Are you ok with naming and shaming racist/bigots

[Nepenthe]

A thing about the personal exceptions: Why should the marginalized care about your specific loved ones?

Like, of course they're nice and redeemable to you. They give you lollipops and head pats before going on down to the confederate march with tiki torches and red hats. But we don't know them from Adam's housecat. A racist is a racist. If we had to consider this for every single asshole we probably wouldn't be as far along as we are.

Marginalized folks have to give their families "the talk" because we are not allowed the benefit of the doubt in the wider world given by close family. Just because we understand our children's habits and mannerisms doesn't mean a cop will. Folks in majority groups need to start doing the same. Snatch the bigots in your family to the side before someone in the streets will.

 

[Angelus Errare]

Well I'm black and Muslim adjacent so you're pretty much never going to see me going to bat for a racist ever. I have 0 empathy or sympathy for them. 🤷🏾‍♂️

 

[astro]

It's a bit a of a slippery slope to be honest. And considering it is so easy to frame things in a way that could easily be used against someone, you run the risk of vilifying innocent people. especially with the increase in fake footage, and the like.

The age old adage or letting a guilty man walk free, as opposed to an innocent man hang is pretty apt here.

That said, undeniable evidence of a public figure being outed as a bigot is probably fine, just there's not really going to be a point soon, as everything will be able to be faked anyway. Further, the most awful bigots who impact on others the most aren't exactly trying to hide their bigotry so is this even relevant in the long run

Click to shrink...

There is no slippery slope in calling out racism.

If there is a questionable account of racism that needs further clarification to be understood then there is a moment for pause, but that's actually so fucking rare in these cases it's a bit ridiculous to lean on as a counter.

The fact is, racism is so deeply embedded that even staunch allies can still be racist. This is very apparent when we have left leaning figures called out for it only for them to double down on "that was not my intent" or "PC gone mad" etc...

Regardless, I don't believe your concern is warranted here. The thread is asking us should racists be named and shamed, the assumption in this hypothetical is that they are.

 

[Daria]

I'm ok with doing way more to them than just naming and shaming them, tbh.

Click to shrink...

this thread is amazing because everybody is tough behind a screen. would half of you actually call someone out IRL? chances are you wouldn't. but when you're able to attack someone online behind an anonymous name and are able to close the tab right after, you become a different person.

 

[Digital Dinosaur]

Racism and bigotry are more than just "opinions" and are damaging to the social fabric of society. Advocating bigoted ideas normalizes harmful beliefs and emboldens other bigots to take action against the targets of prejudice.

If someone openly expresses bigotry they are inviting a public reaction, large or small.

 

[SurrenderDorothy]

this thread is amazing because everybody is tough behind a screen. would half of you actually call someone out IRL? chances are you wouldn't. but when you're able to attack someone online behind an anonymous name and are able to close the tab right after, you become a different person.

Click to shrink...

I would and I have.
It's not a grand thing you know, calling out racism when it's in front of you. Though a lot of that has to do with me being black and not letting shit slide since entering my late teens.
Cut the "lol you lot are acting tough on the internet" shit.

 

[astro]

this thread is amazing because everybody is tough behind a screen. would half of you actually call someone out IRL? chances are you wouldn't. but when you're able to attack someone online behind an anonymous name and are able to close the tab right after, you become a different person.

Click to shrink...

Yes. Every single time. And I'm fairly sure most people saying that here would too.

You'd be surprised how many of us actually stand by our convictions on a daily basis.

 

[Deleted member 1248]

this thread is amazing because everybody is tough behind a screen. would half of you actually call someone out IRL? chances are you wouldn't. but when you're able to attack someone online behind an anonymous name and are able to close the tab right after, you become a different person.

Click to shrink...

Did it the other day at work. A white guy very casually told me he was afraid to leave his bag in the car with the windows down on that hot day because blacks and latinos will steal anything not nailed down, and that he could do that back home in Oklahoma but not in my city. I told him that was incredibly racist and reminded him that his entire homestate was stolen by white people from Native Americans. Dude walked away in silence. Felt good to let him know about himself.

Now you can tell us what it's like to not stand for anything.

 

[Downhome]

Well, I'm in the tiny minority I suppose.

I just can't support actively going out of your way to destroy the lives of folks for any reason. Obviously people should be held accountable for certain things, those aren't the instances that I'm talking about. The effects of doing so is far more complicated and far reaching than just the single individual. Doing this can put the lives and well being of innocent people in jeopardy, and that is incredibly shortsighted and in my opinion morally wrong. There is a correct and a wrong way to do things like this. Many don't even think about it and make terrible mistakes. It's unfortunate.

