top 100 commentsshow all 118

[–]passionflounder 12 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 2 fun -  (21 children)

Why do people insist on granting unwarranted power of mere words to cause injury? Some slopes are more slippery than others.

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (20 children)

Here are some words:

"With satanic joy in his face, the black-haired Jewish youth lurks in wait for the unsuspecting girl whom he defiles with his blood, thus stealing her from her people. With every means he tries to destroy the racial foundations of the people he has set out to subjugate. Just as he himself systematically ruins women and girls, he does not shrink back from pulling down the blood barriers for others, even on a large scale. It was and it is Jews who bring the Negroes into the Rhineland, always with the same secret thought and clear aim of ruining the hated white race by the necessarily resulting bastardization, throwing it down from its cultural and political height, and himself rising to be its master."

These words did harm in the 1940s and no matter how much you try to pretend that words have no power, history shows without a doubt that you are wrong.

[–]Oyveygoyim 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Not a single lie was told in that quote from Mein Kampf.

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)


[–]twolanterns 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

would you even be allowed to post those words in that other place?

would there be any discussion about it as there is here ?


[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Indeed. It wouldn't be acceptable, and any discussion would almost certainly lead to someone getting a ban for some trivial reason.

But - I'm not certain that having the freedom to discuss it here should/can be balanced against the freedom of an abuser to freely abuse anyone they care to abuse here. The idea that 'freedom of speech must mean the freedom of abusers to be abusive without sanction' is what I am arguing against.

[–]passionflounder 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

Please accept my apologies but I still cannot agree.

Mein Kampf was available in 1925 for the world at large to read and figure out the true nature of this Hitler fellow. Its availability gave the world a chance to head off the ugliness of Nazi Germany and the holocaust. Without those admittedly evil thoughts, Hitler may likely have still risen to power because the presence of his manifesto did not have a bearing on the global economic and political situation post WWI that was his opportunity.

The words were the product of a troubled and evil mind. They did not cause the evil. It was evil that created them. Those words did not kill six million jews, their author did- and it's likely that history would have unfolded the same whether or not the words had been written and published.

To me, one's words offer a convenient window into their character- allowing me to make assessments at a safe distance. Deprive idiots of their opportunity to show their true colors and they'll necessarily be much closer to innocent people when their true selves come out.

It is absolutely your right to see words as injurious and I encourage you to find platforms that will indulge that premise.

[–]MagicMike 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Hitler had an IQ of 150+ and early on had excellent ideas for rebuilding Germany. It’s just too damn bad he had such a dark side to him.

[–]passionflounder 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

A big part of the enabling was the terms of the treaty ending WWI that held Germany largely responsible for a war they did not start. Hitler's main thrust as he campaigned legitimately was providing "living space" (lebensraum) for Germans who had seen their country whittled down according to the terms of the Treaty of Versailles.

It's noteworthy that Hitler had served a prison sentence for a failed coup (Beer Hall or Munich Putsch) in 1923 and the writings excerpted in the OP's response were probably authored while he was serving his sentence. The proverbial writing was not only on the wall but in manuscript form as to he nature of what was to come.

I suspect (because I cannot possibly know for sure) that the general attitude was that Germany had been screwed over royally by the treaty so that could have magnified general reluctance for military enforcement when the Nazis began violating the terms by not only building its military past the treaty's limits but also by annexing/invading Lithuania, Czechoslovakia, and Austria in parts or entirety.

The decision to invade Poland was the line too far as far as France and England were concerned.

Hitler laid responsibility for Germany's sad state at the feet of Jewish American bankers. Germany's very existence had relied on credit extended during the 1920's but the stream of cash dried up after the stock market crash in October 1929 that led tot he depression. He also managed to convince enough Germans that Jews had exerted influence over the terms of the treaty forcing not only the ceding of territory and restricting the size of Germany's army, but also mandating the payment of war reparations.

Without the extreme terms of the treaty, Adolph Hitler may have at most been little more than a footnote in history.

