup at 7:02 AM on December 23, 2023 [16 favorites]
Also wanted to call attention to the top-rated comment on the Popehat piece:
I admit I kind of gasped when I read this line from Hamish: "We are committed to upholding and protecting freedom of expression, even when it hurts."posted by Slothrup at 7:05 AM on December 23, 2023 [31 favorites]
Because he didn't mean "even when it hurts ME." That's quite a thing to say to people who are definitely harmed by the perpetuation of Nazi propaganda. At least it's honest, I guess.
Absolute freedom of expression was one of those myths Americans told themselves (disingenuously) back in the Cold War when they were proving to themselves that they were not at all like the Commies. It only appeared to be workable at the time because the dissemination of anti-liberal speech was slow and inefficient.
Yes, librarians would firmly defend their right to hold books of every kind and viewpoint, but you had to hear about the book from some random friend-of-a-friend, then track it down at the library, then read it. Meanwhile, mainstream liberal viewpoints were being broadcast into every TV and radio and classroom. Father Coughlin was muscled off the air and out of mailboxes. Despite the nods to "free speech of every kind", there was a recognition that the survival of a liberal regime requires constant, overwhelming liberal propaganda.
There are many ways in which liberal regimes suck compared to many of the cultures they destroyed when they took over the world, and I've learned about many of those ways of liberal regime suckage here on Metafilter.
We are now perhaps seeing one of the liberal regime defense mechanisms that I learned about on Metafilter kicking in: When there is a threat to liberal freedoms from right-wing reactionaries, liberal regimes ally with the left; but when there is a threat to the sacredness of private property from the left, liberal regimes ally with right-wing reactionaries.
posted by clawsoon at 7:42 AM on December 23, 2023 [12 favorites]
Yes, librarians would firmly defend their right to hold books of every kind and viewpoint, but you had to hear about the book from some random friend-of-a-friend, then track it down at the library, then read it. Meanwhile, mainstream liberal viewpoints were being broadcast into every TV and radio and classroom. Father Coughlin was muscled off the air and out of mailboxes. Despite the nods to "free speech of every kind", there was a recognition that the survival of a liberal regime requires constant, overwhelming liberal propaganda.
There are many ways in which liberal regimes suck compared to many of the cultures they destroyed when they took over the world, and I've learned about many of those ways of liberal regime suckage here on Metafilter.
We are now perhaps seeing one of the liberal regime defense mechanisms that I learned about on Metafilter kicking in: When there is a threat to liberal freedoms from right-wing reactionaries, liberal regimes ally with the left; but when there is a threat to the sacredness of private property from the left, liberal regimes ally with right-wing reactionaries.
posted by clawsoon at 7:42 AM on December 23, 2023 [12 favorites]
Because the very very very first response they'll get is a Reductio Ad Hitlerium anyway?
Yes, and to remain free speech absolutists, they have to respond "and I am ok with spreading Hitler's belief system, and think spreading Hitler's belief system is a net positive".
This, not surprisingly, selects for people who are less than totally horrified with Hitler's belief system.
The first tier other "absolute free speech" counter-argument is a lot more aggressive. Ie, if you are 100% for absolute free speech, give me the names and addresses and pictures of everyone you love, and I'll place a public bounty on their torture and murder. As a supporter of "absolute free speech" you should find that completely acceptable and I shouldn't be penalized at all for it?
Then we either find the boundaries of their "absolute free speech" (often: it is ok to plan and encourage the mass murder of categories of people, but not specific people), or they take shelter behind proving them wrong is a crime and pretend they are ok with it (and actually following through with showing the problem with their position is morally horrible and illegal).
However, we can see tiny versions of this. The muskrat is for free speech, but not when someone uses it to publicize his airplane movements, because *that actually impacts him personally*, and by "absolute free speech" he means "hate against groups I don't belong to doesn't impact me, so I don't care".
posted by NotAYakk at 7:50 AM on December 23, 2023 [18 favorites]
Yes, and to remain free speech absolutists, they have to respond "and I am ok with spreading Hitler's belief system, and think spreading Hitler's belief system is a net positive".
This, not surprisingly, selects for people who are less than totally horrified with Hitler's belief system.
The first tier other "absolute free speech" counter-argument is a lot more aggressive. Ie, if you are 100% for absolute free speech, give me the names and addresses and pictures of everyone you love, and I'll place a public bounty on their torture and murder. As a supporter of "absolute free speech" you should find that completely acceptable and I shouldn't be penalized at all for it?
Then we either find the boundaries of their "absolute free speech" (often: it is ok to plan and encourage the mass murder of categories of people, but not specific people), or they take shelter behind proving them wrong is a crime and pretend they are ok with it (and actually following through with showing the problem with their position is morally horrible and illegal).
However, we can see tiny versions of this. The muskrat is for free speech, but not when someone uses it to publicize his airplane movements, because *that actually impacts him personally*, and by "absolute free speech" he means "hate against groups I don't belong to doesn't impact me, so I don't care".
posted by NotAYakk at 7:50 AM on December 23, 2023 [18 favorites]
How much of this sort of thing can be attributed to a "hedging bets" policy?
