I can definitely see the moral issue here, but as you said pretty much every "big co." is going to have some issues. But regarding the other part of the question, I've heard good things about Beehiiv: https://www.beehiiv.com/
“the main reason I’m on Substack is that it was (and remains) so easy and user-friendly and well-run that I have seldom had to do anything besides write and hit buttons.”--Roy Edroso
So in other words, you’re LAZY!...:)
I agree with the owner of Substack. Even Nazi’s deserve a platform in a free society. Otherwise, who gets me to decide what free and acceptable speech is? Book banning by Moms for Liberty and right-wing billionaires comes to mind.
The question becomes how do you police violent and hateful rhetoric and speech? Personally, I have no idea, because as soon as you start; it never ends well!...:)
This is NOT about 'policing'. This is about profiting, from fascists, for money(!) to promote their murderous bullshit-masquerading-as-ideology. But the self-silencing on the opposite side feels like an own-goal.
Don't go silent--go elsewhere. Let Substack discover what Elon Musk has already thoroughly explored--Nazis do not represent any kind of market from which you can make a profit.
I have to wonder. Some of these smaller RWNJ outlets talk loud but seem to be of the "hook the TV antenna up to the toaster" variety, or whatever the modern equivalent is. It's really easy to put up a Potemkin facade of "business success" when your backers have bottomless pockets.
I get it, but has any other platform brought the robust scale and ease-of-use? I mean, if the only option to American nazi Henry Ford's Model A was a decrepit Stanley Steamer (not that I have anything against steam) should all anti-fascists just walk?
To extend that metaphor--Henry Ford's Model A was a *reaction* to the success of GM's Chevrolet. He had to be persuaded by *competition* to change from the Model T.
When the competition to Substack appears--and it will--it will be supported.
Ford was far from the only one. Even George W’s grandfather and his dad’s father, Prescott Bush, was a Nazi sympathizer and worked for a Nazi Bank before becoming senator.
It’s a largely forgotten piece of history, but in 1932 the German Nazi Party was facing financial ruin, until American industrialists bailed them out to the tune of $30 million in 1933 dollars....:)
Like this would be the first time fascists profited from business deals. Look at all the industrialists and politicians who supported and sympathized with the Nazi’s; doing business with them regardless of any laws against it.
And it is about policing. Yes, substack provides a platform for haters to express their opinions; and it’s insulting to many of us, including myself. However, when you try to police it, it only helps give legitimacy to their viewpoints, as the MSM will undoubtedly report on it. Further, there will always be a market for this bs; someone will find a way to monetize it.
In my opinion, it’s best to ignore than bring their point of view to forefront. I could be wrong, but shining a light on the issue, only creates interest and more readers.
Perhaps we are not defining 'policing' similarly. Policing is the enforcement of democratically-adopted (ie public) rules, regs, laws. Substack is a private outfit with no policing powers. It cannot 'censor' because it has no legal mandate to allow all the damn speech there is. F. Reese Peach only has legal standing within legally defined public spaces and forums.
Weirdly (and as others have pointed out) Substack does appear squidgy about profiting from some messages other than nazism, for its own reasons (which might not even be worth dredging up, because, again, they are a private enterprise). So it declines to profit from pornography, for instance. They do not get (much) blowback for that.
I don’t disagree. Substack can do as it pleases as first amendment and free speech are only protected from government interference.
My point, is if you start policing hate speech, it only brings it to the forefront. Additionally, when you have the Republican Party adding legitimacy to the hateful rhetoric of despicable people, it only confounds the issue, especially when it comes out the mouths of elected officials. Do we refuse to report their speech, even though there is a public interest in doing so?
I don’t have the answers, but haters are gonna hate; regardless of which platform appeals to them, or is available to them. As long as there’s a profit motive, you can always follow the money; and where this leads, is anyone’s guess.
Bottom line: if they are banned from SubStack, some other entity will rear its ugly head and provide a safe space for them to disseminate their hatred of others.
It’s Newton’s third law of physics: “for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.” The more you complain and react, the more of a demand for this hate rhetoric grows and metastasizes....:)
I don't want to get in it with you, but Karl Popper's Paradox of Tolerance comes to mind... otherwise our only choice is to be just squidgy oatmeal liberals.
A few posts ago u had commended the "social democracies" for their levels of happiness (I think in the context of not tacking too hard towards "actual" socialism). I'm sure those numbers are real — yet all of those countries have thriving fascist parties, gathering power & influence. The Boss here even pointed that rise in power out a few posts before that. Truly happy & socially comfortable people don't go fash.
"Truly" is doing some heavy lifting there, though. How many conservatives do you know who will tell you they are happy in their lives -- but their hobby is being mad at the TV? All of them, Katie.
At the same time, how many of them will tell you their social position is NOT comfortable -- while they are 70-year-old married white men in 5-bedroom homes in tranquil suburbs where they will definitely live out the rest of their lives golfing and carving turkeys?
These people will tell you they hate "fascisim" -- but also "We *need* a wall to keep out the kind of people who can't assimilate!" And "It's softhearted policing that lets crime run rampant," and "Biden is a Soros-paid socialist" and "January 6 was NOT insurrection." All socially secure people handed every happy gift that 20th century capitalism ever offered -- and eager to buy the Reichstag Fire as soon as someone lights it.
Read A R Moxon's recent SubStacks about this. (Actually, read him anyway!) He does some superlative addressing of the situation, which I can't recall at the moment because it's too goddamn early and I haven't had my coffee yet.