Sometimes I feel like the internet, and social media as a whole, as a huge mistake and this is just one of the many reasons I feel that way.

 

[lowmelody]

If you're white, It's a social responsibility. Fuck my racist family and acquaintances. Also, fuck yours.

 

[andymoogle]

Bigots have to be named and shamed. It always needs to be known that such beliefs should never ever be accepted anywhere.

 

[Vampirolol]

I try not to shame people on the internet, feels like being part of a torch and pitchfork crowd. Me saying "huh fuck you racist" doesn't add anything to a discussion and is just spitting on someone. There is a justice system and I believe we should improve that, not scream with thousands of voices. The punishment must be mesaured, something impossible on the internet.

 

[Menchi]

There is no slippery slope in calling out racism.

If there is a questionable account of racism that needs further clarification to be understood then there is a moment for pause, but that's actually so fucking rare in these cases it's a bit ridiculous to lean on as a counter.

The fact is, racism is so deeply embedded that even staunch allies can still be racist. This is very apparent when we have left leaning figures called out for it only for them to double down on "that was not my intent" or "PC gone mad" etc...

Regardless, I don't believe your concern is warranted here. The thread is asking us should racists be named and shamed, the assumption in this hypothetical is that they are.

Click to shrink...

Well in the extremely limiting frame of the OP and title, it's a pretty straight answer then... Yes? Which leaves very little for discussion as well, what real reason would there be for not shaming those are bigots?

Actually putting the question into a way it can be discussed by adding nuance, and actual things that can happen in real life, such as happened with the Diner dashers not so long ago, there are ways can be framed and made to look what they aren't, and even if fairly rare, there definitely is a need for pause.

Further, the advance of things such as Deepfake and the like? As things like that develop, there will be ways to make it very difficult to be sure if something is actually as it seems.

But again, since you're holding on to the definitive and limited scope of the original OP, yes, Racists and Bigots who are undeniably so, should absolutely be called out and shamed for it. Duh.

 

[Nepenthe]

There is a justice system and I believe we should improve that, not scream with thousands of voices

Click to shrink...

Unless you're prepared to amend the Constitution (to say nothing of various representation issues in government), the justice system is useless in regards to the majority of bigotry that gets Twitter riled up in the first place.

 

[astro]

Well in the extremely limiting frame of the OP and title, it's a pretty straight answer then... Yes? Which leaves very little for discussion as well, what real reason would there be for not shaming those are bigots?

Actually putting the question into a way it can be discussed by adding nuance, and actual things that can happen in real life, such as happened with the Diner dashers not so long ago, there are ways can be framed and made to look what they aren't, and even if fairly rare, there definitely is a need for pause.

Further, the advance of things such as Deepfake and the like? As things like that develop, there will be ways to make it very difficult to be sure if something is actually as it seems.

But again, since you're holding on to the definitive and limited scope of the original OP, yes, Racists and Bigots who are undeniably so, should absolutely be called out and shamed for it. Duh.

Click to shrink...

But there is no nuance here that's the point. The OP is barebones and there's no discussion to be had here unless you invent it or you don't think blatant racism should be called out.

 

[sbkodama]

You just sound as dumb and extrem as them by doing so.

 

[Vampirolol]

Unless you're prepared to amend the Constitution, the justice system is useless in regards to the majority of bigotry that gets Twitter riled up in the first place.

Click to shrink...

Sadly yes, the laws are light years behind reality today. I believe we should ban any political discussion on any social but that would be impossible.

 

[Deleted member 6582]

For a short while and then let them disappear. I look at it as more of a rubber-banding effect because the lines aren't even but it's less effective and perhaps dangerous at scale I much prefer elevating positivity and not getting attached to emotional catharsis over objectively improving outcomes.

 

[lowmelody]

You just sound as dumb and extrem as them by doing so.

Click to shrink...

Pathetically weak.

 

[Nepenthe]

Sadly yes, the laws are light years behind reality today. I believe we should ban any political discussion on any social but that would be impossible.

Click to shrink...

You think the problem is political discourse and not racism?

 

[Menchi]

But there is no nuance here that's the point. The OP is barebones and there's no discussion to be had here unless you invent it or you don't think blatant racism should be called out.

Click to shrink...

Then what you're saying, is the OP is basically pointless if we don't create nuance? We're in agreement then.