IBM, Ford, Mercedes Benz, GM, Volkswagen, IG Farben. A lot of companies and its backers collaborated with Nazis and are still operating today. Maybe Substack management and its VC investors are playing a longer game.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 7:50 AM on December 23, 2023 [4 favorites]
IBM, Ford, Mercedes Benz, GM, Volkswagen, IG Farben. A lot of companies and its backers collaborated with Nazis and are still operating today. Maybe Substack management and its VC investors are playing a longer game.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 7:50 AM on December 23, 2023 [4 favorites]
I think the competing theory of venture capital and private equity folk all being fash and actually trying to make that Nazi takeover happen is a lot more compelling than the hedging one, TBH.
posted by Artw at 8:32 AM on December 23, 2023 [7 favorites]
posted by Artw at 8:32 AM on December 23, 2023 [7 favorites]
Niko Stratis is moving her work away from Substack due to the response from MacKenzie.
posted by Kitteh at 8:32 AM on December 23, 2023 [8 favorites]
posted by Kitteh at 8:32 AM on December 23, 2023 [8 favorites]
How to Migrate Your Newsletter From Substack to Buttondown
posted by Artw at 8:36 AM on December 23, 2023 [14 favorites]
posted by Artw at 8:36 AM on December 23, 2023 [14 favorites]
Remember Godwin’s Law? That seems so quaint these days.
posted by BuddhaInABucket at 8:49 AM on December 23, 2023 [6 favorites]
posted by BuddhaInABucket at 8:49 AM on December 23, 2023 [6 favorites]
Godwin’s on record as it being fine when it’s actual Nazis.
posted by Artw at 9:18 AM on December 23, 2023 [29 favorites]
posted by Artw at 9:18 AM on December 23, 2023 [29 favorites]
Well this sucks! I subscribe to exactly one author. And he is on Substack. And I mean that I only subscribe to one single author/service/channel in all my Internet ramblings. The author happens to be on Substack.
The author I subscribe to I have followed for about 24 or so years! He took his blog 90% offline and moved to a subscription model on Substack, and I started happily paying to read him 5x per week for about 5 years now.
As a "sorta-very online" person, I will have you know that I had no idea that Substack was Nazi-adjacent, or Nazi/fascist-friendly at all. I'm sure I could have searched for this info, but I am literally finding out about this via Metafilter this morning.
The author I follow is a very left-leaning writer of social and political commentary, humor, satire and some other topics. An old-school blogger who's probably 60-something now and is the opposite of a Nazi-fascist.
I remember subscribing to him first time around Xmas, which means my annual subscription probably just got renewed. I'm angry about this, but it hasn't been "obvious" to everyone that Substack has been fascist friendly. Not obvious at all.
posted by SoberHighland at 9:25 AM on December 23, 2023 [13 favorites]
The author I subscribe to I have followed for about 24 or so years! He took his blog 90% offline and moved to a subscription model on Substack, and I started happily paying to read him 5x per week for about 5 years now.
As a "sorta-very online" person, I will have you know that I had no idea that Substack was Nazi-adjacent, or Nazi/fascist-friendly at all. I'm sure I could have searched for this info, but I am literally finding out about this via Metafilter this morning.
The author I follow is a very left-leaning writer of social and political commentary, humor, satire and some other topics. An old-school blogger who's probably 60-something now and is the opposite of a Nazi-fascist.
I remember subscribing to him first time around Xmas, which means my annual subscription probably just got renewed. I'm angry about this, but it hasn't been "obvious" to everyone that Substack has been fascist friendly. Not obvious at all.
posted by SoberHighland at 9:25 AM on December 23, 2023 [13 favorites]
WaPo: Yes, it’s okay to compare Trump to Hitler. Don’t let me stop you. By Mike Godwin
posted by jenfullmoon at 9:27 AM on December 23, 2023 [24 favorites]
posted by jenfullmoon at 9:27 AM on December 23, 2023 [24 favorites]
Back before internet, I could read the local newspaper, and agree or disagree with what was there. Same with TV. Magazines were numerous but I knew which ones to avoid. And Nazis, racists, etc were all considered cranks and relegated to either speechifying on street corners or huddling together in their little groups. In other words, it was really easy to avoid hearing or seeing this shit. Unless, of course, you were a member of one of their hated groups and had to deal with their machinations resulting from their huddling. But now, thanks to the internet, what were once deemed cranks, are now influencers, spokespeople, pundits, content creators, and more, all piped into my world via the open sewer that the internet has become. Oh, I forgot to mention the $$$ being made from the sewage. Free speech is just a marketing slogan.
I can remember somebody saying that restricting speech was bad, because by letting everything to get out there, people will be able to hear or see it and make their own reasoned opinions about it, which is better than just hiding it here and there. Note the fundamental flaw in this argument - “reasoned opinions.” The messages from the left are generally reasoned, hence the continual arguments about them. But the right specializes in fear, “they are coming to get you,” and emotions are more powerful than reason. In the old days, if a political operative on one side was given a platform it was expected and required to give the other side a similar platform. Since Reagan, equal time on the media went away.