Sure, I get it, one of the attractions of Naziism (and white supremacy) is their status as "forbidden fruit" and a certain kind of person (i.e. idiots) are drawn in because of that. But the "forbidden fruit" signal is already being sent in a thousand other ways sufficient to make Naziism attractive to the weak-minded, if Substack banned Nazis it's unlikely there would be that many additional idiots saying: "Oh, now that they're REALLY forbidden, I've just got to check out what those Nazis have to say!"
As others have said, it's about legitimizing and normalizing the hate as "just another point of view", not just policing it. Obviously it won't be eradicated, if WW iI didn't do the job I don't know what would. And while Nazisim is even stupider than the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Trull, wrapping your head in a blanket doesn't make it go away either. It has to be dealt with, and not by "engaging" with it. Engaging with a gaslighter only increases the amount of gas in the room, or the shower in this case.
But—BUT! we must platform, for example, Joe Rogan’s conspiracy theories and anti-science bullshit that’s literally getting people killed, or else we will have sunk to their level and turned our back on Free Speech! [dramatically throws toga over shoulder; trips, falls off soapbox; Nazis point and laugh]
Agreed, this argument seems like bullshit as long as the US gov isn’t doing the policing, which the constitution seems to be pretty clear on. There is nothing wrong with a corp establishing an office of Nazi, racist and other bigoted bullshit moderation, and indicate this shit does not need to be on its platform.
I've read that Germany has laws against promotion of Naziism, showing the Nazi flag, etc. Laws they can have because they don't have our First Amendment. But Substack, not being the United States Government, could adopt those same laws as policy. They're already written (OK, written in German, but I think we can get over that) and there's decades of case law to guide in their implementation, it's not like we need to reinvent the wheel here or imagine the whole project is undoable. Substack could adopt a "If it's banned in Germany, it's banned here" policy and we could get on with our lives. If they choose not to do that, it's not because it's impractical.
Interesting argument but it will never fly here. And do we really want to emanate Germany? They have a right-wing socialist party that has been gaining steam since the influx of immigration from the ill-advised Libyan bombing (chaos) by Obama.
OK, we won't adopt all things German, just their laws against promotion of Naziism as a policy for private businesses that don't want to support Nazis.
I don’t know much about it Roy, but I’ve heard a lot of chatter about people moving to Ghost because it’s user friendly. I don’t know whether they are set up for comments. I think you’re on the right track with following BlueSky threads on the topic, and maybe wait to see where most people land which also has a comments feature.
As far as the moral question of staying or leaving, I’m a bit more agnostic. I tend to think it’s right to leave, but I also don’t think it’s necessarily wrong to stay, if that makes any sense. Remote cooperation with evil, as the Catholics say. What offends me more than the actual presence of Nazis is Substack’s blasé acceptance that Nazis are just part of the discourse now. SOME things are clearly beyond the pale for them – they don’t allow porn. So they’ll use their censorious hand when it suits them. When it doesn’t, they bleat about freeze peach. So their offense is twofold – they allow Nazis, AND they are hypocritically sanctimonious about it. I honestly find the second more annoying than the first.
To Roy's question, I agree with these points that holding out for more clarity on a workable substitute makes sense.
Re the general conversation around Freeze Peach and Paradox of Tolerance, we know the things Substack won't tolerate. Which shows the real problem is that Nazis are being normalized.
Substack is just a tool. If it works for you, Roy, there's no reason to move. Too, there aren't exact alternatives to Substack. Flip side is that a Substack contributor is bothered by being associated with the site, that's their call. The heart knows what the heart knows or something.
To its virtue, the site doesn't force Nazi shit on anyone. The worse is possibly being offered Nazi shit.
As for MacKenzie's response, likewise his response when queried about doing a promotional interview with some Nazi POS whose name I forget and have no interest in looking up: if one has to be cowardly and/or a liar to make that extra scintilla of profit that's just the way the world works.
I would prefer that any money I pay not to go to support Nazis. The world won't change if we do nothing. I'm old but I would like to have the world change in a non-Nazi, non-Capitalist exploitation way
First, thanks for taking this on. Needs to be done, by thinking people...
Second, and really for me this is the most important thing about the issue, the operators of Substack are mind-bleedingly wrong. Parading-their-stupidity-in-public wrong. Deserving-of-all-our-inflammatory-opprobrium wrong. Pathetically-ill-served-by-their-parents wrong. This on its own does not make them unusual.
Third, there are everso many thoughtful posts on stacks already – nuanced, fierce, convincing – that should be read and thought about. I am simultaneously reading one by Thomas Zimmer at Democracy Americana this morning that shows how America produces these stupid dilemmas and how some writers can be significantly more impacted than others.
I'm on the side of the resistance, whatever that means. Stand and fight. Call them out long, loud, regular and specific. Question their upbringing (their improper fetchins up). Hound their peers, their professors, their clergy...And no need to be civil about it – they're making money from serving nazis!
Pressure ought to be relentless upon substack management, but I do not feel that stackers should cut off their own income streams just because nazis have discovered similar monetary inducements. When good writers get cut off from income because nazis appear, it does not follow that the good writers should die lonely and destitute as a result.
I am cheerfully willing to be shown the holes in my argument, but might not give them the weight I typically allow...
You cite the best argument for staying -- that good writers will self-select their own removal to less popular sites and will cede the field to fascists. That's what is slowly happening on Twitter with the emigration to BlueSky. I'm part of it, I spend very little time on Twitter nowadays, but I'm a nobody. The real impact is that the big Twitter accounts that provided the most effective counterbalance to rightwing bilge are dwindling. I don't know the solution, the situation is quite bad.