 

[AndrewDean84]

Not for violence, but Pitts character had it right, carving a swastika into nazi's foreheads. How else do we spot them?

Maybe the modern equivalent would be to permanently have their Facebook and twitter accounts changed to show them as racists.

 

[astro]

Then what you're saying, is the OP is basically pointless if we don't create nuance? We're in agreement then.

Click to shrink...

Also there is not as much nuance - regardless - as some are suggesting. My previous posts reason why.

 

[TheModestGun]

I think it depends on the context for me. If its someone I personally know, I'm more about "calling in" than "calling out". If they can change and are willing, then I won't cut them out of my life, but if its a thing where they repeatedly offend and make no clear efforts to overcome their prejudice, then I'm not afraid to call it out for what it is.

and then if its a public figure on the internet, yeah pretty easy to call that out ESPECIALLY if they have influence and an audience.

I will say though that I care a lot about far right de-radicalization and although it may be unpopular, for me its worth the effort when I can plant the seeds of change.

With all of that said, I would never expect anyone else to put themselves through the mental exhaustion of that process. Its really only for those who want to make that choice.

 

[Vampirolol]

You think the problem is political discourse and not racism?

Click to shrink...

I think politics on social become non-politics and most of the times help racism spread (the left isn't that good at populism). Racism itself is one of the basic problems in bigotry.

 

[SasaBassa]

Depends on the level and context but most of the time, hell yes.

That said, I think it's worth handling on a case by case basis. Even if almost every time people ain't shit

 

[rrc1594]

I call out if any chance I get.

 

[Orwell]

Well, I'm in the tiny minority I suppose.

I just can't support actively going out of your way to destroy the lives of folks for any reason.

Click to shrink...

Racism is destructive and harmful to our society. It's literally the only reason we haven't advanced as a human race and will probably go extinct before reaching our potential. I don't care about the lives of racists being destroyed.

 

[Orwell]

I think it depends on the context for me. If its someone I personally know, I'm more about "calling in" than "calling out". If they can change and are willing, then I won't cut them out of my life, but if its a thing where they repeatedly offend and make no clear efforts to overcome their prejudice, then I'm not afraid to call it out for what it is.

and then if its a public figure on the internet, yeah pretty easy to call that out ESPECIALLY if they have influence and an audience.

I will say though that I care a lot about far right de-radicalization and although it may be unpopular, for me its worth the effort when I can plant the seeds of change.

With all of that said, I would never expect anyone else to put themselves through the mental exhaustion of that process. Its really only for those who want to make that choice.

Click to shrink...

de-redicalization doesn't work and is an undeserved benefit of the doubt extended by people who have probably never been victims of racism. I'm of the mind that those in the dominant society are always presented a choice at an early, formative juncture in their lives:

- Look at the dynamics of the society in which they live, noticing the racial hierarchy at play, acknowledging the benefits they receive by being a member of the dominant society, and choose to accept those perks and actively enforce them through attitudinal and behavioral choices you make over the course of your life.

or

- Recognize the inequitable structure of our society, the various ways in which those who are not of the dominant society are oppressed, and consciously resist its influence and reject any participation that would give active or tacit support to its maintenance

Those who make the first choice, of whom the dominant society is primarily comprised, are not redeemable. Ever. At some point, for those who have been "rehabilitated," their choice at that formative stage of their life will always rear its head and make its presence known. It never fails.

 

[Lightning hand5]

Cowardly and dishonest thing to suggest and you should be ashamed of it.

This doesn't happen. Bans happen when people are dismissive of certain concerns or offer certain opinions that this site does not allow, it's all clear as day in the guidelines.

If feel you can't share something as you'll be banned, you know what that is. Don't try to hide that.

Either that, or you bought into a narrative that isn't true.

Click to shrink...

It's a private site and the owners can moderate as they please but I've definitely seen questionable bans. The jussie smollett thread was remarkable to see. People who posted opinions phrased in even the most careful fashion like "I'm not saying he couldnt have been attacked but some of these facts arent lining up" were banned. Or the battlefield 5 reveal thread where people said "there werent women on the U.S. side in combat positions but there were women on the eastern front why arent they getting screentime?" Were banned as well. The THQ nordic spongebob thread was derailed immediately with people going on and on about "fuck THQ" with mods refusing to get the thread back on track or just lock it. while if someone posts a silly thread it gets locked because it's not serving some greater purpose. And that's to say nothing about the dogpiling that consistently happens. If a user has a toxic or shitty take, people rush to see who can fit in the snarkiest burn while mods sit back and let it happen instead of warning the user and warning other users to stop dogpiling so the discussion can proceed.