And after reading the Popehat piece, I was left with thinking he’s still swimming in that pool full of dogshit. But he’s thinking about it… Freedom of speech is not a slogan, it’s a very fluid and changing space that requires loads of thoughts and actions to maintain something ethically responsible. Being responsible takes guts. In a lot of these types of situations I see a lot of gutless individuals.
posted by njohnson23 at 9:34 AM on December 23, 2023 [7 favorites]
I can remember somebody saying that restricting speech was bad, because by letting everything to get out there, people will be able to hear or see it and make their own reasoned opinions about it, which is better than just hiding it here and there. Note the fundamental flaw in this argument - “reasoned opinions.” The messages from the left are generally reasoned, hence the continual arguments about them. But the right specializes in fear, “they are coming to get you,” and emotions are more powerful than reason. In the old days, if a political operative on one side was given a platform it was expected and required to give the other side a similar platform. Since Reagan, equal time on the media went away.
And after reading the Popehat piece, I was left with thinking he’s still swimming in that pool full of dogshit. But he’s thinking about it… Freedom of speech is not a slogan, it’s a very fluid and changing space that requires loads of thoughts and actions to maintain something ethically responsible. Being responsible takes guts. In a lot of these types of situations I see a lot of gutless individuals.
posted by njohnson23 at 9:34 AM on December 23, 2023 [7 favorites]
From the ancient history of last April, Mike Masnick wrote "Substack CEO Chris Best Doesn’t Realize He’s Just Become The Nazi Bar", based on the failure of Substack's leadership to answer any moderation questions in an interview with Nilay Patel's Decoder podcast. The transcript of the podcast is really damning, but the actual video of Chris Best staring at the camera instead of answering Patel's straight-forward questions about allowing overt racism is devastating.
posted by autopilot at 9:44 AM on December 23, 2023 [11 favorites]
posted by autopilot at 9:44 AM on December 23, 2023 [11 favorites]
Hamish McKenzie is just wrong being disingenuous to protect a revenue stream, because they are indifferent to the suffering caused by that same revenue stream.
This is a story as old as time, and underscores the motivation of forces driving societal split.
posted by CynicalKnight at 10:04 AM on December 23, 2023 [7 favorites]
This is a story as old as time, and underscores the motivation of forces driving societal split.
posted by CynicalKnight at 10:04 AM on December 23, 2023 [7 favorites]
Given that, we don’t think that censorship (including through demonetizing publications) makes the problem go away—in fact, it makes it worse." — Hamish McKenzie
Is there actual evidence that stopping nazis from promoting naziism makes it "worse?" Like worse in what sense? Worse than the time America's likely next president and his supporters openly promoted nazi theories at his rallies and in the media? Worse than the first time when nobody stopped them until it was too late and sixty million people died?
posted by klanawa at 10:15 AM on December 23, 2023 [14 favorites]
Is there actual evidence that stopping nazis from promoting naziism makes it "worse?" Like worse in what sense? Worse than the time America's likely next president and his supporters openly promoted nazi theories at his rallies and in the media? Worse than the first time when nobody stopped them until it was too late and sixty million people died?
posted by klanawa at 10:15 AM on December 23, 2023 [14 favorites]
>> It's also not a coincidence that so many freedom of speech absolutists jump to defend Nazis first and foremost.
>Because the very very very first response they'll get is a Reductio Ad Hitlerium anyway?
Yes, and to remain free speech absolutists, they have to respond "and I am ok with spreading Hitler's belief system, and think spreading Hitler's belief system is a net positive".
They certainly think the ability to spread it is a net positive. However to suggest, as the original comment did, that they are all fired up and want to talk about Nazis is extremely facile. To shower a group with questions about Nazis and then claim that *they* are the ones who are obsessed is intellectually dishonest.
People arrive at free speech absolutism by many paths, and it doesn’t imply that they are accepting or happy about vaccines causing autism, or Covid being a hoax, or a thousand other things including, yes, Nazis. They often think that much like Democracy, free speech absolutism is the worst possible solution — except for all of the other ones.
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 10:18 AM on December 23, 2023 [4 favorites]
>Because the very very very first response they'll get is a Reductio Ad Hitlerium anyway?
Yes, and to remain free speech absolutists, they have to respond "and I am ok with spreading Hitler's belief system, and think spreading Hitler's belief system is a net positive".
They certainly think the ability to spread it is a net positive. However to suggest, as the original comment did, that they are all fired up and want to talk about Nazis is extremely facile. To shower a group with questions about Nazis and then claim that *they* are the ones who are obsessed is intellectually dishonest.
People arrive at free speech absolutism by many paths, and it doesn’t imply that they are accepting or happy about vaccines causing autism, or Covid being a hoax, or a thousand other things including, yes, Nazis. They often think that much like Democracy, free speech absolutism is the worst possible solution — except for all of the other ones.
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 10:18 AM on December 23, 2023 [4 favorites]
Is there actual evidence that stopping nazis from promoting naziism makes it "worse?"
This is a very common line from the “absolutists” and it’s so demonstrably not true. Ideas are memes, they spread by exposure. Keeping them obscure, marginalized, and shameful is in fact much more effective.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 10:29 AM on December 23, 2023 [11 favorites]
This is a very common line from the “absolutists” and it’s so demonstrably not true. Ideas are memes, they spread by exposure. Keeping them obscure, marginalized, and shameful is in fact much more effective.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 10:29 AM on December 23, 2023 [11 favorites]
It's true. It's just that that line so often goes unquestioned.
posted by klanawa at 10:30 AM on December 23, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by klanawa at 10:30 AM on December 23, 2023 [1 favorite]
I've said it before and I'll say it again: what do you call 9 people who knowingly sit down to dinner with a Nazi?