The internet's young yet, Twitter, Substack, Facebook, etc. these are really the first (or maybe second?) generation. People could move to alternatives, and then, ten years from now, when people ask, "Hey whatever happened to Twitter/Substack/Facebook?" it'll be a good opportunity for a conversation about how Nazis are bad, and also incidentally bad for business.
I think Sunday Style said it best: "As far as the moral question of staying or leaving, I’m a bit more agnostic. I tend to think it’s right to leave, but I also don’t think it’s necessarily wrong to stay.... What offends me more than the actual presence of Nazis is Substack’s blasé acceptance that Nazis are just part of the discourse now. SOME things are clearly beyond the pale for them – they don’t allow porn. So they’ll use their censorious hand when it suits them. When it doesn’t, they bleat about freeze peach. So their offense is twofold – they allow Nazis, AND they are hypocritically sanctimonious about it. I honestly find the second more annoying than the first."
Any possibility of getting a statement or a petition going that could be circulated and signed by Substack writers and subscribers deploring their hypocrisy?
Nazism is just part of the discourse now. *sigh* We're here because words have meaning.
Part of Substack's argument seems to be if they don't platform the Nazis, they will just go elsewhere and their horrible ideology will fester in darkness, which is....OK? Their ideology belongs in darkness, let it fester away there. I mean, holy shit. Substack may as well ape WaPo and make their slogan "Nazism Festers in Darkness, We Are the Light."
Look, if we just have ONE more debate with the Nazis, we will definitively prove them wrong and they will go away. They have to, it's in the rules somewhere.
jeebus, this is a tough question. you might as well ask me the cause of the civil war, you democrat plant, you! more seriously, I am not qualified to answer, because I do not search sub stack, or any other media platform, for nazi content, nor do I have any knowledge whatsoever of 'how things work'. how does the country of Germany handle this problem? or do they? I understand that they have little tolerance for such overt displays of fascism, but once, twice burnt...
I say one solution is to retreat back to alicublog, but I clearly recognize the need to reach more readers on a larger platform, as well as the monetary advantages. I just can't answer the question.
For what it's worth, I say leave. Sure, you're not being tithed to support Nazi Daily News. But your ARE paying Substack to be on here, and that, in turn, enables the rest of the Nazi-supporting structure. Let Substack discover how profitable having nothing but Nazis as both vendors and buyers is.
And as for "competing in the marketplace of ideas," the entire White supremacy/Nazi set of ideas SHOULD be repellent to anyone who is not already in their camp. Anyone who says in this day and age that Nazi ideas "deserve to be heard" is a Nazi. Full stop.
But "we" (or at least some subset of the great unrinsed) WILL get that no matter what we (the REBIDs) feel about it, or what Roy does. And as Substack clearly is prepared to invite more nazis, other writers [outside the stack] will have lesser standing to complain/rail against that. Instead of boycotting, perhaps the righteous should be rolling out a program to get tens of thousands MORE subscriptions to the best writers, showing Substack the power of antifascist money, and possibly convincing them that maybe there's something to be said for lumping nazism and pornography together under one "Nope – not goin' there" blanket.
Though (and this may just be my warped mind speaking) porn and Nazis aren't exactly the same; one's sex, admittedly exploitative (but what the fuck ISN'T these days?), and the other's unabashed hate.
Sure. But the fear of public shaming exhibited by the management because porn ought to even-more-than-equally cause 'em fright because nazi. This is foundational to just, harmonic and bog-standard sensible society.
In spite of years of comments and other internet interactions I have a real real hard time with people talking down to me. Our Buddy Hammish (OBH) can't seem to help himself. I'm going to disagree with him just by how he presents himself, much less the content of what he's trying to say -
.Though I get what he's saying
But I have a hard enough time sharing a platform with ( that idiot) Laura Loomer and ( that asshole) Andrew Sullivan. Don't get me started on Nazis. Or Matt Taiibi.
I got sucked into the substack lifestyle interacting with Wonkette and here with you. I'm retiring soon I have a couple of projects that I think work well with a public, internet face. I had intended to use Pinterest or Instagram as a place to generate some monetary support. Sell some coffee cups. Maybe a t-shirt.
Then the substack thing came along and seemed kind of perfect for what I'm doing.
Until the Nazi showed up. I'll be honest. I'm having a problem with it. I never would have joined up had I known. You obviously have a much bigger fish to fry.
I would counsel - wait. Someone's going to come up with a nazi-free substack clone ( that's how free enterprise works)
And OBH is going to take a well-deserved fucking. You can gladly get on board.
Thanks for addressing this. It sucks to have to change (if you need to change) but it needed to be addressed. I'll follow you wherever you end up. Take your time. Thanks for all the great content and happy new year.
Substack's position on this is obviously infuriating, but I can't blame you for waiting to find a better option, and my guess is eventually there will be one. I'm going to read what you write wherever you publish and I don't think anyone can object to your use of this platform until you find one that doesn't monetize Nazis. I do agree that a site with no comments would suck because this little community is filled with sharp and funny readers/commenters. It is an important part of my morning to commiserate and laugh with my fellow travelers in the REBID community. I'm with you whatever you do, my man!
