Should racist/bigots in the fandom be exposed?

[Mesme Rize 15,681]

We in germany, always had a good phrase for these kind of things. The thoughts are free and no hunter can shoot them. No one should be condemned for it

Also, if you ban aleximus from cons, you will miss on good art like this and arts and politics should always stay apart.

[SharpWit 2,483]

No, differing opinions are protected under the first amendment. Unless they are actively pursuing individuals for the purpose of harassment, using racial slurs, spamming topics with negative views on varying races, or repeatedly breaking forum rules/guidelines, then no action should be taken against them.

Same applies to Cons. It's up for the staff to decide. It's good to bring individuals to their attention, if they are likely to pose a threat or be a disruption to events, i.e. disturbing the peace, but you must have hard evidence of this. Attempts to ban someone from sites and events for differing opinions would classify you as the harasser otherwise. 

[Yakamaru 3,077]

Umm. How about no?

You are basically acting as thought police, policing what someone is allowed to think. And it's a trait of an Authoritarian/Totalitarian.

Just because someone have views you don't like it doesn't give you the right to do anything other than calling them an asshole and cut contact/interaction.

3 hours ago, ShadowSJG said:

Come on, should racist views really be tolerated?

And what would you do?

Edited April 5, 2018 by Yakamaru

[GeekySonic 1,150]

If someone is racist, they'll out themselves eventually. I like to hope that the majority of the fandom is wise enough, and smart enough to not put up with it, regardless of their status or what kind of cool shit they might have come up with. Besides, imagine the paradoxical existence of being a racist Brony. Talk about confusion. Anyways, for the people starting to get a little derailed:

[Dreambiscuit 8,138]

Racism, or any ism, is what it is and people will tolerate it or not according to their own individual standards. If someone doesn't like what another person says, they can call that person out accordingly, for their own reasons, and use their own right to free speech to express it. But legally speaking, there's nothing we can do about it. We have free speech in this country and, as much as we may not like what we hear freely spoken, we have to take the bad with the good. There are many things I hear expressed that I don't like, but all I can do is use my own voice to counter it if I so-choose. 

 

[Twiggy 2,965]

There can be no tolerance toward racists and bigots in an Equestrian social order. They will have to be physically separated and removed from the fandom.

- Professor Hans-Hermann Cloppe

 

[Kyoshi Frost Wolf 40,368]

I don't exactly agree with the banning from cons thing, that is going into witch hunt territory which is the start of a slippery slope. However, unlike some here, I personally think that someone with racist viewpoints does NOT have to be tolerated and accepted as some 'opinion'. If someone randomly said 'I don't like black people' or 'I don't like Asian people', that isn't them having an 'opinion', it is them being a shitty person. From that point, I will avoid that person like the plague that they are.

[Lucid_Nightlight 923]

Just let them expose themselves.

[Yakamaru 3,077]

4 hours ago, Kyoshi said:

I don't exactly agree with the banning from cons thing, that is going into witch hunt territory which is the start of a slippery slope. However, unlike some here, I personally think that someone with racist viewpoints does NOT have to be tolerated and accepted as some 'opinion'. If someone randomly said 'I don't like black people' or 'I don't like Asian people', that isn't them having an 'opinion', it is them being a shitty person. From that point, I will avoid that person like the plague that they are.

That I can agree on. Just ignore and avoid. 

Assholes expose themselves when they speak in public.

[honk friend 1,972]

I strongly believe in naming and shaming racists. Freedom of speech doesn't come without social consequences.

[JonasDarkmane 19,777]

I don't have much problem with people getting debated or disagreed with. No problem with people ridiculing other people for their own ideas. But I still say "accuse at your own risk". An accusation is not necessarily the same thing as reality. I won't feel sorry for anyone, who is going out on an accusation spree to try and fill up their little moral cup of the day when they themselves get ridiculed for their baseless accusations. So just be sure to back your claims. 

 

Besides, no matter who people are being racist towards to, be it against blacks, Asian or white people, they themselves know deep down they are full of shit. 

[Olly 1,008]

A bigot usually exposes themselves- it's not hard to spot one when they're around. They almost want to be noticed, they just can't keep their opinions to themselves. But when someone behaves badly, usually they get ostracized or 'removed' since nobody wants to be around them. Unless of course, they happen to be around other bigots. 