A table of 10 Nazis.
posted by nushustu at 10:33 AM on December 23, 2023 [10 favorites]
A table of 10 Nazis.
posted by nushustu at 10:33 AM on December 23, 2023 [10 favorites]
Ben Werdmuller: Leaving the Nazi Bar
posted by Cardinal Fang at 11:05 AM on December 23, 2023 [7 favorites]
posted by Cardinal Fang at 11:05 AM on December 23, 2023 [7 favorites]
The Popehat piece linked above effectively destroys the free speech absolutism argument. Substack does have limits on speech. They don't allow writing promoting eating disorders. They don't allow boobs in profile pictures. Nazi speech, on the other hand is allowed. So Substack does limit speech, they just think that boobs and eating disorders are worse than nazis.
posted by being_quiet at 11:11 AM on December 23, 2023 [33 favorites]
posted by being_quiet at 11:11 AM on December 23, 2023 [33 favorites]
They often think that much like Democracy, free speech absolutism is the worst possible solution — except for all of the other ones.
And oftentimes, they're able to think that because they're not the ones actually paying the price for their beliefs. As I've said in prior threads, the shibboleth of "the answer to 'bad'/hate speech is more/'better' speech" winds up resulting in minorities and the dispossessed having to constantly argue and fight for their right to exist, because for free speech "absolutists", it's a bigger sin for people to oppose bigots and fascists being given a soapbox than for bigots and fascists to be given a soapbox. And when asked to defend that, said "absolutists" break out the other big shibboleth of the ideology - "we bind their hands by binding ours" - that by giving bigots and fascists a soapbox, it will force them to return the favor. Which is why my response is always binding our hands will never bind theirs - that they will never respect any limitations not backed by repercussions.
(I'm also a big believer in tolerance as peace treaty, which makes the point that those who foreswear the obligations of tolerance also foreswear its protections. Which means that the targets of bigots aren't obliged to "take one for the team", as it were.)
posted by NoxAeternum at 11:14 AM on December 23, 2023 [25 favorites]
And oftentimes, they're able to think that because they're not the ones actually paying the price for their beliefs. As I've said in prior threads, the shibboleth of "the answer to 'bad'/hate speech is more/'better' speech" winds up resulting in minorities and the dispossessed having to constantly argue and fight for their right to exist, because for free speech "absolutists", it's a bigger sin for people to oppose bigots and fascists being given a soapbox than for bigots and fascists to be given a soapbox. And when asked to defend that, said "absolutists" break out the other big shibboleth of the ideology - "we bind their hands by binding ours" - that by giving bigots and fascists a soapbox, it will force them to return the favor. Which is why my response is always binding our hands will never bind theirs - that they will never respect any limitations not backed by repercussions.
(I'm also a big believer in tolerance as peace treaty, which makes the point that those who foreswear the obligations of tolerance also foreswear its protections. Which means that the targets of bigots aren't obliged to "take one for the team", as it were.)
posted by NoxAeternum at 11:14 AM on December 23, 2023 [25 favorites]
> Yes, and to remain free speech absolutists, they have to respond "and I am ok with spreading Hitler's belief system, and think spreading Hitler's belief system is a net positive".
They certainly think the ability to spread it is a net positive. However to suggest, as the original comment did, that they are all fired up and want to talk about Nazis is extremely facile. To shower a group with questions about Nazis and then claim that *they* are the ones who are obsessed is intellectually dishonest.
I don't care that much if you are a Nazi-hobbiest who plays with Nazi dolls and Nazi memorabilia, gets together with Nazi-loving weekend clubs, and reads Mein Kamph in your spare time, or if you are just someone who is ok with Nazi ideology and will spread it in exchange for money. I do not care if they are "obsessed" with Nazis. I care if they *support* Nazis and spread their ideology.
It is a really simple line.
People arrive at free speech absolutism by many paths, and it doesn’t imply that they are accepting or happy about vaccines causing autism, or Covid being a hoax, or a thousand other things including, yes, Nazis. They often think that much like Democracy, free speech absolutism is the worst possible solution — except for all of the other ones.
They all are going to be challenged by "ok, so would you support spreading genocidial propoganda, such as the Nazis, who also publicly call for everyone else to be killed and silenced who disagrees with them", and they have to decide that "yes, I would support that".
If they support Nazis regretfully, they are a Nazi. If they support Nazis philosophically, as a matter of devil's advocate, theoretically, practically, regretfully, reluctantly, or politely, they are a Nazi.
What do you call a table with 10 people peacefully eating supper, one of whom is an open Nazi?
A table with 10 Nazis.
This isn't a game.
And if they think tolerating and supporting Nazis is worth whatever benefit you, they or the world gets from doing so, then they are just another Nazi.
This position may make you not agree with me. I don't care.
posted by NotAYakk at 11:20 AM on December 23, 2023 [13 favorites]
They certainly think the ability to spread it is a net positive. However to suggest, as the original comment did, that they are all fired up and want to talk about Nazis is extremely facile. To shower a group with questions about Nazis and then claim that *they* are the ones who are obsessed is intellectually dishonest.
I don't care that much if you are a Nazi-hobbiest who plays with Nazi dolls and Nazi memorabilia, gets together with Nazi-loving weekend clubs, and reads Mein Kamph in your spare time, or if you are just someone who is ok with Nazi ideology and will spread it in exchange for money. I do not care if they are "obsessed" with Nazis. I care if they *support* Nazis and spread their ideology.