Is the transformation of Twitter to X instructive? I’ve never opened an account there, so what I know about it is limited. Substack allows me to read the entries I want to read without having to deal with an algorithm that puts angry, insecure, racist, misogynistic, white nationalist excretions in my face. Twitter, as I understand it, is totally tone deaf in this regard, and troll infestations can be overwhelming. I’m torn between the idea of allowing all who want to participate vs. stomping on patently toxic ideologies that offer no demonstrable value that deserve to be stomped on. I’m never going to see the fascist newsletters on Substack so I’ll never enter that section of the marketplace of ideas. The stench of rotting fruit in that produce aisle would keep me away -- what kind of weirdos want that shit? But it would be good to limit the places these fucknuggets can congregate and spread their bile and venom.
It comes down to what it means to use, as a normal, non-fascist writer, a platform, that allows nazi and nazi adjacent propaganda. It certainly doesn’t mean you approve of those views. Nobody thinks that. Is any money the writer makes tainted by the fact that white supremicists have a shoddy shebeen on Substack? Unless you’re openly endorsing their views, I’d say not.
I don’t have a problem with you staying on Substack, notwithstanding its owner’s BS justifications for allowing putridity to take residence there.
Interesting to point out the stacks' fettered algorithms. Having not spent a moment on the twit (tho having seen some of the baddies on youtube) I've not too much experience being bombarded from unfettered Hatred Central.
The Twitter comparison is interesting. Paradoxically Musk's crappy figleaf moderation makes it easier to tolerate the fash -- the system is good, it just needs some tweaks! -- notwithstanding it's simultaneously harder to ignore them because they keep getting promoted to your timeline; whereas Substack's "Nazis Welcome" position makes it less easy to tolerate, but easier to ignore.
I’m an old ACLU guy (who doesn’t always agree with their stands) and pretty much for all free speech all the time. Part of the present problem with our America is that is contains 40% more fascists than we were willing to admit until Trump rubbed our faces in it. My free speech limit is actively harming others: doxxing, for example, or revenge porn, or encouraging the harassment of a couple of election workers or the Maine Sec of State. Lies should be exposed as lies, not tolerate as “beliefs.” “Alternative facts” ain’t. If Hamish is showing his ass, it’s in (as Roy says) thinking Harper-Collins bestows value on bullshit, any more than Substack does. My 18 year old has a better moral compass and bullshit detector than Hamish, and he’s 5 - 7 years from full frontal brain maturity. So, stay on Substack and take on the Substake Nazis as you do the rightwing hardcore emailers, if that doesn’t put you and yours at risk. I can’t think of anyone who could do it better.
"My free speech limit is actively harming others: doxxing, for example, or revenge porn, or encouraging the harassment of a couple of election workers or the Maine Sec of State. Lies should be exposed as lies, not tolerate as 'beliefs.' 'Alternative facts' ain’t."
Precisely. Which is why I'm so glad to see the speech-related prosecutions of Trump, Giuliani, et al. In any case, private platforms can't win by refusing to decide who to platform. Hosting malicious, slanderous liars suggests that they are real or possible truth-tellers.
Deciding who to deplatform is hard, sometimes. Not always! Lies, deceptions, and defamations are often straightforward. Don't knowingly host them.
you can take on the Substack Nazis without sharing a platform. I think "I left because of the Nazis" is a better foundation than "the Nazis here suck, but I won't leave'
I swear these fash-enablers be all "How could we ever see things in the light if there was no darkness? Think about it... whoa..."
An excellent test of Substack's "commitment to Freispracht" would be how many pro-Palestine sites there are, & how many were shut down this past October? Some speech is more free than others.
well ACKSUALLY the old model of electrons orbiting the nucleus has been abandoned for a more sophisticated concept of electrons existing at all points in a cloud around the nucleus, determined by their energy states, and planets do not jump orbits the way electrons do, so your suggestion is ludicrous *annoying nasal half-laugh*
I can definitely see the moral issue here, but as you said pretty much every "big co." is going to have some issues. But regarding the other part of the question, I've heard good things about Beehiiv: https://www.beehiiv.com/
Hope this helps!
“the main reason I’m on Substack is that it was (and remains) so easy and user-friendly and well-run that I have seldom had to do anything besides write and hit buttons.”--Roy Edroso
So in other words, you’re LAZY!...:)
I agree with the owner of Substack. Even Nazi’s deserve a platform in a free society. Otherwise, who gets me to decide what free and acceptable speech is? Book banning by Moms for Liberty and right-wing billionaires comes to mind.
The question becomes how do you police violent and hateful rhetoric and speech? Personally, I have no idea, because as soon as you start; it never ends well!...:)
This is NOT about 'policing'. This is about profiting, from fascists, for money(!) to promote their murderous bullshit-masquerading-as-ideology. But the self-silencing on the opposite side feels like an own-goal.
Don't go silent--go elsewhere. Let Substack discover what Elon Musk has already thoroughly explored--Nazis do not represent any kind of market from which you can make a profit.
Ironically, they always do. Look at Fox and the rest of the white supremacy news outlets; business is brisk!
I have to wonder. Some of these smaller RWNJ outlets talk loud but seem to be of the "hook the TV antenna up to the toaster" variety, or whatever the modern equivalent is. It's really easy to put up a Potemkin facade of "business success" when your backers have bottomless pockets.
I get it, but has any other platform brought the robust scale and ease-of-use? I mean, if the only option to American nazi Henry Ford's Model A was a decrepit Stanley Steamer (not that I have anything against steam) should all anti-fascists just walk?
To extend that metaphor--Henry Ford's Model A was a *reaction* to the success of GM's Chevrolet. He had to be persuaded by *competition* to change from the Model T.
When the competition to Substack appears--and it will--it will be supported.
Fascists gonna fash (GM learned all its fash from Ford, and might have been more successful with it in the long run than Hank was.)