Moderation is important, but if you dont allow ANY spaces for people to debate or just goof off you create an echo chamber that doesnt teach people how to challenge harmful opinions or lines of thought. When everyone agrees with you already, you dont know how to handle people who dont and how to reprogram them.

And I know people will accuse me of whining or tell me to just get out or I might get banned because someone can interpret my post as "hes excusing bigotry, he is trying to argue the site should allow intolerance!" And that's a big problem right there. When you immediately ban a user rather than questioning them to sus out their beliefs you kill discussion and encourage the stereotype of the smug individual that thinks they know better.

My general view has always been that platforming bigotry is harmful, and people who hold toxic beliefs should be excluded from public life if they refuse even in the face of logical evidence to let go of those views. Those people are dangerous and can whip up a fervor, but I also believe that those ideas should be expertly dissected and discredited so that they're not seen as "secret information that THEY dont want you to know and say in public" that's what gives bigots energy, feeling like they've stumbled on the truth of the world that others dont want them to know because it's not socially appropriate for them to say, rather than these ideas are ignored because they're trash that makes zero sense once logic is applied.

 

[astro]

It's a private site and the owners can moderate as they please but I've definitely seen questionable bans. The jussie smollett thread was remarkable to see. People who posted opinions phrased in even the most careful fashion like "I'm not saying he couldnt have been attacked but some of these facts arent lining up" were banned. Or the battlefield 5 reveal thread where people said "there werent women on the U.S. side in combat positions but there were women on the eastern front why arent they getting screentime?" Were banned as well. The THQ nordic spongebob thread was derailed immediately with people going on and on about "fuck THQ" with mods refusing to get the thread back on track or just lock it. while if someone posts a silly thread it gets locked because it's not serving some greater purpose. And that's to say nothing about the dogpiling that consistently happens. If a user has a toxic or shitty take, people rush to see who can fit in the snarkiest burn while mods sit back and let it happen instead of warning the user and warning other users to stop dogpiling so the discussion can proceed.

Moderation is important, but if you dont allow ANY spaces for people to debate or just goof off you create an echo chamber that doesnt teach people how to challenge harmful opinions or lines of thought. When everyone agrees with you already, you dont know how to handle people who dont and how to reprogram them.

And I know people will accuse me of whining or tell me to just get out or I might get banned because someone can interpret my post as "hes excusing bigotry, he is trying to argue the site should allow intolerance!" And that's a big problem right there. When you immediately ban a user rather than questioning them to sus out their beliefs you kill discussion and encourage the stereotype of the smug individual that thinks they know better.

My general view has always been that platforming bigotry is harmful, and people who hold toxic beliefs should be excluded from public life if they refuse even in the face of logical evidence to let go of those views. Those people are dangerous and can whip up a fervor, but I also believe that those ideas should be expertly dissected and discredited so that they're not seen as "secret information that THEY dont want you to know and say in public" that's what gives bigots energy, feeling like they've stumbled on the truth of the world that others dont want them to know because it's not socially appropriate for them to say, rather than these ideas are ignored because they're trash that makes zero sense once logic is applied.

Click to shrink...

Yes, moderation isn't perfect. It's hard job to manage a site like this. There's 100% not an imbalance though, all types of people are banned all the time. This is confirmation bias and a real misrepresentation of the standard.

 

[PoppaBK]

As long as you don't mistakenly shame innocent people, then damn right.

Click to shrink...

Well that's like if the OP asked "Do you think murderers should go to jail". The question should be "Are you ok with a few innocent people having their lives ruined for the ability to name and shame bigots?"

 

[TAJ]

Yes, and I'd do it myself.

 

[Deleted member 18360]

You think the problem is political discourse and not racism?

Click to shrink...

I think they're mutually self-reinforcing, but I might be defining the two differently. Racism I see as a less mediated, and a more individual and irrational response. That then gets discursively 'justified' (and is thus sustained) through racist political discourse, further embedding itself into culture, since these are positions that can be shared and communicated in an 'objective' sense among people. Simply diminishing the potential for racist political ideology to distort itself as being rational, seems like a pretty pointed response to what we often think brought us to these social conditions, a post-truth social media hellscape where everyone is so scattered and exhausted by late capitalism that it's harder to identify any specific problem and thus to develop any strong political passion or sentiment in the citizenry.