It is a really simple line.
People arrive at free speech absolutism by many paths, and it doesn’t imply that they are accepting or happy about vaccines causing autism, or Covid being a hoax, or a thousand other things including, yes, Nazis. They often think that much like Democracy, free speech absolutism is the worst possible solution — except for all of the other ones.
They all are going to be challenged by "ok, so would you support spreading genocidial propoganda, such as the Nazis, who also publicly call for everyone else to be killed and silenced who disagrees with them", and they have to decide that "yes, I would support that".
If they support Nazis regretfully, they are a Nazi. If they support Nazis philosophically, as a matter of devil's advocate, theoretically, practically, regretfully, reluctantly, or politely, they are a Nazi.
What do you call a table with 10 people peacefully eating supper, one of whom is an open Nazi?
A table with 10 Nazis.
This isn't a game.
And if they think tolerating and supporting Nazis is worth whatever benefit you, they or the world gets from doing so, then they are just another Nazi.
This position may make you not agree with me. I don't care.
posted by NotAYakk at 11:20 AM on December 23, 2023 [13 favorites]
> It's also not a coincidence that so many freedom of speech absolutists jump to defend Nazis first and foremost.
Because the very very very first response they'll get is a Reductio Ad Hitlerium anyway?
Yes, yes, I'll include #notallfreespeechabsolutists next time.
posted by slimepuppy at 12:32 PM on December 23, 2023 [2 favorites]
Because the very very very first response they'll get is a Reductio Ad Hitlerium anyway?
Yes, yes, I'll include #notallfreespeechabsolutists next time.
posted by slimepuppy at 12:32 PM on December 23, 2023 [2 favorites]
If you self-define as an absolutist, then you are going to get "reductio" arguments, because you have committed yourself to no exceptions. That's what absolutism IS. A position of "my default is free speech and I want the most minimal and most justified exceptions possible" is much more defensible, but it commits you to a lot of work defending choices about what exceptions there might be.
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 12:46 PM on December 23, 2023 [20 favorites]
posted by i_am_joe's_spleen at 12:46 PM on December 23, 2023 [20 favorites]
Back in the 30’s, Alan Cranston, who later became a senator from California, published Mein Kampf in translation. He was then sued by Hitler, for violating his copyright. Cranston did this because he felt it was important that people would know what Hitler’s policies really were. Giving the people of this country the ability to read for themselves what was going on was important. Now… was his publishing of this book wrong because now the wrong sorts of people could also read it?
posted by njohnson23 at 1:27 PM on December 23, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by njohnson23 at 1:27 PM on December 23, 2023 [2 favorites]
Free speech absolutism is like saying the best way to avoid infections is to have absolutely no immune system.
Avoiding memetic infection requires good information hygiene, and a strong intellectual immune system.
Media literacy and empathy are strongly indicated.
posted by chromecow at 1:42 PM on December 23, 2023 [8 favorites]
Avoiding memetic infection requires good information hygiene, and a strong intellectual immune system.
Media literacy and empathy are strongly indicated.
posted by chromecow at 1:42 PM on December 23, 2023 [8 favorites]
Now… was his publishing of this book wrong because now the wrong sorts of people could also read it?
I feel strongly that the correct answer to that is “that’s a stupid fucking question”.
There’s all kinds of parsing-things-out-from-first principles that people do around the issue of “don’t support Nazis” that mark them as unserious people and possibly New York Times columnists, ignoring anything they have to say on the matter and treating them with a degree of suspicion is generally for the best.
posted by Artw at 1:48 PM on December 23, 2023 [22 favorites]
I feel strongly that the correct answer to that is “that’s a stupid fucking question”.
There’s all kinds of parsing-things-out-from-first principles that people do around the issue of “don’t support Nazis” that mark them as unserious people and possibly New York Times columnists, ignoring anything they have to say on the matter and treating them with a degree of suspicion is generally for the best.
posted by Artw at 1:48 PM on December 23, 2023 [22 favorites]
Now… was his publishing of this book wrong because now the wrong sorts of people could also read it?
Did he publish the book with explanatory context, or did he go on YouTube shouting "I AGREE WITH EVERY WORD THIS MAN SAYS"?
posted by Faint of Butt at 1:57 PM on December 23, 2023 [6 favorites]
Did he publish the book with explanatory context, or did he go on YouTube shouting "I AGREE WITH EVERY WORD THIS MAN SAYS"?
posted by Faint of Butt at 1:57 PM on December 23, 2023 [6 favorites]
If you read the linked article, an earlier published version removed the really horrible stuff. It had been censored to hide the real message. He had a new translation done, left it all in and printed it with commentary.
posted by njohnson23 at 2:04 PM on December 23, 2023 [8 favorites]
posted by njohnson23 at 2:04 PM on December 23, 2023 [8 favorites]
no f****** s*** Alan Cranston was sued by Adolf Hitler.
that's one Democrat I like.
posted by clavdivs at 2:31 PM on December 23, 2023 [11 favorites]
that's one Democrat I like.
posted by clavdivs at 2:31 PM on December 23, 2023 [11 favorites]
The various Euro models of free speech have issues. Like criminalizing marches for Palestinians, as a recent example, or having crazy libel laws like the UK. They're also not handling wink-and-a-nod white supremacists (among a litany of other, sometimes partially related and intertwined communities like incels) well but they at least COULD handle it. It's within the realm of possibility that the state COULD really tamp down on that shit given the systems of government.