Ford was far from the only one. Even George W’s grandfather and his dad’s father, Prescott Bush, was a Nazi sympathizer and worked for a Nazi Bank before becoming senator.
It’s a largely forgotten piece of history, but in 1932 the German Nazi Party was facing financial ruin, until American industrialists bailed them out to the tune of $30 million in 1933 dollars....:)
I'm hip. Ford's just shorthand.
They collectively saw the euthanasia project moving forward over there and thought "We need to ensure this experiment plays out!"
As I've said elsewhere, businessmen love them some fascism, because line goes up more efficiently if there's no troublesome dissent.
Poor guy was provoked into being a Nazi by the United Auto Workers union.
Like this would be the first time fascists profited from business deals. Look at all the industrialists and politicians who supported and sympathized with the Nazi’s; doing business with them regardless of any laws against it.
And it is about policing. Yes, substack provides a platform for haters to express their opinions; and it’s insulting to many of us, including myself. However, when you try to police it, it only helps give legitimacy to their viewpoints, as the MSM will undoubtedly report on it. Further, there will always be a market for this bs; someone will find a way to monetize it.
In my opinion, it’s best to ignore than bring their point of view to forefront. I could be wrong, but shining a light on the issue, only creates interest and more readers.
Perhaps we are not defining 'policing' similarly. Policing is the enforcement of democratically-adopted (ie public) rules, regs, laws. Substack is a private outfit with no policing powers. It cannot 'censor' because it has no legal mandate to allow all the damn speech there is. F. Reese Peach only has legal standing within legally defined public spaces and forums.
Weirdly (and as others have pointed out) Substack does appear squidgy about profiting from some messages other than nazism, for its own reasons (which might not even be worth dredging up, because, again, they are a private enterprise). So it declines to profit from pornography, for instance. They do not get (much) blowback for that.
I don’t disagree. Substack can do as it pleases as first amendment and free speech are only protected from government interference.
My point, is if you start policing hate speech, it only brings it to the forefront. Additionally, when you have the Republican Party adding legitimacy to the hateful rhetoric of despicable people, it only confounds the issue, especially when it comes out the mouths of elected officials. Do we refuse to report their speech, even though there is a public interest in doing so?
I don’t have the answers, but haters are gonna hate; regardless of which platform appeals to them, or is available to them. As long as there’s a profit motive, you can always follow the money; and where this leads, is anyone’s guess.
Bottom line: if they are banned from SubStack, some other entity will rear its ugly head and provide a safe space for them to disseminate their hatred of others.
It’s Newton’s third law of physics: “for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.” The more you complain and react, the more of a demand for this hate rhetoric grows and metastasizes....:)
I don't want to get in it with you, but Karl Popper's Paradox of Tolerance comes to mind... otherwise our only choice is to be just squidgy oatmeal liberals.
A few posts ago u had commended the "social democracies" for their levels of happiness (I think in the context of not tacking too hard towards "actual" socialism). I'm sure those numbers are real — yet all of those countries have thriving fascist parties, gathering power & influence. The Boss here even pointed that rise in power out a few posts before that. Truly happy & socially comfortable people don't go fash.
"Truly" is doing some heavy lifting there, though. How many conservatives do you know who will tell you they are happy in their lives -- but their hobby is being mad at the TV? All of them, Katie.
At the same time, how many of them will tell you their social position is NOT comfortable -- while they are 70-year-old married white men in 5-bedroom homes in tranquil suburbs where they will definitely live out the rest of their lives golfing and carving turkeys?
These people will tell you they hate "fascisim" -- but also "We *need* a wall to keep out the kind of people who can't assimilate!" And "It's softhearted policing that lets crime run rampant," and "Biden is a Soros-paid socialist" and "January 6 was NOT insurrection." All socially secure people handed every happy gift that 20th century capitalism ever offered -- and eager to buy the Reichstag Fire as soon as someone lights it.
Read A R Moxon's recent SubStacks about this. (Actually, read him anyway!) He does some superlative addressing of the situation, which I can't recall at the moment because it's too goddamn early and I haven't had my coffee yet.
Sure, I get it, one of the attractions of Naziism (and white supremacy) is their status as "forbidden fruit" and a certain kind of person (i.e. idiots) are drawn in because of that. But the "forbidden fruit" signal is already being sent in a thousand other ways sufficient to make Naziism attractive to the weak-minded, if Substack banned Nazis it's unlikely there would be that many additional idiots saying: "Oh, now that they're REALLY forbidden, I've just got to check out what those Nazis have to say!"
As others have said, it's about legitimizing and normalizing the hate as "just another point of view", not just policing it. Obviously it won't be eradicated, if WW iI didn't do the job I don't know what would. And while Nazisim is even stupider than the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Trull, wrapping your head in a blanket doesn't make it go away either. It has to be dealt with, and not by "engaging" with it. Engaging with a gaslighter only increases the amount of gas in the room, or the shower in this case.
Rest assured, you can avoid looking into the void, but the void will still ask to see your papers eventually.
But—BUT! we must platform, for example, Joe Rogan’s conspiracy theories and anti-science bullshit that’s literally getting people killed, or else we will have sunk to their level and turned our back on Free Speech! [dramatically throws toga over shoulder; trips, falls off soapbox; Nazis point and laugh]
Peter Hotez MUST debate RFK Junior on the shaved-head guy's show, it's just how science works!
Agreed, this argument seems like bullshit as long as the US gov isn’t doing the policing, which the constitution seems to be pretty clear on. There is nothing wrong with a corp establishing an office of Nazi, racist and other bigoted bullshit moderation, and indicate this shit does not need to be on its platform.
