K: people like 45 is in charge and he is as destroying the nation quite easily…
he is as irrational as they come…
Kropotkin
K: and missing my point… but you are really, really good at missing the point…
congrats on your finely tuned ability to miss the point…
Kropotkin
But should companies have that power? I agree that it’s fully consistent to criticize or praise a company based on its actions, but it is very often not limited to mere praise and blame. For example, Net Neutrality seeks to deprive companies of exactly the rights that GoDaddy, AirBnB, and Google exercised here. Under Net Neutrality, it would be illegal for Comcast to decide not to serve traffic from the Daily Stormer. Is that kind of regulation a good idea?
As for the profit motive, I am apparently somewhat more cynical than you. If you look at the backlash that Cloudflare is facing for refusing to terminate services to WS websites, it seems pretty clear that removing these sites from their platforms made economic sense for the companies that did. Cloudflare is very likely to lose more money in cancelled subscriptions from customers who see them as providing cover for racists, than they will earn from keeping Daily Stormer as a client. Perhaps it’s a happy accident that human decency and business rationale aligned for the other companies, but I would be willing to be that the business considerations, the profit motive, is what controlled the decision.
K: I have no illusion that companies, first and foremost, put profits first, I am not that Naïve
to think otherwise, but we can support those who from time to time, understand
that there is more to life then profits…now SHOULD those companies have
the right to limit or to censor speech? that is a discussion that is still in the mix…
I work for a rather large company and we are very limited in our ability
to speak freely, we, I deal with customers every single day and I have to
be limited in what I say but with that said, I can only really be fired for stealing
or insubordination (that is because of my length of years, 10 and a union) but
company wide, they can limit what I say to a customer… and it is all in the name of
profits…so we have two different aspects of free speech, one from the employee’s
and one like the companies you mentioned in limiting free speech with net neutrality…
and companies will often have two separate idea’s about free speech, one with employees
and one with media and other considerations…now I have made it very clear I support
free speech, but what if I was forced, forced to carry hate and violence content
in my message to my customers… to keep my job, I must recite vile anti-gay, anti-Semite,
anti-women messages to my customers…would I do so? no, I would quit first…
I would fight this corporate message as long as I could because it is wrong…
but to keep my job, I must… and the company would not be punished for firing me
because I refused to partake in this particular example of free speech.
this whole area of free speech in the corporate world is quite complex and has
many, many different moving parts… employees, and the company message and
via things like net neutrality with companies… you really don’t have one such
aspect going on, you have several and that is in part what is complicating
our understanding of this entire aspect of free speech and the corporation…
so we have to be very clear about what we are talking about and in what
circumstance… net neutrality is just one aspect of free speech and the corporation…
Kropotkin
Peter, you do not support free speech if you believe that speech in itself is the cause of violence.
What I just said to Peter goes for all the liberal leftists.
K: think about it… a message, a public message is meant to
encourage action… action of some type… what is the message of
the white national terrorist? hate the … be it the jew, blacks, women,
others not of our type… the neo-Nazi message is one of hate and violence
and racism and the message wants action that is of hate, violence and racism…
what is the message of the left? we promote love and tolerance and acceptance…
we don’t advocate hate or violence or racism against people…but that
means if we are faced with a message of hate and violence and racism, we
should just accept and tolerate that message? a message that damages our society
and damages our democracy…no, we want to protect our society, our government,
our democracy… and so we act… I am personally opposed to violence… I don’t believe
that violence can end violence… only peace and love can end violence and hate and racism…
but if one reacts to a message of hate and violence and racism with hate and violence,
I must admit I can understand the reaction but I don’t believe the answer to a message
of hate and violence and racism can be or should be answered with hate or violence…
one day, the wind and the sun were having an argument about who is stronger…
and the wind seeing a man walking down a path, said this to the sun…
whoever is stronger can get that man walking down the path with his jacket,
to take his jacket off… the winner can get the man to take off his jacket and is
the strongest… the sun agreed and allowed the wind first crack at the man…
so the wind began to blow and blow and blow even harder at the man walking
down the path… the harder the wind blew, the tighter the man held on
to his jacket… after a while, the wind gave up and then the sun made his
attempt to get the man to take off his jacket… all the sun did was warm up
the earth around the man, not by much, but enough and soon the man took
off his jacket and the sun declared victory… it is not enough to blow and blow
to win the contest, sometimes it just takes a little warmth to win the victory…
a message of hate and violence and racism will lose to a message of love
and peace because the message of love and peace is not as violent or as hateful
as the message of hate and violence and racism, but it is a softer message that
is more about who we are and what needs to happen…
Kropotkin
First Peter, in your message here you have to be honest in considering the fact that all white nationalists are NOT KKK, Neo-Nazis, or violent terrorists. That’s first. Some white Americans are worried that the white race is being shamed and persecuted just for being white, the removal of our countries disliked history, its symbols and statues being removed to erase/rewrite history is also not honest. The white nationalist are trying to preserve the history of our country WITHOUT agreeing that it was a good idea to harm Africans, to enslave any people, and our history should be left in tact, so that was reason for the Alt-right rally, to protest the removal of America’s history. KKK and Neo-nazi members joined the white nationalists to protest the removal of all traces of the Confederacy, but their platforms of beliefs are radically extreme from simple white nationalists and should not be lumped together as the liberal media has done.
