It's almost like they have consistent principles and they are upholding them... If you don't like that they are allowing unrestricted free speech you can migrate to reddit or bluesky. Part of why I love Substack is there is a culture of good-faith open debate. When there are blatant nazi pages, the 99% majority of normal pages have 100% confidence that they can post a slightly controversial post without needing to self censor or filter their actual, raw thoughts. And there is no brigading, mass reporting, doxxing and other hysterical behavior like you see on other sites.
the problem is that not enough people understand that free speech does not equate to a lack of consequence for that speech.
“Substack preserves free speech” is a bullshit take when it preserves the free speech of a known genocide group. a group that wants half of us dead in the pursuit of eugenics.
free speech just means that your government cannot take action against you for what you say. your job, people around you, and a platform like Substack can and should have you face consequence for being a supporter of literal genocide.
because it's free speech today but tomorrow it's actual violence, as we've seen time and time again.
there's no world where holocaustal propaganda should be given a platform. if it was a "Muslim terrorist organisation" y'all would change your tune real quick
To me it's about precedent. Banning nazis sounds reasonable, but the owners of the platform ultimately decide who is a 'nazi.' Look how Putin justified the invasion of Ukraine, it was by claiming he was 'denazifying' the country. Or how Zionists will call anyone who opposes the actions of Israel anti-semetic nazis. Or look how the Trump admin got control of TikTok and immediately banned any mention of Epstein. However, when the platform maintains a principled defense of free speech, to the point of keeping nazis on the platform, I have much greater faith that they will not censoring real important issues due to capitalist or political pressure.
And for the record I support Muslim terrorist organizations being allowed on Substack.
Maybe ask Google who Ghislaine's father is. And then ask Google what publishing companies he owned. After that you can ask if he was a mossad agent. And then you'll know the truth about the jews and the nazis. Oh yeah, don't forget to ask Google how many jews lived in Germany before the holohoax and after the holohoax.
that's quite literally the biggest misconception about free speech
free speech means you are free to say what you want without GOVERNMENT intervention. you are free from consequences enforced on you by the GOVERNMENT, and even then, the law can and will give you the consequences necessary if you're viewed as a terrorist organisation, or if you've defamed someone.
private entities, social media platforms, and employers are allowed to enforce their own regulations on speech in their spaces.
free speech allows unpopular or offensive speech, NOT incitement to violence and direct threats to safety, which is what Nazi rhetoric generally is.
a right does not absolve you of the responsibility and consequences of that right. every right has a responsibility, and ignoring that responsibility will have a consequence. come on guys, let's get it together
I don’t disagree with you until the very last paragraph, so you’re making too much of this “biggest misconception about free speech”.
And to add extra detail, social media platforms enforce their own regulation but controlling participation. Meaning if you want to say that you can’t participate here. They don’t impose consequences like if you say that here you’ll pay a fine or spend 30 days in prison or lose your job, etc. They can control who participates in their network, which gets into the freedom of participation territory.
You just want to be able to impose your own consequences basically since the law won’t impose any on the people you find distasteful. That’s all this is for.
“a right does not absolve you of the responsibility and consequences of that right.”
The right is given by law but the responsibilities are apparently levied not by the law but by…you and other righteous vague, undefined, social groups, sth sth?! Make that make sense.
They did. They learned that you are the fascists and that losing you and people like you because of your baby feelings about being mad that you're not in control of the censorship on the platform would improve the platform, not harm it.
I don’t think “let the haters hate 😎😜” is a great response to the calling for the erasing of entire groups of people, but I guess that’s just a different opinion 👍
But seriously, lots of people are hateful idiots and they should be allowed to say or write what they think. No matter how irrational and dumb.
Allowing them their say doesn’t equate to endorsing their point of view.
Our job is to not police their words, but to avoiding becoming those hateful idiots ourselves.
Now, from the standpoint of a private company, like Substack, I guess they could choose to censor whatever they want on their own platform. Then they have to decide where to draw the line.
I’m speaking from my own context in the U.S. and yes, abhorrent, hateful, racist rhetoric IS protected in America—as long as it doesn’t cross the line into harassment, actual violence, or criminal conduct. This allowance is necessary in a truly free society.
see how I said "most"? I'm aware this kind of dehumanising speech is allowed in the U.S., the president is one of the loudest dehumanizers and H*tler supporters. in most of the rest of the world, Nazi rhetoric isn't protected by free speech because there's no reason you should be saying or supporting that kind of propaganda, because human rights and dignity should never be up for debate.
Soren, does it ever bother you that people can call you the n word legally, because of Free Speech, BUT if you question the Gaza situation you’re an antisemite and it’s an actual crime.
They’re the only group above Free Speech law. And the only people who never took their shit were the same people who fly the swastika
It’s a weird moral dilemma when you think about it
But the foundational U.S. principle of free speech existed before he was born.
The reason why we must allow such hateful speech is because if we don’t, whomever holds power can decide which speech is free and which speech is not. This is somewhat illustrated by Patient Zero’s comment about the n-word vs. anti-semitism. Why is one allowed and not the other? Why is one prohibited and not the other?
I've noticed that boomers call everyone who disagrees with them a "russian troll". You know "Russiagate" was debunked, right? Why don't you retards come up with a better line?