I've read that Germany has laws against promotion of Naziism, showing the Nazi flag, etc. Laws they can have because they don't have our First Amendment. But Substack, not being the United States Government, could adopt those same laws as policy. They're already written (OK, written in German, but I think we can get over that) and there's decades of case law to guide in their implementation, it's not like we need to reinvent the wheel here or imagine the whole project is undoable. Substack could adopt a "If it's banned in Germany, it's banned here" policy and we could get on with our lives. If they choose not to do that, it's not because it's impractical.
Interesting argument but it will never fly here. And do we really want to emanate Germany? They have a right-wing socialist party that has been gaining steam since the influx of immigration from the ill-advised Libyan bombing (chaos) by Obama.
OK, we won't adopt all things German, just their laws against promotion of Naziism as a policy for private businesses that don't want to support Nazis.
And beer.
Hey, if someone wants to throw a Mercedes Gullwing in my general direction, I wouldn't complain either.
I don’t know much about it Roy, but I’ve heard a lot of chatter about people moving to Ghost because it’s user friendly. I don’t know whether they are set up for comments. I think you’re on the right track with following BlueSky threads on the topic, and maybe wait to see where most people land which also has a comments feature.
As far as the moral question of staying or leaving, I’m a bit more agnostic. I tend to think it’s right to leave, but I also don’t think it’s necessarily wrong to stay, if that makes any sense. Remote cooperation with evil, as the Catholics say. What offends me more than the actual presence of Nazis is Substack’s blasé acceptance that Nazis are just part of the discourse now. SOME things are clearly beyond the pale for them – they don’t allow porn. So they’ll use their censorious hand when it suits them. When it doesn’t, they bleat about freeze peach. So their offense is twofold – they allow Nazis, AND they are hypocritically sanctimonious about it. I honestly find the second more annoying than the first.
haha the catholic cooperation with evil was often much less than remote.
Up close and personal, in fact.
To Roy's question, I agree with these points that holding out for more clarity on a workable substitute makes sense.
Re the general conversation around Freeze Peach and Paradox of Tolerance, we know the things Substack won't tolerate. Which shows the real problem is that Nazis are being normalized.
Reading Substack sure as hell didn't motivate Trump to invite Nick Fuentes to dinner.
Nope. Yet the question is whether there's a platform with a bare minimum of ethics to just not normalize (and monetize) Nazis.
Substack is just a tool. If it works for you, Roy, there's no reason to move. Too, there aren't exact alternatives to Substack. Flip side is that a Substack contributor is bothered by being associated with the site, that's their call. The heart knows what the heart knows or something.
To its virtue, the site doesn't force Nazi shit on anyone. The worse is possibly being offered Nazi shit.
As for MacKenzie's response, likewise his response when queried about doing a promotional interview with some Nazi POS whose name I forget and have no interest in looking up: if one has to be cowardly and/or a liar to make that extra scintilla of profit that's just the way the world works.
Really, talk about a tempest in a teapot...
My vote ⬆️
I would prefer that any money I pay not to go to support Nazis. The world won't change if we do nothing. I'm old but I would like to have the world change in a non-Nazi, non-Capitalist exploitation way
It’s impossible to be online and pure. Selfishly. I advise you to stay on Substack.
My vote ⬆️
First, thanks for taking this on. Needs to be done, by thinking people...
Second, and really for me this is the most important thing about the issue, the operators of Substack are mind-bleedingly wrong. Parading-their-stupidity-in-public wrong. Deserving-of-all-our-inflammatory-opprobrium wrong. Pathetically-ill-served-by-their-parents wrong. This on its own does not make them unusual.
Third, there are everso many thoughtful posts on stacks already – nuanced, fierce, convincing – that should be read and thought about. I am simultaneously reading one by Thomas Zimmer at Democracy Americana this morning that shows how America produces these stupid dilemmas and how some writers can be significantly more impacted than others.
I'm on the side of the resistance, whatever that means. Stand and fight. Call them out long, loud, regular and specific. Question their upbringing (their improper fetchins up). Hound their peers, their professors, their clergy...And no need to be civil about it – they're making money from serving nazis!
Pressure ought to be relentless upon substack management, but I do not feel that stackers should cut off their own income streams just because nazis have discovered similar monetary inducements. When good writers get cut off from income because nazis appear, it does not follow that the good writers should die lonely and destitute as a result.
I am cheerfully willing to be shown the holes in my argument, but might not give them the weight I typically allow...
You cite the best argument for staying -- that good writers will self-select their own removal to less popular sites and will cede the field to fascists. That's what is slowly happening on Twitter with the emigration to BlueSky. I'm part of it, I spend very little time on Twitter nowadays, but I'm a nobody. The real impact is that the big Twitter accounts that provided the most effective counterbalance to rightwing bilge are dwindling. I don't know the solution, the situation is quite bad.
There's a pair of us -- don't tell!/ they'd banish us you know
Fret not – just wear that swastika armband when you reshoot your avatar shot for the X posts, facto.
The internet's young yet, Twitter, Substack, Facebook, etc. these are really the first (or maybe second?) generation. People could move to alternatives, and then, ten years from now, when people ask, "Hey whatever happened to Twitter/Substack/Facebook?" it'll be a good opportunity for a conversation about how Nazis are bad, and also incidentally bad for business.
or less popular sites become more popular and the Nazi sites get less popular. Like is happening to Twitter
I'm really liking this new long-form Bern.