[–]WoodyWoodPecker 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Hitler was a mean drunk! /s

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

The point is that Hitler was a nasty piece of work who made it very clear what he believed. And it turns out that what he believed was also believed by thousands, if not millions or even billions of other people. Hitler didn't kill the Jews - he wouldn't have had the time to manage the war if he spent his time killing millions of Jews, Roma, Poles, black people and socialists. And sure, the book he wrote didn't kill the Jews either - it's a book and doesn't have that capacity. But to pretend that his words had no part in the systematic murder of millions of people carried out by thousands of Germans and Ukrainians is, in my opinion, just missing the point.

Words have power. The words here on Saidit have little power because no-one is reading them. But the rot spreads, and pretending there is no problem is foolish.

[–]passionflounder 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Words may have power but in my view, that power is heavily vested in an audience's willingness to give it. I'm afraid that we're going to have to agree to disagree here. I beg your forgiveness if I'm mistaken but i see a number of tells suggesting this entire discussion may not have been posted in good faith.

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

"this entire discussion may not have been posted in good faith" sounds a bit whiny, to be honest. If you think I am playing some sort of game, let's hear it, rather than you making shallow insinuations. BTW - your faux politeness is irritating.

[–]passionflounder 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I couldn't care less about your irritation. I'm positing a point contrary to yours and your responses have included thinly veiled swipes at my intelligence which strikes me as an attempt to provoke a flame war.

Your initial post evokes a straw argument which in my estimation weakens your point and with this response it's beyond clear that you are not here for a fair discussion.

My original point stands. Words alone do not in and of themselves possess the power to injure. The inability or unwillingness of individuals such as yourself to civilly and respectfully engage in discourse that airs differing views is a far bigger threat to free speech than anything Hitler, Stalin, or other despot wrote... let alone anything racist and antisemitic posted here.

If your feelings are so readily bruised by words, Reddit offers a most protective environment that indulges censorship enthusiasts such as yourself. Respond if you must but I am through dealing with you. Have a smashing day.

[–]HugodeCrevellier 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

It's not the words, it's the acts. The demonstrable self-serving bullshit of biblical mythology, for example, is a sewer of jewish-supremacism. But that, on its own, is not the problem. An essential issue might for example be the theft of the Palestinians' ancestral homeland. The excuses concocted to do this, to steal these people's ancestral homes(!), are incidental. The words merely provided rationalization to justify a crime. But the words themselves are not the crime.

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

The words are important exactly because they provide a rationalisation for the crime, and other words such as 'antisemitism' have the power to prevent any examination of what is really going on there. I'm not saying the words are a crime, but I am saying that the failure to take the power of words seriously is a moral and intellectual failure because the words are often bound up in the actions some people take.

I'm not saying the words are the crime. But I am saying that failure to act appropriately on the words says something about a person.

If someone tells me face to face that Palestinians are sub-human (which I have been told on a couple of occasions by Zionists on line) they are going to get a punch in the throat. I won't be shrugging my shoulders and saying 'Well, you are entitled to that view' because that view is a view that needs to be dealt with with some action. I find it hard to understand why anyone would look at a situation where someone can say that another group are subhuman and decide 'Yeah, that's OK because free speech'.

[–]HugodeCrevellier 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

If someone tells me face to face that Palestinians are sub-human (which I have been told on a couple of occasions by Zionists on line) they are going to get a punch in the throat.

That's basically criminally insane. If something can be thought, then it can be said. And people can think both correct and incorrect things. We don't need nor want self-appointed thought-enforcers assaulting people over wrong-think. The partially successful goal of the Enlightenment was to replace dogma with reason. So, let's not descent back into some neo-abrahamic dark ages, where diverging from the approved orthodoxy gets you assaulted.

[–]Adventurous_Ad6212 10 insightful - 4 fun10 insightful - 3 fun11 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

So.. how many shekels are you receiving to shill?