The US has gotten to a point where not only are we not allowed to address it from any level of government, one of our two parties is wholly reliant on the stuff to exist. It's a problem we will never fix. Now, we will also never apply that right evenly. Historically or now. Communism back in the day, unions throughout (not officially but there's enough one-hand-washes-the-other for it to be clear), Iraq War/GOP convention protests, Occupy, BLM. But you want to march through Skokie then let's have the legal system ride to your rescue.
And this is basically where Substack is. Pornography? Hell no. Incels, Nazis, et al? Come on in.
The website could be fixed but the culture of the executives is not fixable.
posted by Slackermagee at 3:03 PM on December 23, 2023 [9 favorites]
The US has gotten to a point where not only are we not allowed to address it from any level of government, one of our two parties is wholly reliant on the stuff to exist. It's a problem we will never fix. Now, we will also never apply that right evenly. Historically or now. Communism back in the day, unions throughout (not officially but there's enough one-hand-washes-the-other for it to be clear), Iraq War/GOP convention protests, Occupy, BLM. But you want to march through Skokie then let's have the legal system ride to your rescue.
And this is basically where Substack is. Pornography? Hell no. Incels, Nazis, et al? Come on in.
The website could be fixed but the culture of the executives is not fixable.
posted by Slackermagee at 3:03 PM on December 23, 2023 [9 favorites]
Publishing Hitlers vile evil when the world had an opportunity to stop his horror? Good.
Praising Hitler almost a century after we saw where his genocidal rage led us? Unequivocally BAD . It caused the biggest war in history, and mass murder in concentration death camps. There's no amount of justification to make that ok. It should be shamed and disavowed at every opportunity. Nazi is a hate ideology and has less than no redeeming values.
posted by Jacen at 3:26 PM on December 23, 2023 [13 favorites]
Praising Hitler almost a century after we saw where his genocidal rage led us? Unequivocally BAD . It caused the biggest war in history, and mass murder in concentration death camps. There's no amount of justification to make that ok. It should be shamed and disavowed at every opportunity. Nazi is a hate ideology and has less than no redeeming values.
posted by Jacen at 3:26 PM on December 23, 2023 [13 favorites]
Few people are likely to read a nazi blogger in 2023 and reach the epiphany that nazis are bad, actually. People who read nazi blogs are looking for, at the very least, reinforcement of their own nazi feelings and thoughts (if not for logistical information about where they can go to meet other nazis and, ahem, "hang out").
posted by kittens for breakfast at 4:00 PM on December 23, 2023 [14 favorites]
posted by kittens for breakfast at 4:00 PM on December 23, 2023 [14 favorites]
Now… was his publishing of this book wrong because now the wrong sorts of people could also read it?
Cranston’s book: “Not 1 cent of royalty to Hitler,” and all profits went to help refugees from Hitler’s Reich.
SubStack: Proudly sends dollars to Nazis.
Not the same.
posted by UN at 6:49 PM on December 23, 2023 [25 favorites]
Cranston’s book: “Not 1 cent of royalty to Hitler,” and all profits went to help refugees from Hitler’s Reich.
SubStack: Proudly sends dollars to Nazis.
Not the same.
posted by UN at 6:49 PM on December 23, 2023 [25 favorites]
My grandfather told me that the 1st person to buy a copy of MK at his Pickwick bookshop was a rabbi....I assume that it was the full New School translation and not Cranston's pamphlet of excerpts.
posted by brujita at 8:35 PM on December 23, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by brujita at 8:35 PM on December 23, 2023 [2 favorites]
I like Substack has a Nazi opportunity by Popehat.
That post links to a list of authors advocating in favor of personal moderation of blogs (as opposed to site-wide policies). Notable names on that list (to me):
- Abigail Shrier
- Edward Snowden
- Lawrence M. Krauss
- Matt Taibbi
- Michael Shermer
- Richard Dawkins
- Slavoj Žižek
posted by nosewings at 9:30 PM on December 23, 2023 [1 favorite]
That post links to a list of authors advocating in favor of personal moderation of blogs (as opposed to site-wide policies). Notable names on that list (to me):
- Abigail Shrier
- Edward Snowden
- Lawrence M. Krauss
- Matt Taibbi
- Michael Shermer
- Richard Dawkins
- Slavoj Žižek
posted by nosewings at 9:30 PM on December 23, 2023 [1 favorite]
Thanks for that context, UN.