Enjoy it while you can – I'm entering a long-form care facility next week...
I think Sunday Style said it best: "As far as the moral question of staying or leaving, I’m a bit more agnostic. I tend to think it’s right to leave, but I also don’t think it’s necessarily wrong to stay.... What offends me more than the actual presence of Nazis is Substack’s blasé acceptance that Nazis are just part of the discourse now. SOME things are clearly beyond the pale for them – they don’t allow porn. So they’ll use their censorious hand when it suits them. When it doesn’t, they bleat about freeze peach. So their offense is twofold – they allow Nazis, AND they are hypocritically sanctimonious about it. I honestly find the second more annoying than the first."
Any possibility of getting a statement or a petition going that could be circulated and signed by Substack writers and subscribers deploring their hypocrisy?
Nazism is just part of the discourse now. *sigh* We're here because words have meaning.
There has been at least one big letter of protest by Substack authors -- and also a letter of support that, according to Forbes, was signed by writers "including former New York Times writer Bari Weiss, evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins and NSA leaker Edward Snowden." Which, lol. https://www.forbes.com/sites/zacharyfolk/2023/12/15/over-100-substack-writers-sign-letter-condemning-site-for-hosting-nazi-and-white-supremacist-newsletters/amp/
I remain amused by how transparently stupid (or bullshitty) some people advertise themselves when it comes to nazis.
Part of Substack's argument seems to be if they don't platform the Nazis, they will just go elsewhere and their horrible ideology will fester in darkness, which is....OK? Their ideology belongs in darkness, let it fester away there. I mean, holy shit. Substack may as well ape WaPo and make their slogan "Nazism Festers in Darkness, We Are the Light."
Look, if we just have ONE more debate with the Nazis, we will definitively prove them wrong and they will go away. They have to, it's in the rules somewhere.
If they don’t go away, we will just have to replace them. They hate when we do that.
They’ve already got their fun “Stormfront” online hangout. Substack, just direct their interest and entreaties there!
jeebus, this is a tough question. you might as well ask me the cause of the civil war, you democrat plant, you! more seriously, I am not qualified to answer, because I do not search sub stack, or any other media platform, for nazi content, nor do I have any knowledge whatsoever of 'how things work'. how does the country of Germany handle this problem? or do they? I understand that they have little tolerance for such overt displays of fascism, but once, twice burnt...
I say one solution is to retreat back to alicublog, but I clearly recognize the need to reach more readers on a larger platform, as well as the monetary advantages. I just can't answer the question.
For what it's worth, I say leave. Sure, you're not being tithed to support Nazi Daily News. But your ARE paying Substack to be on here, and that, in turn, enables the rest of the Nazi-supporting structure. Let Substack discover how profitable having nothing but Nazis as both vendors and buyers is.
And as for "competing in the marketplace of ideas," the entire White supremacy/Nazi set of ideas SHOULD be repellent to anyone who is not already in their camp. Anyone who says in this day and age that Nazi ideas "deserve to be heard" is a Nazi. Full stop.
Yup. We already did the "competing in the marketplace of ideas" thing; it was called World War II and millions of people died because of it.
We don't need any more Fresh Hot Fascism Baked Daily.
But "we" (or at least some subset of the great unrinsed) WILL get that no matter what we (the REBIDs) feel about it, or what Roy does. And as Substack clearly is prepared to invite more nazis, other writers [outside the stack] will have lesser standing to complain/rail against that. Instead of boycotting, perhaps the righteous should be rolling out a program to get tens of thousands MORE subscriptions to the best writers, showing Substack the power of antifascist money, and possibly convincing them that maybe there's something to be said for lumping nazism and pornography together under one "Nope – not goin' there" blanket.
Though (and this may just be my warped mind speaking) porn and Nazis aren't exactly the same; one's sex, admittedly exploitative (but what the fuck ISN'T these days?), and the other's unabashed hate.
Sure. But the fear of public shaming exhibited by the management because porn ought to even-more-than-equally cause 'em fright because nazi. This is foundational to just, harmonic and bog-standard sensible society.
Took me a minute to parse that. DEFINITELY need coffee.
Sorry. I got no excuse – already had 2 cups.
John Ashcroft. Famous for his crusade against porn, and absolutely a Nazi.
You can't make someone ashamed of something they're proud of.
Ya got me there, pal.
In spite of years of comments and other internet interactions I have a real real hard time with people talking down to me. Our Buddy Hammish (OBH) can't seem to help himself. I'm going to disagree with him just by how he presents himself, much less the content of what he's trying to say -
.Though I get what he's saying
But I have a hard enough time sharing a platform with ( that idiot) Laura Loomer and ( that asshole) Andrew Sullivan. Don't get me started on Nazis. Or Matt Taiibi.
I got sucked into the substack lifestyle interacting with Wonkette and here with you. I'm retiring soon I have a couple of projects that I think work well with a public, internet face. I had intended to use Pinterest or Instagram as a place to generate some monetary support. Sell some coffee cups. Maybe a t-shirt.
Then the substack thing came along and seemed kind of perfect for what I'm doing.
Until the Nazi showed up. I'll be honest. I'm having a problem with it. I never would have joined up had I known. You obviously have a much bigger fish to fry.
I would counsel - wait. Someone's going to come up with a nazi-free substack clone ( that's how free enterprise works)
And OBH is going to take a well-deserved fucking. You can gladly get on board.
I'm trying to envision what condition the dogs and the draft horse would leave Substack management in if they ever showed up at yer compound.
"Pushin' up amaryllis" comes to mind...