[–]hfxB0oyA 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

a properly functional social media platform

Your starting point shows the flaw in your argument, IMO. Saidit wasn't set up to compete with Facebook, Twitter and Reddit. To me, it seems that Saidit was established as a forum to see if people can have productive conversations with as few rules as possible.

We're going to have people who want to say all the words because that's their thing, but they're a feature, not a bug. If we start tossing people because we don't like their choice of words, then the entire point of this site is compromised. Because who gets to choose which words are naughty? You? Me? What if the person in that decision making position is a Jew hater who decides to ban anyone who defends them? Or a Zionist who clamps down on any criticism of Israel? One man's bigot is another man's freedom fighter.

So we allow all most of the speech. And people who are sick of being censored trickle in. Some even stay a while. If you're looking for a big, exciting social site, there's always Reddit, with all of its features and flaws. You can even use Reddit and Saidit, and get what you need from each of them.

As for me, I'm happy to not be on a "properly functional social media platform" anymore. They're overrated anyhow.

[–]TemporarilyDeceased 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

For sure free speech is an essential part of a properly functional social media platform...But it seems to me that allowing all speech, no matter how bigoted, racist and sexist it is creates another problem in creating a lack of appeal to the average person, which in turn produces a lack of engagement.

Popular speech doesn't need protection. That's why all speech should be allowed. The repugnant speech is overwhelmingly childish name-calling which contributes little to the conversation. The best thing to do is shout it down with better content.

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yes - I agree with the principle, and if Saidit wants to remain a one of those places where generally people don't want to bother with because of the repugnant speech, so it just works for those with strong stomachs, then that's all fine and dandy.

But I suspect the result with be a site which is basically irrelevant. There will be some good stuff here, but no-one will see it because (as I said originally) no-one wants to have to deal with hordes of children and bigots being abusive at them.

[–]StillLessons 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I think you're correct here. In the three years I've been on this site, it is essentially irrelevant to the broader societal discussions going on. But those of us here do exist (aside from the massive number of trolls - like everywhere on the internet - there are a small number of actual recognizable people on here), and nuggets of useful information keep on popping up regularly. We're basically irrelevant, but at the same time, we haven't gone away, either. The views here maintain our very tenuous toehold within the societal map.

[–]StillLessons 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

The remarkable potential of a site like this lies in the conversation one level above the slurs people like to throw around because they can.

Only in an environment where people are allowed to consider such speech as acceptable does the broader question appear: What if the concepts that "all races can live together in harmony in a society" and "our similarities dwarf our differences" are wrong? This is a huge and important question. These premises are now so deeply ingrained in our society that they represent doctrine. To question whether all races are equally capable of living within the structure as it is constituted is considered Heresy in the modern intellectual environment. But what if the doctrine is wrong and has been since WWII?

Has western society benefited from this doctrine? Do we believe that today's society is more or less functional than the society pre-WWII, when racism was still roughly acceptable?

How many are willing to approach these questions with an open mind?

The mud-slinging names are brainless, I'll grant you. But there are deeper questions behind them that have been suppressed for decades. The debate was defined as "over", but is our society demonstrating that ending it as we did was in fact a large mistake rather than the universal "progress" the 90+% of the intellectual class accepts it as?

[–]Nathanielthomas 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I don't know. Let me ask you a rhetorical question instead: have indigenous people benefited from your so-called Western doctrines since coming here and colonizing their lands and people and telling them what to think and what to do?

[–]StillLessons 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Civilizations have been wiping out other civilizations since the beginning of humanity. This is not a new phenomenon and it is not unique to the west.

Your question is absolutely right on target. Is it beneficial for either the "winners" or the "losers" for two distinct groups to be forced to live among each other?

On a more personal note, I - as an individual - am genuinely color-blind. With regards to any individual with whom I come in contact, I judge that individual based on the interaction we have. If a group looks dangerous, I stay away, whatever their color or creed. I've seen dangerous-looking groups of young white men; I've seen dangerous-looking groups of young black men. As a white man, I fear the black groups more, because angry black men are more likely to direct their anger on me simply for my race than are the white men. That dynamic works both ways, of course. Black men feel more nervous around groups of dangerous white men.