[Appley Hooves 136]

Ignoring them's always better, plus there's always a chance calling them out could have consequences beyond them. Cost someone their job, maybe their family goes hungry. Or maybe they lose the house, so they get to try living in a car for a while - been there, done that. Makes me wonder how some SJWs sleep at night, honestly - or maybe most of them really are the sociopaths they seem to be.

[King of Canterlot 9,588]

It really depends on how you view said remarks. It's gonna be different for everybody, some people may applaud and agree with said remarks, while others may simply take it as simple opinion and not get too worked up over it, while others still with throw a hissy fit and start an argument with the person over said "racist" remarks. Though if you really feel like you don't agree with the remarks, then the best course of action is to simply ignore them and move on. The freedom of speech gives everybody a right to say whatever they want, and that includes things that you may not agree with. Honestly, I don't tend to get too worked up over "racist" remarks simply because again, they have as much of a right to say what they want even if I don't agree with it, just as I have my right to say what I want even though they may not agree with it. Sometimes I feel that remarks are blown way out of proportion and wrongly labeled as racist.

For example: Haiti is a shithole country. 

This is not racist because it makes no mention of the people who live there, but rather, it's corrupt and failing government, which in many cases, the normal citizens have no say in. Take a look at the Dominican Republic, same island, same color of skin, but the difference is that it is wealthy and not corrupt by a pretty shitty government. Many people from Haiti actually agree that they're home nation is in fact a Shithole, that's why they left it in the first place to seek better fortune elsewhere. 

That is a prime example of something that may seem really racist, but when you brake down what is being said, it actually isn't racist and instead just a simple opinion, that with enough evidence, could be considered a fact.     

[Stone Cold Steve Jobs 22,412]

Depends what you mean. Someone who hates on a group for no other reason than skin color, gender, age, religion, etc? Sure, i guess. So long as you know where to stop. That sort of thing very quickly becomes a witch hunt .

[ShadowSJG 62]

5 hours ago, King of Canterlot said:

It really depends on how you view said remarks. It's gonna be different for everybody, some people may applaud and agree with said remarks, while others may simply take it as simple opinion and not get too worked up over it, while others still with throw a hissy fit and start an argument with the person over said "racist" remarks. Though if you really feel like you don't agree with the remarks, then the best course of action is to simply ignore them and move on. The freedom of speech gives everybody a right to say whatever they want, and that includes things that you may not agree with. Honestly, I don't tend to get too worked up over "racist" remarks simply because again, they have as much of a right to say what they want even if I don't agree with it, just as I have my right to say what I want even though they may not agree with it. Sometimes I feel that remarks are blown way out of proportion and wrongly labeled as racist.

For example: Haiti is a shithole country. 

This is not racist because it makes no mention of the people who live there, but rather, it's corrupt and failing government, which in many cases, the normal citizens have no say in. Take a look at the Dominican Republic, same island, same color of skin, but the difference is that it is wealthy and not corrupt by a pretty shitty government. Many people from Haiti actually agree that they're home nation is in fact a Shithole, that's why they left it in the first place to seek better fortune elsewhere. 

That is a prime example of something that may seem really racist, but when you brake down what is being said, it actually isn't racist and instead just a simple opinion, that with enough evidence, could be considered a fact.     

It's not just saying that. I made a post explaining the racism and reasoning why if you want me to explain.

[Mesme Rize 15,681]

16 hours ago, Annie said:

I strongly believe in naming and shaming racists. Freedom of speech doesn't come without social consequences.

You know you're pretty much starting a witch hunt with this kinda stuff, right?

Witch hunting people for their believes (whenever they are good or bad, which is up for debate) makes you no better then the people who witch hunted Galileo for saying that the earth is revolving around the sun.

When i say that Uganda is filled with poverty and low medical standards, i am just stating a normal problem of the country and not because i am racist. Sadly, people seem to judge way too easily these days.

 

[honk friend 1,972]

7 hours ago, Mesme Rize said:

You know you're pretty much starting a witch hunt with this kinda stuff, right?

Witch hunting people for their believes (whenever they are good or bad, which is up for debate) makes you no better then the people who witch hunted Galileo for saying that the earth is revolving around the sun.

When i say that Uganda is filled with poverty and low medical standards, i am just stating a normal problem of the country and not because i am racist. Sadly, people seem to judge way too easily these days.

 

You know, the idea that tolerance should be tolerated is a bit of a paradox. I have no sympathy for racists or bigots. People didn't hate Galileo because he hated black people.