Thanks for addressing this. It sucks to have to change (if you need to change) but it needed to be addressed. I'll follow you wherever you end up. Take your time. Thanks for all the great content and happy new year.
This is, to me, the correct answer
Substack's position on this is obviously infuriating, but I can't blame you for waiting to find a better option, and my guess is eventually there will be one. I'm going to read what you write wherever you publish and I don't think anyone can object to your use of this platform until you find one that doesn't monetize Nazis. I do agree that a site with no comments would suck because this little community is filled with sharp and funny readers/commenters. It is an important part of my morning to commiserate and laugh with my fellow travelers in the REBID community. I'm with you whatever you do, my man!
Where else would I do my bizarre yacketing?
Monterey, Pops!
Is the transformation of Twitter to X instructive? I’ve never opened an account there, so what I know about it is limited. Substack allows me to read the entries I want to read without having to deal with an algorithm that puts angry, insecure, racist, misogynistic, white nationalist excretions in my face. Twitter, as I understand it, is totally tone deaf in this regard, and troll infestations can be overwhelming. I’m torn between the idea of allowing all who want to participate vs. stomping on patently toxic ideologies that offer no demonstrable value that deserve to be stomped on. I’m never going to see the fascist newsletters on Substack so I’ll never enter that section of the marketplace of ideas. The stench of rotting fruit in that produce aisle would keep me away -- what kind of weirdos want that shit? But it would be good to limit the places these fucknuggets can congregate and spread their bile and venom.
It comes down to what it means to use, as a normal, non-fascist writer, a platform, that allows nazi and nazi adjacent propaganda. It certainly doesn’t mean you approve of those views. Nobody thinks that. Is any money the writer makes tainted by the fact that white supremicists have a shoddy shebeen on Substack? Unless you’re openly endorsing their views, I’d say not.
I don’t have a problem with you staying on Substack, notwithstanding its owner’s BS justifications for allowing putridity to take residence there.
Interesting to point out the stacks' fettered algorithms. Having not spent a moment on the twit (tho having seen some of the baddies on youtube) I've not too much experience being bombarded from unfettered Hatred Central.
The Twitter comparison is interesting. Paradoxically Musk's crappy figleaf moderation makes it easier to tolerate the fash -- the system is good, it just needs some tweaks! -- notwithstanding it's simultaneously harder to ignore them because they keep getting promoted to your timeline; whereas Substack's "Nazis Welcome" position makes it less easy to tolerate, but easier to ignore.
Stay put unless it gets far worse. Same problem will pop up everywhere. And we're pretty sure you're not a Nazi.
I’m an old ACLU guy (who doesn’t always agree with their stands) and pretty much for all free speech all the time. Part of the present problem with our America is that is contains 40% more fascists than we were willing to admit until Trump rubbed our faces in it. My free speech limit is actively harming others: doxxing, for example, or revenge porn, or encouraging the harassment of a couple of election workers or the Maine Sec of State. Lies should be exposed as lies, not tolerate as “beliefs.” “Alternative facts” ain’t. If Hamish is showing his ass, it’s in (as Roy says) thinking Harper-Collins bestows value on bullshit, any more than Substack does. My 18 year old has a better moral compass and bullshit detector than Hamish, and he’s 5 - 7 years from full frontal brain maturity. So, stay on Substack and take on the Substake Nazis as you do the rightwing hardcore emailers, if that doesn’t put you and yours at risk. I can’t think of anyone who could do it better.
Well put.
"My free speech limit is actively harming others: doxxing, for example, or revenge porn, or encouraging the harassment of a couple of election workers or the Maine Sec of State. Lies should be exposed as lies, not tolerate as 'beliefs.' 'Alternative facts' ain’t."
Precisely. Which is why I'm so glad to see the speech-related prosecutions of Trump, Giuliani, et al. In any case, private platforms can't win by refusing to decide who to platform. Hosting malicious, slanderous liars suggests that they are real or possible truth-tellers.
Deciding who to deplatform is hard, sometimes. Not always! Lies, deceptions, and defamations are often straightforward. Don't knowingly host them.
you can take on the Substack Nazis without sharing a platform. I think "I left because of the Nazis" is a better foundation than "the Nazis here suck, but I won't leave'
Yes, if other things being equal (ease of background function, access to income, ease of audience access/interaction)...
You can do what I said whether anything else is equal or not.
Shackletonian missives, then?
Don't even require that one be in Antarctica
If Substack were a government forum, the ACLU would sue if any group was removed. Remember NSPA and Skokie? And I give money to the ACLU.
I swear these fash-enablers be all "How could we ever see things in the light if there was no darkness? Think about it... whoa..."
An excellent test of Substack's "commitment to Freispracht" would be how many pro-Palestine sites there are, & how many were shut down this past October? Some speech is more free than others.
"And did you ever LOOK at your hands? I mean, really LOOK at them?"
Have you ever thought about how the electrons going around the nucleus of an atom are just like the planets orbiting the sun?
*pushes duct-taped glasses up nose*
well ACKSUALLY the old model of electrons orbiting the nucleus has been abandoned for a more sophisticated concept of electrons existing at all points in a cloud around the nucleus, determined by their energy states, and planets do not jump orbits the way electrons do, so your suggestion is ludicrous *annoying nasal half-laugh*
...whoa...but screw this guy!
only in the mostly incorrect Bohr model
What fun's a planetary system with just one planet?
ACKSUALLY most planetary systems appear to have multiple -
*Bern appears, tackles guy, chaos ensues*
What would their Elon Musks obsess over?