I repeat my original theme: is the "melting pot" actually the most harmonious way to design a society, or would it make more sense to acknowledge genuine differences among races and ethnicities, allowing different societies to form independently from each other, each following the traditions and capabilities of its homogeneous group?

And would such an idea even be possible or is it logistically simply never going to happen because peoples interbreed, and to think otherwise is simply a waste of time?

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Again - there's nothing here I can disagree with. But any debate about the big questions can only happen when there is a space to discuss it without hinderance or attack. Sadly, I suspect no sensible debate can happen here without the danger of the participants getting attacked or the discussion getting hijacked or trolled out of existence.

[–]StillLessons 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The internet is what it is. The best we can do is ignore the mindless junk that floats around and try to engage with people who are actually saying something. Censorship is absolutely not the answer, because nobody is sufficiently wise to know the correct line at which to engage the red pen. It always - every time - ends up representing straight up political repression. The idea of just stopping "misinformation" is itself propaganda and has been used by every propaganda apparatus throughout history. It is as old as large-scale civilizations themselves.

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Again - I don't disagree with you. I've been banned from Reddit, Facebook and Twitter for holding the wrong opinions, so I totally get it. But to be honest, my first few days here haven't been a great experience. The racism of some just doesn't do it for me. I saw someone last week whining on about Jews not being human. It sucks, and I totally get that a lot of people will stick their nose in here, see something like that and walk away.

[–][deleted] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

But it's okay to bash trannies all day, kike?

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)


[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)


[–]ionlysaynigger 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)


[–]SMCAB 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

I came into this crybaby thread to look for you. You didn't disappoint.

[–]iamonlyoneman 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

how can OP complain? We even have gimmick accounts like reddit!

[–]SMCAB 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I often wonder, is it a bot that looks for threads? Is it a guy who lurks and literally just says this one word when the opportunity arises? The internet is fascinating.

[–]Ethnocrat 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There's literally nothing wrong with "racism". Stop using kike terms.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

Racism is a social construct.

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

Of course it is. For sure race doesn't exist biologically.

[–]iamonlyoneman 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

You could be more wrong but you would have to try harder

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

I can't make you educate yourself, but I would suggest you do some reading on the subject.

Race is a social construct viewed through a cultural lens. The only way you are going to be able to see past your cultural googles is to educate yourself.

[–]HugodeCrevellier 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (20 children)

Racism can be mere generalization, something between 'speciesism' (different species have different characteristics) and 'familialism' (children share characteristics with their parents). In the USA, the real ('indigenous') Americans having been essentially genocided away, the population there is no longer an ethnicity. These real Americans were replaced by assorted imported/foreign ethnicities, 'European-Americans', 'African-Americans', 'Asians-Americans', etc. So, of course, in the USA, to recognize the validity of racial/ethnic characteristics is an issue, a political(?) one, a contentious one in any case ... becoming a taboo.

[–]Musky 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

the real ('indigenous') Americans having been essentially genocided away

That's a common misconception, the native population was largely demolished accidently from disease. I'll post a couple other links, but check out this chart.

[–]HugodeCrevellier 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 children)

Some of it by accident , some of it on purpose, but the fact remains that the American Nations were essentially wiped out.

[–]Musky 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (16 children)

Sure, but they weren't genocided by the white man. Genocide is a deliberate action and Cocoliztli, wasn't the native name for some disease from the Old World, it's thought to have been caused by indigenous hemorrhagic fevers and the deaths were exacerbated by a mega drought at the time.

Surprisingly the number of natives killed in direct military action was quite small.

