On the other hand what is being called alt right and white supremacisrs by mainstream organizations is bullshit:

- The economist called Ben Shapiro alt right today https://mobile.twitter.com/TheEconomist/status/1111248348114...

- The guardian says Jordan Peterson is supposedly alt right https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/science/201...

- Bret Weinstein is supposedly alt right

And ridiculously enough Ben Shapiro is a Jew that is the biggest hate target of the alt right, and Jordan Peterson is hated by the alt right such as Richard spencer and Vox Day.

White supremacists also advocate violence against other races often to subjugate them. This is highly similar to isis.

Or are you claiming that all members of the alt right are white supremacists?

SPLC also say they are the same: https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/ideo...

The opinions of SPLC and ADL is especially relevant because mainstream media and social media companies such as Facebook seem to have relationships with them as well as similar orgs to define actions against people.

So no, we are taking about the same poorly defined term because these orgs is an authority to Facebook.

The reason it’s bullshit is that these orgs doesn’t relate it to truth and evidence, use their power to slap this label onto anyone that disagree with them and punish people for things they didn’t do.

Unless you're of the opinion that "racism" and "white supremacy" are synonymous, the ADL does not define them as the same.

>So no, we are taking about the same poorly defined term.

To be clear, the "alt right" isn't white nationalist, it is, however, a white nationalist recruiting tool. Sort of like how you don't just start out as a random person and then the next day you become Jihadi Jane. You're slowly radicalized. The alt right to full-on white supremacist pipeline is the same way.

You start off interested in self help, so you read 12 rules for life; then get caught up in Peterson's weird ideas about western culture; then pretty soon you're seeing not just his youtube lectures, but other lectures about western culture; and then videos about the decline of white/western culture; and then you're watching Richard Spencer; then you shoot up a church.

Now absolutely, granted, not everyone follows the entire path, very few people end up radicalized, but while I'll absolutely agree with you that Peterson isn't a white supremacist, he's absolutely a useful idiot for them.

But again, let's stick to people who have been accused of being "White Supremacists" since you're the one using the term alt-right, not Facebook. Which innocent people are getting accidentally confused for "white supremacists" specifically?

> White supremacist Richard Spencer, who runs the National Policy Institute, a tiny white supremacist think tank, coined the term “Alternative Right”

Or from the SPLC source:

> The racist so-called “alt-right,” which came to prominence in late 2015, is white nationalism’s most recent formulation

Both clearly use them in the same breath.

We can argue semantics about one being the tool for the other etc etc. But that doesn't change the fact that they are being tightly related by organizations that is an authority to Facebook.

SPLC and ADL is very aware of its power, and has related much of the prominent dissenters of wildly different ideologies to what they claim is alt-right; Maajid (an arab muslim, they lost a lawsuit on this one and apologized), Jordan Peterson (an individualist liberal), Ben Shapiro (a pretty normal conservative), Dave Rubin (a classical liberal) etc etc.

SPLC and ADL are by this evidence too often bullshitters that don't relate what they say to truth, but instead relate it to their ideology that is not preoccupied with truth-seeking. It is really a shame their views are elevated like this as a justification for Facebooks and other organizations abuse of power.

Again, Facebook didn't use the word already right. They're talking about white supremacists. You're arguing that these are the same thing. So if that's the case, you should have ample examples of people calling Jordan Peterson a white supremacist also.

If not, then maybe they aren't the same thing, and your equivocation is unwarranted and you should stop attempting to confuse the subject.

I've also shown that even the authoritarian sources Facebook trusts use alt-right and white supremacist in the same breath when defining the terms. These articles are no accident, this is what they believe.

This is not fear mongering. This is people that don't mind using their power to accuse viewpoint opponents for things they didn't do and with no evidence claiming they hold reprehensible viewpoints.

Edit: can't reply due to message depth limit, but the debate here is about facebook suppressing people like Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro, Dave Rubin using arguments made by SPLC and ADL such as the one in [1,2]. Why do they have the right to suppress other peoples viewpoints on dubious grounds with no recourse?

It is pretty clear from your arguments that you agree that they are related or as you say "a white nationalist recruiting tool" regardless of how you otherwise view them. The process facebook institute will therefore suppress these viewpoints based upon no evidence and by subjectively mischaracterizing their viewpoints, with no recourse for this power abuse.

[1] https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2018/06/07/prageru%E2%80...

[2] https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2016/08/25/whose-alt-rig...

Once more: please give an example of someone calling Jordan Peterson a white supremacist, or admit alternatively admit that no one has done so and you were fearmongering.

Not saying jbp associates with white supremacists, or serves as a useful idiot for white supremacists. That's all well known. You claimed that people called Jordan Peterson a white supremacist. You still haven't justified that claim, and that's because, quite simply, it's false.

You're fearmongering. No one has called Jordan Peterson a white supremacist. That's just a factually incorrect statement. They've said he unintentionally helps white supremacists, he occasionally associates with them, take selfies with them sure, but for all your trying, you still haven't been able to find someone actually call jbp a white supremacist.

So perhaps, just maybe, your worry is misplaced.

I certainly do, but evidence (e.g. historic enforcement patterns) indicates that Facebook does not.

Note that my opinion on this isn't global and without nuance. There are things that Jordan Peterson does and says that aren't, at all, controversial and are even occasionally interesting and thought provoking. Not everything he does radicalizes people. Same with, I assume, Rubin and Shapiro, although I don't pay them enough attention to know or care either way.

However, that's all beside the point. Facebook *doesn't appear to thing that they're worth censoring. I'm not sure why my opinion is at all relevant.

You still haven't given me that example, by the way.