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 10:55 PM on December 23, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by They sucked his brains out! at 10:55 PM on December 23, 2023 [1 favorite]
Nosewings, the letter signees include many other notable names: a very quick scan revealed to my eye anti-Palestinian zealot Bari Weiss, COVID denialist Jay Bhattacharya, transphobe Julie Bindel. In short, a list of some of the most notorious scoundrels out there.
posted by splitpeasoup at 11:05 PM on December 23, 2023 [10 favorites]
posted by splitpeasoup at 11:05 PM on December 23, 2023 [10 favorites]
It’s like they’ve fully covered every stage of the TERF to fash pipeline.
posted by Artw at 11:28 PM on December 23, 2023 [10 favorites]
posted by Artw at 11:28 PM on December 23, 2023 [10 favorites]
Snowden is the only one on the list I am even a little surprised by.
posted by The Manwich Horror at 4:13 AM on December 24, 2023
posted by The Manwich Horror at 4:13 AM on December 24, 2023
This whole clusterfuck is gaining traction in the NY Times, on Substack itself and elsewhere. I have read that writers with over 10k subscriptions are thinking of moving to another platform.
posted by DJZouke at 5:56 AM on December 24, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by DJZouke at 5:56 AM on December 24, 2023 [1 favorite]
This has been true since the beginning of substack as a platform, glad its finally gaining some traction so folks can move on and let this turn into another gab and fade into irrelevance
posted by yuletide at 8:52 AM on December 24, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by yuletide at 8:52 AM on December 24, 2023 [2 favorites]
That post links to a list of authors advocating in favor of personal moderation of blogs (as opposed to site-wide policies).
Once again for the cheap seats - nobody owes you a fucking soapbox. Which also has the correlary that if you do offer someone a soapbox, that's a decision that you can be held accountable for. And no, trying to argue that this is "censorship" (as the piece inelegantly attempts to) only serves to cheapen the concept (which has more and more become a "last refuge of scoundrels" as abusers, bigots, and fascists use it to "argue" against being held accountable for what they advocate for.)
posted by NoxAeternum at 10:03 AM on December 24, 2023 [2 favorites]
Once again for the cheap seats - nobody owes you a fucking soapbox. Which also has the correlary that if you do offer someone a soapbox, that's a decision that you can be held accountable for. And no, trying to argue that this is "censorship" (as the piece inelegantly attempts to) only serves to cheapen the concept (which has more and more become a "last refuge of scoundrels" as abusers, bigots, and fascists use it to "argue" against being held accountable for what they advocate for.)
posted by NoxAeternum at 10:03 AM on December 24, 2023 [2 favorites]
How to migrate your newsletter from Substack to Buttondown
posted by DJZouke at 10:49 AM on December 24, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by DJZouke at 10:49 AM on December 24, 2023 [3 favorites]
Since we’re relitigating history: there’s a direct line from the ACLU using precious limited resources on Nazis in Skokie to this. It was a disastrously bad decision, has reaped no good, and still gets defended by useful idiots to this day.
posted by Lentrohamsanin at 11:12 AM on December 24, 2023 [8 favorites]
posted by Lentrohamsanin at 11:12 AM on December 24, 2023 [8 favorites]
> DJZouke: "I have read that writers with over 10k subscriptions are thinking of moving to another platform."
Sometimes, it feels like someone should just make a new email newsletter blogging platform just called TheOneWithoutTheNazis.com.
posted by mhum at 11:24 AM on December 24, 2023 [2 favorites]
Sometimes, it feels like someone should just make a new email newsletter blogging platform just called TheOneWithoutTheNazis.com.
posted by mhum at 11:24 AM on December 24, 2023 [2 favorites]
I don't think that's quite fair. Substack platforms the alt right because it's lucrative to do so, indeed this is exactly as intended by the VCs backing it. Whereas the ACLU defended Nazis knowing that this would be genuinely unpopular and anti-lucrative.
You can also tell the difference in that in the age of Trump the ACLU has consistently defended vulnerable populations from oppression. Whereas the alt right technobros and their podcaster/pundit allies display their fascist tendencies more than ever.
Saying that Substack and the ACLU are akin because of Skokie is another pointless and false both-sides-ism.
posted by splitpeasoup at 11:35 AM on December 24, 2023 [2 favorites]
You can also tell the difference in that in the age of Trump the ACLU has consistently defended vulnerable populations from oppression. Whereas the alt right technobros and their podcaster/pundit allies display their fascist tendencies more than ever.
Saying that Substack and the ACLU are akin because of Skokie is another pointless and false both-sides-ism.
posted by splitpeasoup at 11:35 AM on December 24, 2023 [2 favorites]
When The NY Times takes shots at you for coddling Nazis too much you REALLY must be coddling Nazis.
posted by Artw at 12:04 PM on December 24, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by Artw at 12:04 PM on December 24, 2023 [4 favorites]
ACLU Virginia: Why we defended the alt-right in Charlottesville
What we decided to defend, with the facts available at that time, and only after requiring Kessler to swear in court papers that he intended the rally to be “peaceful” and “avoid violence,” were important principles of constitutional government. The First Amendment guarantees political speech, including protest, the highest level of protection — and the right to speak out is most robust in public spaces, including public parks and streets. Since this country’s founding, people have taken to the parks, streets, and sidewalks to make their voices heard on matters of public concern.
And then the Nazis turned out to be Nazis, big whoops.
All my moneys been going to the SPLC since.
posted by Artw at 12:13 PM on December 24, 2023 [5 favorites]
What we decided to defend, with the facts available at that time, and only after requiring Kessler to swear in court papers that he intended the rally to be “peaceful” and “avoid violence,” were important principles of constitutional government. The First Amendment guarantees political speech, including protest, the highest level of protection — and the right to speak out is most robust in public spaces, including public parks and streets. Since this country’s founding, people have taken to the parks, streets, and sidewalks to make their voices heard on matters of public concern.
And then the Nazis turned out to be Nazis, big whoops.