The Indian wars under the government of the United States have been more than 40 in number. They have cost the lives of about 19,000 white men, women and children, including those killed in individual combats, and the lives of about 30,000 Indians. The actual number of killed and wounded Indians must be very much higher than the number given ... Fifty percent additional would be a safe estimate.[76]

[–]HugodeCrevellier 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

When you force someone into a situation against their will, into reservations, concentration camps, prisons, etc., if they then die ... by whatever means ... you're the one responsible for their death. It's actually surprising to me that the prisoners in prisons, where rapes, murders, etc., seem to be considered normal(!?), don't sue these institutions for anything/everything that happens to them ... but that's another issue. The point is that, there's no avoiding it, the 'wretched refuse' of other continents, the lowest classes and the criminals, which are the people that went to the Americas, are responsible for the genocide, and replacement, of the American Nations, the actual/ethnic Americans.

[–]Musky 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (13 children)

The first reservation wasn't created until 1758, long after the collapse of the native population. The continent was still mostly open during the indigenous population collapse. It was a great big world with lots of places to run to, to quote a line from Tom Petty. Prisons weren't that big of a thing either back then either.

The idea that white people genocided the Indians isn't really supported by the facts. We sure as shit didn't help their cause any, but that one just one relatively small part of it.

Speaking of racism, and to tie this into the OP, constantly blaming and denigrating white people is a type of racism we see commonly on Reddit, and comments like mine refuting the popular narrative would likely catch me a ban there. It may be counterintuitive at first blush, but Saidit is one of the most accepting and welcoming places I've ever been to. Sure there's nazis and we make fun of trannies and niggers a lot, but the only active admin is a guy who wants to be a girl fox and there's a lot of fags here. There'd probably even be black people here if they knew how to use computers. But everyone gets along amazingly for the most part. We are a shining example of inclusivity.

[–]HugodeCrevellier 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

We can't seriously hold that the virtual extinction of the Americans is unrelated to the invasion of new arrivals to the continent, can we?

One way or another, we must agree that the American Nations were essentially wiped out. Now, whether this was mostly by accident or mostly on purpose doesn't really matter for my point: They were replaced by other ethnicities, foreigners, from other continents.

This, now, requires, in trying to concoct some kind of new semi-coherent nationality/ethnicity, the imposition of the pretence that all ethnicities are the same or, better yet, that there's no such thing as ethnic differences ... nor ethnicities.

[–]Musky 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

We can't seriously hold that the virtual extinction of the Americans is unrelated to the invasion of new arrivals to the continent, can we?

It is not outside the realm of possibility the indigenous population would have collapsed on its own anyways since the major cause of mortality was from a locally based disease. I don't see the Hundred Years War ever blamed for the plague.

I am not sure though. I'm inclined to assume the colonization played some role but that's coming from a common background of being told my entire life the Europeans wiped out Indians. It is possible, however, that is simply a white guilt / noble savage narrative. I don't know enough to say without more research but most of the deaths were from an "Act of God," -- or 'Nature' if you prefer, the hemorrhagic fever -- which may be at least partially responsible for the attitude of the time that it was Divine Right to conquer and rule over the new land. If you're invading and the natives simply die to make way for you that might certainly seem to a religious person as if God willed it.

One way or another, we must agree that the American Nations were essentially wiped out

As they existed, sure, although there's still 10 million natives today. That's the highest number in modern history. Would a modern day native even want to go back to the old way of living if it was possible? Not that there weren't some really appealing aspects to that sort of life, it's still pretty much like camping all the time.

This, now, requires, in trying to concoct some kind of new semi-coherent nationality/ethnicity, the imposition of the pretence that all ethnicities are the same or, better yet, that there's no such thing as ethnic differences ... nor ethnicities.

Yeah, the biology of race became taboo after WW2 and we have danced around the topic ever since. It's rather ridiculous.

[–]rki 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

As they existed, sure, although there's still 10 million natives today. That's the highest number in modern history. Would a modern day native even want to go back to the old way of living if it was possible? Not that there weren't some really appealing aspects to that sort of life, it's still pretty much like camping all the time.

We have some data on that, actually. Taos Pueblo has about 2,000 community members, and per the website (and Wiki which says its data is from 2011) 150 people choose to live the old ways at the pueblo. When we were there in 2020, it was just five families choosing to continue living that way.