 

[Orwell]

Moderation is important, but if you dont allow ANY spaces for people to debate or just goof off you create an echo chamber that doesnt teach people how to challenge harmful opinions or lines of thought. When everyone agrees with you already, you dont know how to handle people who dont and how to reprogram them.

Click to shrink...

Why would someone who has any respect for themselves waste time dissecting and discrediting the views of a person who believes black people are inferior? How does one even go about dissecting and discrediting something that defies basic reason and could only be an opinion held by the insane? Why is the onus to educate the oppressor constantly placed on the shoulders of the victims?

 

[EdibleKnife]

I have zero issue with it. I feel no sympathy for people who abuse others yet winge when their words and actions have consequences. As a country built on and continuing to exploit and marginalized multiple disenfranchised groups we should consider it laughable to think that simply paying for your bigotry in current is somehow "gross" or "detrimental". I know there are probably a lot of people on this board who want to pull out the tired old: "You catch more flies with honey than vinegar" or "what would MLK say?" type bullshit and I just ask that they keep it to themselves. Bigots being outed is not in anyway the "cause" of racism. The Central Park Five weren't nationally vilified as pariahs because black people tell white bigots to fuck off. Trump didn't become president because trans people aren't consistently ready and willing to always make a case for their humanity. Minorities aren't "holding back progress" by rightfully reading sexist, homophobic, transphobic, racist, and/or xenophobic individuals. I don't care if it's your sister, brother, uncle or gam-gam; they don't get to spread their hate and walk away scot free.

Why would someone who has any respect for themselves waste time dissecting and discrediting the views of someone who believes black people are inferior? How does one even go about dissecting and discrediting something that defies basic reason and could only be an opinion held by the insane? Why is the onus to educate the oppressor constantly placed on the shoulders of the victims?

Click to shrink...

Right? I'm not against educating ignorant people but that's not a full-time job for me. I don't always have time or patience or mental/emotional energy to tell some alt-right uncles and aunties why I deserve equality even if I have black skin or that me being pansexual doesn't make me an abomination. You could fill a thousand libraries with all the education marginalized groups, much smarter than me, have put into the world to, grossly enough, justify their humanity. They can go ahead and start there instead of expecting me to play professor in the face of oppression.

 

[ebs]

There are two factors:

The increasingly contextless news cycle dominant on the internet.

The increase in contempt for critical thought, in an increasingly polarised and dogmatic world.

Given these, I just don't trust people to accurately identify who's racist and who isn't, what's racist and what isn't. Most of the time are they right? Probably. But nonetheless some innocent people get run over by the unthinking, emotional hive mind. We've seen it happen multiple times. How many is acceptable to those saying just publicly name and shame everyone?

Wouldn't even care if people posted their home addresses and stuff.

Click to shrink...

This is absolutely over the line. Doxxing puts other, innocent people at risk and encouraging it is fucking disgusting.

 

[Lightning hand5]

Why would someone who has any respect for themselves waste time dissecting and discrediting the views of a person who believes black people are inferior? How does one even go about dissecting and discrediting something that defies basic reason and could only be an opinion held by the insane? Why is the onus to educate the oppressor constantly placed on the shoulders of the victims?

Click to shrink...

You're making the assumption that everyone here is a victim. There are people who are just as privileged as someone who arrived at the view that black people are inferior, but often these people cant be bothered to educate their fellow privileged people.

For example: two white people from similar backgrounds. One believes black people are more dangerous and the other doesn't. What accounts for the difference ? Refusing to talk about white supremacy and how to dismantle it is what leads to people thinking "my views are just politically incorrect" rather than "my views are based off of fear that someone will outperform me in an equal playing field because of the arbitrary barriers that forced them to develop a tougher work ethic and skillset"

Theres a reason why so many black people werent shocked at the Donald Trump victory but you had hundreds of people here and all over the world being shocked "how could the same country that elected a black man do this?" As if there arent millions of people who just think racism is a matter of etiquette and political correctness and who have decided to hide their views in polite company but then vote for a monster when given a chance.

Those kind of people are more dangerous than the cartoonish versions of a bigot. The person who thinks his or her fellow citizen is dangerous because of their religion or physical appearance. Shutting down people who may Express an opinion that LOOKS like it MIGHT be bigoted rather than challenging them out in the open and pointing out what makes those views so seductive only adds fuel to the flames.

 

[RedMercury]

This is absolutely over the line. Doxxing puts other, innocent people at risk and encouraging it is fucking disgusting.