All my moneys been going to the SPLC since.
posted by Artw at 12:13 PM on December 24, 2023 [5 favorites]
Saying that Substack and the ACLU are akin because of Skokie is another pointless and false both-sides-ism.
This misunderstands the argument, which is that Substack (alongside other tech companies like CloudFlare) are able to make the argument that free speech "obliges" them to do business with bigots and fascists and not get laughed out of the room in large part because of the framework the ACLU built with things like Skokie. As I've said before, for all the good the ACLU does, they routinely are the poster child for the saying "so open minded their brain fell out", in large part because they get so caught up in principle that they don't look at what the practical effects are.
Whereas the ACLU defended Nazis knowing that this would be genuinely unpopular and anti-lucrative.
The problem wasn't that it was "unpopular" or "anti-lucrative", it was that the decision was wrong on the merits, for reasons that Karl Popper famously pointed out. It was a wrongheaded "binding our hands will bind theirs" argument that failed to acknowledge exactly what message letting Nazis march in force through a heavily Jewish suburb of Chicago as a symbol of "free speech" actually sends.
You can also tell the difference in that in the age of Trump the ACLU has consistently defended vulnerable populations from oppression.
They were also instrumental in bringing about Charlottesville, as Artw pointed out.
No one is above reproach. Does the ACLU do a lot of good? Yes - but they also have a long and ignoble history of bad decisions that have caused harm. And the proper response is not to paper over that, but to hold them accountable so that they can be better in the future.
posted by NoxAeternum at 12:19 PM on December 24, 2023 [6 favorites]
This misunderstands the argument, which is that Substack (alongside other tech companies like CloudFlare) are able to make the argument that free speech "obliges" them to do business with bigots and fascists and not get laughed out of the room in large part because of the framework the ACLU built with things like Skokie. As I've said before, for all the good the ACLU does, they routinely are the poster child for the saying "so open minded their brain fell out", in large part because they get so caught up in principle that they don't look at what the practical effects are.
Whereas the ACLU defended Nazis knowing that this would be genuinely unpopular and anti-lucrative.
The problem wasn't that it was "unpopular" or "anti-lucrative", it was that the decision was wrong on the merits, for reasons that Karl Popper famously pointed out. It was a wrongheaded "binding our hands will bind theirs" argument that failed to acknowledge exactly what message letting Nazis march in force through a heavily Jewish suburb of Chicago as a symbol of "free speech" actually sends.
You can also tell the difference in that in the age of Trump the ACLU has consistently defended vulnerable populations from oppression.
They were also instrumental in bringing about Charlottesville, as Artw pointed out.
No one is above reproach. Does the ACLU do a lot of good? Yes - but they also have a long and ignoble history of bad decisions that have caused harm. And the proper response is not to paper over that, but to hold them accountable so that they can be better in the future.
posted by NoxAeternum at 12:19 PM on December 24, 2023 [6 favorites]
Yeah it’s the weird ridiculous instinct to work things out from first principles I mentioned above. We don’t need to do that, Nazis are fucking Nazis, we know they are bad.
And you know what happens if the ACLU doesn’t pick up their bill for them? They pick up their own fucking bill, because Nazis have rich backers.
posted by Artw at 12:57 PM on December 24, 2023 [5 favorites]
And you know what happens if the ACLU doesn’t pick up their bill for them? They pick up their own fucking bill, because Nazis have rich backers.
posted by Artw at 12:57 PM on December 24, 2023 [5 favorites]
Substack ... are able to make the argument that free speech "obliges" them to do business with bigots and fascists... because of ... the ACLU
Substack can make that claim, or any other claim they dream up, but also we can laugh at these claims because they are naked bullshit.
Unlike a city government, Substack is not bound by the First Amendment. They don't have to platform Nazis. They want to platform Nazis. (In fact, they intentionally seek out and pay large sums to fascist adjacent and fascist sympathetic pundits to write for them. They had a thing for alt right contrarians right from the get go.)
And meanwhile, they choose not to platform plenty of non-fascist, perfectly legal content like porn. So the whole First Amendment thing is a total red herring.
Conservatives often make bad faith arguments. When Substack says or implies that they are forced to platform Nazis because of the ACLU and the First Amendment, we don't have to entertain these laughable arguments. They are a Nazi bar because they intentionally want to be one.
posted by splitpeasoup at 1:42 PM on December 24, 2023 [8 favorites]
Substack can make that claim, or any other claim they dream up, but also we can laugh at these claims because they are naked bullshit.
Unlike a city government, Substack is not bound by the First Amendment. They don't have to platform Nazis. They want to platform Nazis. (In fact, they intentionally seek out and pay large sums to fascist adjacent and fascist sympathetic pundits to write for them. They had a thing for alt right contrarians right from the get go.)
And meanwhile, they choose not to platform plenty of non-fascist, perfectly legal content like porn. So the whole First Amendment thing is a total red herring.
Conservatives often make bad faith arguments. When Substack says or implies that they are forced to platform Nazis because of the ACLU and the First Amendment, we don't have to entertain these laughable arguments. They are a Nazi bar because they intentionally want to be one.
posted by splitpeasoup at 1:42 PM on December 24, 2023 [8 favorites]
« Older Rare turtle lays eggs to edge species back from... | Ha, Gaston! Ha, Tiboy! Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by flod at 3:01 AM on December 23, 2023 [8 favorites]