[–]HugodeCrevellier 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

The answer to the white guilt / noble savage narrative is probably not some counter-narrative denying the genocide of the indigenous Americans, but an attempt to actual historical accuracy and to as objective as possible an understanding. You do seem to try to do that more than most, I must say. This, of course, is hard work, tedious, difficult and imperfect ... and one may not like the conclusion ... ergo the popularity of merely slinging self-serving narratives at each other. All that being said, it's basically certain that the invasion of the Americas by foreign populaces played a decisive role in the virtual extinction of the original Americans, and is not just coincidental.

[–]Musky 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

It simply wasn't a genocide when the native Americans mostly died off from a native illness. If you have anything compelling to dispute that, I'm all ears.

virtual extinction

240k at its lowest. We wouldn't call that near extinction if it were animals we were talking about.

[–]StillLessons 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes. While the effect might have happened anyway with the European settlers carrying new strains, it is well documented that the Europeans were completely aware of the disease issue, and were intentionally using smallpox in particular as the biological weapon of its day, to the greatest extent they could figure out how to contrive.

Again, this might have happened whether they tried to do it or not, but to highlight "accidentally" the way Musky has is incorrect. At least some portion of the disease spread was absolutely intentional.

[–]iamonlyoneman 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Fuck off back to reddit if you don't like it

Bully the kinds of racists you find to be distasteful, if you stay.

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I got banned from Reddit on account of posting images of Ukrainian Nazis. They won't let me back. So yeah - I understand the issue. I'm not sure you do.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I'm not sure you understand how many burner accounts of mine were nuked by reddit LOL. You can always make more accounts.

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I could. But I understand they use some sort of fingerprinting process to remove the new accounts. I'm a bit fed up with doing it to be honest and I'm not sure I have the patience to make a new account and rebuild my block list only to get removed again in a few days/weeks

[–]SMCAB 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You don't even know what that word means because you think words have a play in it.

Racist, racism, that's rayciss! Fuck this crybaby shit gets old.

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

[–]SMCAB 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I had zero expectations for you to do so, so at least you've met those.

[–]Mcheetah 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

For sure free speech is an essential part of a properly functional social media platform. But... It seems to me that allowing all speech, no matter how bigoted, racist and sexist...

No, let me stop you right there. It's either all okay, or none of it is. This whiny snowflake shit is exactly what ruined Reddit. I'm guessing you must be a Zoomer and/or super-left if you can't handle a few morons on the internet dropping N bombs and being edgelords.

This is all irrelevant anyway, as the overuse of a word is EXACTLY how you normalize and depower it. That's why "nigga" became a thing in the early 90s; to make the hard-R inoffensive. It's why "queer" and "fag" are now accepted in the gay community by other gays. Pretending that words have inherent "power" or "offense" without context is the most retarded shit ever; they're just mouth sounds. That's why "puta" is inoffensive if you don't know Spanish.

Either way, "uncomfortable language" is the most First-World Non-Problem out there. And no, I'm not a white dude. I'm just older than 24 and remember when the internet used to be the Wild West and you could see public executions from third world countries, if so inclined, before the corporations took over and made it a whiny Safe Space for pampered little First World Zoomer shits. As in, pre-2012 Web 2.0 internet. More specifically, 1999-2009.

Also, the average person is a fucking idiot, along with 90% of the rest of humanity. Politically right-leaning or especially left-leaning; the average person is irrelevant and 99% of everything sustainable in society is upheld by the hard-working, intelligent, or (maliciously) powerful; not the "average" Joe Slob. Who cares what they think? If you want to really depower "nigger," you should let the edgy teens on here say it as much as possible and not care when they do, so they get it out of their system and it becomes boring to them.

Keeping words taboo has the opposite effect, which is why only snowflakes and pussies complain about "offensive language." There are motherfuckers dying in both Ukraine and North Korea literally right now, and people want to complain about "harmful" words on the internet...