[Mesme Rize 15,681]

14 minutes ago, Annie said:

You know, the idea that tolerance should be tolerated is a bit of a paradox. I have no sympathy for racists or bigots. People didn't hate Galileo because he hated black people.

no he didn't. But he had a different opinion then everyone else and people didn't liked his idea, so he was burned alive.

I stand with what i said, because witch hunters who scream racism, are not better then the nazis they try to fight.

[Guest]

I have zero sympathy for violent racists or bigots so it does feel satisfying when people start calling them out for their bullshit.

[honk friend 1,972]

1 minute ago, Mesme Rize said:

no he didn't. But he had a different opinion then everyone else and people didn't liked his idea, so he was burned alive.

I stand with what i said, because witch hunters who scream racism, are not better then the nazis they try to fight.

Are they now? Because there are white supremacists and neo-nazis out there spreading messages of hate and literally committing acts of domestic terrorism.
Fuck, I'd argue I'm within my first amendment rights to call out and shame racists, and if that's all that constitutes a "witch hunt" then I have no problem with it.

And racism/sexism/homophobia/transphobia/whatever have you isn't just a "different opinion that people don't like", it's an actually, genuinely harmful worldview and spreading those messages and ideas hurts already marginalized people. Once again, I have no obligation to tolerate intolerance.

[Mesme Rize 15,681]

5 minutes ago, Annie said:

Are they now? Because there are white supremacists and neo-nazis out there spreading messages of hate and literally committing acts of domestic terrorism.
Fuck, I'd argue I'm within my first amendment rights to call out and shame racists, and if that's all that constitutes a "witch hunt" then I have no problem with it.

And racism/sexism/homophobia/transphobia/whatever have you isn't just a "different opinion that people don't like", it's an actually, genuinely harmful worldview and spreading those messages and ideas hurts already marginalized people. Once again, I have no obligation to tolerate intolerance.

And what about the antifa group from the left who call everyone nazis that don't agree with them and the people who are getting their first amendment rights surpressed? It's not as easy, because fascism and everything else you mentioned happens in both political spectrums.

If you actually think antifa, who are apparently against homophobia/transphobia and are all peaceful, you got another thing comin. I saw alot of leftists in hamburg last year tearing the city appart.

[Thrond 3,257]

If they keep to themselves, then I don't know about cons. I don't know about the situation you're mentioning, but if nothing else I think racists should be ostracized from our online spaces, so those spaces can be more welcoming. Alas, that would require more consensus-making than is probably feasible. 

[kaiser5578 340]

Okay I see the issue this way. 

Racism is a disease and the people who hold it are critically ill. I see it as we have three choices,

one: ignore it, let it continue as it is

(doesn't work)

two: hunt them down and treat them to ridicule and punishment

(this only lowers you to their level and encourages them to group together)

three: try to help them change and see on a better spectrum. As they are sick and we should treat them.

(while it may not be easy, or work well at all, maybe we can fix a few. Maybe not many, maybe not entirely, but even if we fix just one we will have done right)

[honk friend 1,972]

4 minutes ago, Mesme Rize said:

And what about the antifa group from the left who call everyone nazis that don't agree with them and the people who are getting their first amendment rights surpressed? It's not as easy, because fascism and everything else you mentioned happens in both political spectrums.

If you actually think antifa, who are apparently against homophobia/transphobia and are all peaceful, you got another thing comin. I saw alot of leftists in hamburg last year tearing the city appart.

I'm glad you brought up Antifa because everyone who does has no clue what they actually stand for. First of all, they're anarcho-communists. The anti-fascist message is primary but the reason why you see so many Antifa protesters rioting and "tearing the city apart" is because they're revolutionary anarchists. Conservatives and right-wingers hate Antifa because for all intents and purposes, they are the new punk-rock. Calling them fascists in itself is kind of an oxymoron because fascism is a far-right nationalistic and authoritarian ideology, and Antifa is the direct opposite of "authoritarian". This notion of how they just want to destroy free speech is absolute nonsense because, well, they're anarchists. Punching nazis and fascists isn't "suppressing free speech", it's radically expressing it. Just to reiterate, I have no sympathy for nazis, fascists, or bigots, and I have no obligation to tolerate intolerance. Also, Antifa has a grand total of 0 casualties to its name last I checked.