Second, what did the white nationalist’s say in particular? What was their message. Leave out the KKK and Neo-nazi’s messages.
I believe you are making a distinction that doesn’t exist…
trying to break out one aspect of the message being white nationalist
and the neo-nazi’s and kkk being another another aspect…
the message being the same from all of them…
to protest taking down a statue was part of the message
of hate and violence and racism, a message of white nationalist
and neo-Nazi and KKK, being the same message if you understand
what the statue of Robert lee meant…
it isn’t the same as a statue of Washington because Washington
fought for the creation of the country, he was a slave owner
but you have to remember, you can’t criticize someone for being in a
different time period as you and thus having different standards then you as
Washington did…
but, but Lee fought AGAINST the U.S, in defense of slavery when
became clear that slavery was an evil… by his time, enough people
had said that slavery was evil, a sin against man and god…
lee choose to ignore that message, whereas in Washington time,
there was no such recognition that slavery was evil, no one said it
in Washington’s time…NO ONE and so we can’t condemn
Washington for his belief in his societies beliefs…
whereas we can condemn Lee because enough people had condemn
slavery and we can condemn Lee for fighting for slavery against
the U.S…AGAINST the U.S…
REPEAT that a few times to understand it, Lee fought AGAINST
the U.S in favor of slavery…
so to stand with a statue of LEE is to stand for fighting against
the U.S in favor of slavery… so anyone who stood for the statue
did stand against the U.S… and should be condemned…
Kropotkin
Propaganda BS.
I should have had a V-8 (rather than read Peter’s nonsense)!
K: is the fact that Robert Lee fought for the south really Propaganda?
then you are far more confused then I can help you with…
I would recommend professional help for anyone who thinks that
Robert Lee fighting for the south and slavery is “PROPAGANDA”
it is a fact… and no amount of denial will allow you to think that
Lee fighting for the south and slavery is Propaganda…
Kropotkin
Peter, you are peddling propaganda, not about Robert E. Lee, but about lumping all protesters into a terrorist group.
K: if I were you and in denial about reality, I too would rather drink a V-8,… with vodka…
but hay, I admit it is hard work to stay with reality… sometimes reality hurts,
it is far better for you to remain in your fantasy land and think your happy thoughts
about how you are about hate and violence and racism… remember the message…
WendyDarling loves hate and violence and racism… that is the message you are sending
today… and the message we hear…
Kropotkin
If that is what you got out of what I wrote, I must 
at you.
K: I didn’t “Lump all protesters into a terrorist group”…
I lumped neo-nazi’s and white nationalist and KKK as members
of a terrorist group… and they are…they peddle a message of
hate and violence and racism/sexism/ageism/anti-Semite message…
and that is no different then the message of Muslim terrorist…
a another message of hate and violence and racism/sexism/ ageism/ ant-Semite…
if you are not of us, you are against us… is the message of the Muslim
terrorists and the same message of hate and violence and racism/…
and the same message from white nationalist/neo-Nazi/KKK…terrorists…
call them what they are… TERRORISTS… and get it over with…
Kropotkin
K: as I am hearing impaired, I am very aware of the message people send and your
message is quite clear… you defend the message of hate and violence and racism/…
because you approve that message and your message was received quite clearly…
I would suggest you remain with the denial phase… it really works for you…
Kropotkin
So, there is no middle ground with you. You are an extremist on the left and if I do not agree with your extremism, then I am on the right extreme? I need another V-8 and I’ll add some Vodka (God knows you drive sane people to drink.)
K: first of all, you think inside your head that because I am of the left, I MUST be an extremist
and I am not… I am actually a moderate… but because of your vision and message
about yourself, you just think I am an extremist…so we are clear… how is my message
of love and tolerance and understanding… EXTREME? that is my message and your message
is of hate and violence and racism/…so who here is really extreme?
love or hate? that is the both the question and the answer… I pick love and you have
picked hate… so is my message of love really extreme and if you think love is extreme,
then you really, really, REALLY, need to rethink your understanding of the universe…
Kropotkin
You put words in my mouth Peter which is extreme and your words do not encourage love, tolerance and understanding. I have not stated that I support hate, violence, or racism, yet you state that I do. I know, you accuse me of preposterous things in the name of your kind of higher love and tolerance, and understanding. You are amusing. 
Wendy, you sound a lot like you support white nationalism, how is that not a racist ideology?