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It's either all okay, or none of it is

According to you. I disagree.

This is all irrelevant anyway

According to you. I disagree.

There are motherfuckers dying in both Ukraine and North Korea literally right now

Not really relevant.

[–]Nathanielthomas 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

I came here earlier this week looking for a Reddit alternative after once again getting banned from a popular subreddit for no valid reason whatsoever.

Unfortunately, this website is a haven for the people who genuinely and likely did deserve to get perma banned from Reddit. The literal Nazis, conspiracy loons, transphobics, homophobics, racists, right wing clowns and what appears to be a very large population of low IQ lowly educated people in general.

So, I haven't found my Reddit alternative.

[–]Ethnocrat 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Cry harder about it cuck.

[–]neolib 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Here's some traffic stats (June 23) for selected old-reddit-like alternatives: are also right-wing ones, so probably not for you.

[–]Nathanielthomas 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks man, probably the best comment I've seen on Saidit lol

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks - I'll take a look at some of these. I have an account in Mastodon, but it's just too worthy for my liking...

[–]iamonlyoneman 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

You should try

[–]Musky 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Apparently a Saiditor did the art work there.

[–]iamonlyoneman 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It's a community effort, with fun prizes handed out during various occasions for creating site artwork and emojis.

[–]Musky 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

It's a pretty wild UI. I admire the effort, and all open source too, but man... rdrama is a little much.

[–]iamonlyoneman 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

LOL the site is repulsive to nearly everyone who visits, by design.

[–]Mcheetah 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Okay. Fuck off then. You're EXACTLY the type of whiny soy faggot with no self-awareness who "hates Reddit" but literally acts like a Reddit mod, that we don't want on Saidit to begin with.

And I don't even necessarily disagree with your rhetoric; you're just a thin-skinned bitch who can't handle things you disagree with, forever stuck in your far-left echo chamber of fake morality, smug self righteousness, and pseudo intellectualism. In other words, a Redditor.

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Amen. This is my problem exactly.

[–]neolib 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

No-one wants to come here and get called a nigger, or a kike, or whatever, the minute they say anything.

Technically that would be "dragging discussion down to lower levels of the pyramid", but I think that rule is not really being enforced recently:

People who are consistently dragging discussion down to lower levels of the pyramid are not welcome here

If a person is caught repeatedly dragging discussion in a downward direction on the Pyramid of Debate, they will be removed. If a person is caught repeatedly dragging the quality of discourse in an upward direction, they're highly valued!

[–]Ethnocrat 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The word "racism" was literally invented by a kike who wrote for the Jew York Times.

[–]neolib 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Why did you write this as a reply to me? I said nothing about "racism". You won't argue with the notion that "nigger" and "kike" are derogatory words, and therefore using them in a conversation can be considered "name-calling"?

[–]Musky 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Technically that would be "dragging discussion down to lower levels of the pyramid", but I think that rule is not really being enforced recently:

The wording was changed. Originally it read something along the lines of users should aspire to the top 3 levels of the "Pyramid of Debate," 4 wasn't great, and anything below was frowned upon until you get to advocating violence, which is still outright forbidden. Dragging the discussion downwards the pyramid was a rule violation. I mean, at all. If someone gave a well thought out and reasoned reply, calling them a name would be a rule violation.

Now the rule reads "People who are consistently dragging discussion down to lower levels of the pyramid are not welcome here." It's a subtle difference, but now calling someone a stupid cunt for the hell of it is not necessarily a rule violation, no matter what they posted, as long as you aren't consistently doing it. Amd if their post was low on the pyramid to begin with, you aren't dragging it down by responding in kind.

Which... kinda makes the pyramid of debate pointless now. Nobody hardly mentions the pyramid at all because violating the pyramid is difficult to do unless a person were deliberately trolling.

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Interesting, and not great... I don't really understand the rationale behind just letting abusers and trolls run free of any consequences. I totally get the need to allow free speech - that's essential. But where's the value in allowing abuse to be given a free pass? Why would I want to be anywhere where someone can call me a stupid cunt and it's OK?

