- he posted on sites which were considered targets.
- he posted a manifesto online (it's been censored in NZ)
- he livestreamed the act (also censored)
- his attack has been referenced by subsequent attacks (this was his goal)
- he wants to use the courts as a platform (our media has voluntarily agreed to censor proceedings)
- he said his rights are being infringed by not having phone and other communication (his "rights" need to be weighed against all the dead and injured)
- other groups want to politicize and publicize his agenda (should they be censored?)
His efforts to use the web as a platform for inciting hate and further violence led to our government's response. If the US President incites hate and violence via Twitter we would be having the same discussion no?
The idea of censoring his manifesto is strange to me. You'd think people would just want to argue the points brought up in his manifesto on their merits and win mindshare that way.
We heard he cites Anders Breivik's manifesto in his own (i haven't read them) so the domino effect of self-radicalization is what concerns them i think. A bit like how we have laws against reporting on suicides cos they determined that suicides statistically increased when they were widely publicized in the past.
Well, a good chunk of the US anti-vax movement seems to be ultra-Orthodox Jews: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/14/nyregion/measles-vaccine-... Their religous beliefs don't permit them to have unfettered Internet access because it'd expose them to corrupting ideas (like, say, the idea that vaccines are safe).
And yet more than a good chunk of the anti-vax movement worldwide has unfettered Internet access. Ultra-orthodox Jews certainly aren't a factor here in New Zealand.
If the US President incites hate and violence via Twitter we would be having the same discussion no?
No. We might be having a conversation about the inappropriateness of such comments, but we have no laws against hate speech. In fact, a sitting president can call for imminent violence against a person or group (which is illegal) and the only recourse would be impeachment or waiting until the next election (he can be prosecuted after his removal though). So there wouldn't be much we could do if the US President did call for violence.
He also explicitly said he'd learned his radical ideas from 8chan in his final post there; and furthermore, there's good reason to believe his selection of travel destinations was already motivated by his far-right worldview of a 'Muslims-vs-the-West' conflict.
Lastly, it is a mistake to take a document intended as propaganda directly at face value; for instance, his claims of "ecofascism" on inspection seem to be more intentionally selected to inspire infighting between political left and right (one of his aims he claims to have regarding gun legislation) rather than motivated by any genuine concern for the environment; for example, his manifesto was devoid of environmental concerns unless we were to first concede a fascist obsession with racial birthrate disparites is an "ecological" concern.
His manifesto also included memes and copy pasta.He listened to meme music as he drove to the mosque, he said "Subscribe to Pewdiepie" before he shot the first victim.
The fact that he was a member of an online community that considered his views normal is extremely significant.
Oh yeah? How about the fact that he drove a car, or ate meat or spoke english or traveled a lot?
The "online radicalization" thing is complete and total bullshit: it's an excuse to ramp up the totalitarian surveillance state in a more obvious way than the "war on terror" -now it's a war on people who read things on the internet. Magic internet forums might make me into a terrorist ... or a hacker; better put me in prison!
And you don’t think his manifesto is propaganda rather than a attempt at reliable narration?
Coming to “the truth” seeing the reality of the world at first hand is a much more stirring story than being radicalised by lies on the Internet. Plus it fits directly into all the other racist propaganda put out by white supremacists about the state of Europe and France in particular.