Click to shrink...

You don't think it's a proper response for any of them when they use anonymity to further their cause of hatred?

Spoiler: Racists

People need to know who these people are.

 

[Wishbone Ash]

With receipts, sure. All the better to call these people out.

 

[ebs]

You don't think it's a proper response for any of them when they use anonymity to further their cause of hatred?

Spoiler: Racists

People need to know who these people are.

Click to shrink...

No, I don't. Because doxxing isn't a fucking case by case basis thing. If you don't condemn it in every circumstance then it's use gets normalised, not just when you like it but also when you don't. Do you think if the left starts doxxing every person they think is a Nazi, that the rights just not gonna start doxxing figures on the left, putting them, their livelihood, and their families at risk?

There is no light at the end of that tunnel.

 

[RedMercury]

No, I don't. Because doxxing isn't a fucking case by case basis thing.

Click to shrink...

Sure, it can be.

If you don't condemn it in every circumstance then it's use gets normalised, not just when you like it but also when you don't.

Click to shrink...

I mean, I'm not gonna expend effort condemning nazi's being doxxed.

Do you think if the left starts doxxing every person they think is a Nazi, that the rights just not gonna start doxxing figures on the left, putting them, their livelihood, and their families at risk?

Click to shrink...

You think the right isn't doxxing people? And we don't not do things because the right might do it too, they are already nuts.

There is no light at the end of that tunnel.

Click to shrink...

There absolutely is- knowledge and safety. These people are a danger to the public, I don't see how you could argue otherwise. The same way that people want to know when a sex offender moves near them, people should know that there are nazi's or totally unrepentant racist pieces of trash near them so they have the knowledge to stay away from them and to know what they are about.

 

[ebs]

Sure, it can be.

Click to shrink...

Ima stop you right there. My entire post was about why, logically, you cannot expect doxing to be applied with any degree of sensitivity by the internet. A statement which is so obviously the truth to anyone who's spent more than 5 seconds on it.

You then just say "it can be", contrary to all evidence ever observed, and no reasoning why, then base the rest of your post on that.

You're living in a fantasy.

 

[RedMercury]

Ima stop you right there. My entire post was about why, logically, you cannot expect doxing to be applied with any degree of sensitivity by the internet. A statement which is so obviously the truth to anyone who's spent more than 5 seconds on it.

You then just say "it can be", contrary to all evidence ever observed, and no reasoning why, then base the rest of your post on that.

You're living in a fantasy.

Click to shrink...

Yes, that is how arguments typically work. I disagree with your conclusion and premise and offer my own. Unless you think at this moment when it has already been around for a long time we are already living in the doxpocalypse, your fear of opening some pandora's box is just a guess.

No quarter for those that willingly choose to spread hatred and poison.

 

[ebs]

Yes, that is how arguments typically work. I disagree with your conclusion and premise and offer my own. Unless you think at this moment when it has already been around for a long time we are already living in the doxpocalypse, your fear of opening some pandora's box is just a guess.

Click to shrink...

That's how nonsense arguments work. Debates work by disagreeing with a conclusion and premise, then offering an alternative with logical reasoning and evidence to back it up. That second half is absent in your post.

 

[Deleted member 48897]

The idea that Nazis and their collaborators will cease doxxing people just because people of the left won't is a laughable notion at best and basically the last decade of the internet stands in evidence against it. Who do you think was doing the doxxing first?

 

[RedMercury]

The idea that Nazis and their collaborators will cease doxxing people just because people of the left won't is a laughable notion at best and basically the last decade of the internet stands in evidence against it. Who do you think was doing the doxxing first?

Click to shrink...

Or that if the left abstains from it, the right will honor some sort of truce haha

 

[RedMercury]

That's how nonsense arguments work. Debates work by disagreeing with a conclusion and premise, then offering an alternative with logical reasoning and evidence to back it up. That second half is absent in your post.

Click to shrink...

Alright dude, how about this. I'll take a nice big L if you tell me you really believe these people should not have their identities known to the public:

Because honestly, I don't care about "losing" some internet argument, but I damn sure want to know where you stand on that. Tell me it's wrong to dox them.

 

[Marvie]

Zero problems with it. These fuckers need to get called out on their bullshit.

 

[Captain Melody]

Yes.

Side note, I'll never stop being confused that every other thread about racists has one or two people trotting out stories about this racist friend they have that they just hang out with, but he doesn't really count because he'd never hit anyone or he's sad.