[–]Musky 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I don't really understand the rationale behind just letting abusers and trolls run free of any consequences. I totally get the need to allow free speech - that's essential.

Bro.... You were banned on Reddit because someone judged what you said to be detrimental to the overall conversation, and you wheel over here and want that recreated.

abusers and trolls

It's a small community here and everyone offers something in their own way that forms the gestalt of Saidit. It isn't a sea of anonymous randos like Reddit where you can axe individuals indiscriminately and be assured some warm body or bot will fill their place. People here simply aren't as disposable. I can probably tell you a little something about nearly ever user on this site, you get to know them a little and have an idea where they stand, seeing the same names day in and day out. It's nice. It's an actual community.

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

LOL - you can't see the difference between 'someone having an opinion you don't like' and 'someone else calling you a cunt'? They are not the same thing.

It's a small community for sure. I suspect it will remain that way too.

[–]Musky 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Someone thinking you're a cunt is them having an opinion you don't like tho.

It's a small community for sure. I suspect it will remain that way too.

Good, wouldn't want this place becoming another Reddit.

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't mind someone thinking I am a cunt. The problem is that some people here think it is OK to abuse others, full stop. And they get away with it because 'it's just words' or 'its just an opinion'.

Like you, I don't want this place to turn into Reddit. But I don't really want to see it becoming a noxious and poisonous place that no-one can be bothered with either (apart from the small number like yourself who don't mind a bit of poison served with their social media experience), and its well on the way to becoming just that.

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah - I read that when I first came here. But you are right - it isn't being enforced. 'The Pyramid Of Debate' looks lke an empty gesture from where I stand.

[–]Musky 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It is an empty gesture now, that wasn't always the case. I hope you see my other comment on it.

And it wasn't a change for nothing. At one time the mods and admins had been enforcing the rules as we understood them but the owner, colloquially known as M7, was unhappy with our actions. Quite a bit of drama ensued. One of the admins, known as D3, asked for a clarification of the rules from M7, but M7 felt the rules were clear enough and needed no further explanation. So D3 quit and the rules were updated, and the pyramid became mostly irrelevant from a rather minor change.

[–]sneako 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

This site is doomed because cuck admins won't give me power

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

People who seek power should be denied it. It's the only thing that makes sense.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

you're doomed because you won't go to EMDR therapy nor believe in the Jesus

[–]MagicMike 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Racism, when based on science, is perfectly valid. Races are different, they evolved in different parts of the world, and have different cultures.

Racism based on emotion is irrational.

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Science tells us that race is a mirage. It simply doesn't exist in any real biological way.

[–]MagicMike 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Then why do blacks get sickle cell anemia? Why does outbreeding depression exist? If one parent is Asian and another parent is white (for ex), transplants are way less functional in their children.

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Your cultural glasses are at work here.

"Sickle cell disease is common in Africa, Spanish-speaking regions in South and Central America, parts of the Caribbean. Mediterranean countries (such as Greece, Turkey, and Italy), the Arabian Peninsula, and India, affecting people of all skin tones."

Outbreeding depression is a symptom of cultural malaise and doesn't have a biological cause.

The transplant stuff talks more about the similarity of people living in particular areas rather then race. It's not as simple as a black kidney can only work in a black body or vice versa.

[–]Death_By_Democracy[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I agree with you to some point. Censorship is a road which leads nowhere. Apart from me getting banned from all three of the ones I have mentioned for holding views I feel are not unreasonable. However...

Maybe I am wrong about Saidit. Maybe is is destined to be the meeting place for racists, bigots and the rest of the low-lives, with a few hardy normal people pretending everything is OK. If that's the case, then its unlikely to grow much. It already feels like a ghost town.

I don't have any answers for you. It just feels like this is a place that has swung a little too far away from what I feel comfortable with. But its not about me, is it?

[–][deleted]  (1 child)