The types of people that moved to Gab hate "big government" and are against market regulation, but suddenly want the government to step in when companies blacklist them. They want the ability to "just ask questions" when it's clear they only intend to create inflammatory arguments so they get the excuse to degrade people. People like that complain people shouldn't force their views onto other people and then force their own hateful views about abortion, birth control, etc.
I mean hell, r/conservative said this point themselves, in a strikingly moment of hilarious self-awareness:
https://www.reddit.com/r/SelfAwarewolves/comments/hle529/goo...
The reason they get turned away from every and all social networks thusfar is because they cannot conduct themselves in a civil manner.
If Visa won't let you fund your hate speech, then I guess go find someone who will. If no one is willing, maybe that says more about you than about them.
Gab (twitter alternative) was just blacklisted by Visa last week. There is no recourse. What, should these people build their own consumer credit company too?
> Imagine calling jews who want to have their own country in Israel "jewish supremacists".
Jews wanted to have their own country because of thousands of years of persecution by basically everyone, everywhere, after they were driven out of their own home. When that happens to white people, I'll accept your argument.
I mean, if you go back far enough basically every identity group has been on the receiving end of something terrible done by some other group. If that's all it takes for separatism to be legitimate and praiseworthy then more or less anyone could argue they deserve their own ethno-state.
Aren't you arguing for banning them, though? You can't have it both ways.
which would never have happened if they had been separatists in the first place. it took thousands of years to figure it out.
But you're saying that after persecution its no longer "toxic, exclusionary, and racist bullshit"? That illogical and steeped in slave morality. persecution is not a currency.
Why would racist Whites stop there? Pretty soon they'll want to build their own governments: literal White nationalism. Republicans are already talking about secession in a positive light…
To protect minorities, the 2nd Amendment has to be gutted as much as possible before that kind of thing happens, even if we must seriously bend the existing Civil Rights legislation to do so (Republicans can't stand up to the NRA, even if they wanted to).
Biden has the right kinds of policy ideas, but he needs to go further. https://joebiden.com/gunsafety/
> Close the “hate crime loophole.” Biden will enact legislation prohibiting an individual “who has been convicted of a misdemeanor hate crime, or received an enhanced sentence for a misdemeanor because of hate or bias in its commission” from purchasing or possessing a firearm.
No laws or "due process" are being broken when Gab—a social network created to host as much hate speech as possible—is denied access to Visa's financial network.
I'm not suggesting we "subvert the rule of law", I'm suggesting we use the existing laws (and pass new ones when needed, like Biden wants to do) to disarm racist Whites before they attempt to kill vulnerable minorities.
Literally yesterday there was a racist White couple in St. Louis [0] pointing guns at peaceful protestors—safeties off, fingers on the trigger. Under Biden's proposed legislation, they could easily be given a (well-deserved) hate crime misdemeanor and then have their guns taken away. That's "due process" and "the rule of law" at work.
[0] https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/29/us/st-louis-couple-protest-fi...
Can you not see the new loophole? Simply convict anybody we don't want owning a firearm of a made up misdemeanour or hate crime. 2A BTFO.
Right? Incredibly clever, and I think that kind of precedent can be taken much further by the courts if they had any kind of backbone...