Yeah I'm not sure where everyone's gonna move to but I found that account the other day and thought I'd shove it deep into the recesses of my mind and live in ignorance.
I just can't believe it's so blatant and hasn't been taken down
I share the concern. There’s a difference between protecting open discourse and failing to act on explicit harm. Platforms earn loyalty through how they handle moments like this. I hope Substack chooses wisely.
ohh! I forgot to take my schizophrenia meds! I’m so sorry- I only thought I saw a transphobic misogynistic piece of poorly packaged horse shit! my apologies, O Wise Man of the Superior Genders! Head as empty as a flowerpot, darlin <3
also, by the way, darlin, if you're gonna insult someone, you should at least refrain from calling someone "woman" or "ma'am" if you don't know who they are :) just a thought!
I think I've applied it accurately, since you posted a news story and captioned it with the word "troons" (slur btw, just so ya know love) and also refusing to acknowledge my gender by immediately assuming I was an adult woman :) you know what they say, assuming makes an ass out of you and ming!!
It’s the toxicity of our societal understanding of free speech. These platforms themselves are responsible for propagating the misunderstanding.
You don’t have freedom of speech when you step into an online space. Not the way we’ve come to understand it, which is basically as the right to say whatever we want, whenever we want, wherever we want, with no social or legal consequences whatsoever.
Free speech is reduced within the context of a private business or a government building. Virtually all spaces online are private businesses or government spaces.
Real world analog—you can go down to the local restaurant and yell slurs inside. You won’t be arrested for yelling the slurs. You might be arrested for trespassing when you’re trespassed and refuse to leave, but that’s not the same thing as being arrested for yelling as such.
Likewise, you won’t be arrested for yelling said slurs, but no one in the restaurant is obligated to tolerate you yelling them. You’re open to a variety of social consequences for your behavior, including but not limited to being a social pariah and being banned from the establishment.
That’s freedom of speech as it actually exists. One will not be arrested; that doesn’t mean they can’t be asked to leave the establishment or trespassed for refusing to leave, or that anyone has to talk to them nicely afterward.
What the free speech mob wants, and what a place like Substack is tacitly offering when it says freedom of speech, is the warped modern understanding. It’s the understanding that I should be able to say and do anything as vile as I want any time I want, anywhere I want, and no one should be able to stop me ever, at any time.
If I call you a slur, you should have to take it. If I get banned, that’s infringing on my speech.
Except it isn’t. You don’t have the same expectations in these spaces. And honestly, I can’t think of anywhere in the world you would reasonably have the expectation of immunity to social consequences.
And a lot of our decay as a society starts with that misunderstanding. It was never true that you were free to behave any way you wanted in online spaces. It was never true that the first amendment protected people from social consequences. Trolls might feel like a ban is the same as jail, but it really isn’t.
Which is all a really long winded way of saying that absolutely, and when Substack allows harassment, deepfake porn, revenge whatever, you name it, it’s not meeting the definition of freedom of speech. It’s just failing a portion of its users in favor of the people for whom freedom of speech is the right to reduce their entire vocabulary down to racial and sexual slurs.
You can have your booth. That is allowed, like it or not, one way or the other.
You can’t have a history of harassment and public disorder.
Substack and platforms that promise you freedom of speech are really just abdicating their responsibility to manage the latter, dressing it all as the former, and this gaslighting is happening at a national level.
Ban the trolls. Educate the public. Restore actual freedom of speech.
Its their establishment, they get to choose what they do with their establishment. You don't get to choose what they do with THEIR establishment, that they manage and control. They don't have a "social responsability" or whatever cope you come up with. If you don't like their establishment, leave. There's hundreds of options available for you. May i recommend you visit bluesky or weenie hut junior? Dumb cunt.
Thank you for writing this and naming the uncomfortable truth so clearly. As someone from Germany, this topic carries a different weight. There can be no excuse for giving space to this kind of thinking.
Platforms are not neutral when they allow hate to organize and spread. Silence is not harmless. I’m grateful you spoke up.
Thank you, Aaron. I wasn't even aware that the Nazi page was a thing until today. I will never understand how the support team or whoever's supposed to be responsible to handle hate/harassment can continue to do nothing.
I’m currently writing a post as well on what I’ve seen since returning to the platform and it is horrendous. I’m so glad we’re all speaking up about what’s happening and their lack of action
Thank you for speaking about this Aaron !!! I'll honestly switch platforms as well if this keeps going on
Please do, no one cares
they already went through getting flamed for this exact issue in 2023 and 2024, you'd think they'd have learnt literally anything 💀
It's almost like they have consistent principles and they are upholding them... If you don't like that they are allowing unrestricted free speech you can migrate to reddit or bluesky. Part of why I love Substack is there is a culture of good-faith open debate. When there are blatant nazi pages, the 99% majority of normal pages have 100% confidence that they can post a slightly controversial post without needing to self censor or filter their actual, raw thoughts. And there is no brigading, mass reporting, doxxing and other hysterical behavior like you see on other sites.
the problem is that not enough people understand that free speech does not equate to a lack of consequence for that speech.
“Substack preserves free speech” is a bullshit take when it preserves the free speech of a known genocide group. a group that wants half of us dead in the pursuit of eugenics.
free speech just means that your government cannot take action against you for what you say. your job, people around you, and a platform like Substack can and should have you face consequence for being a supporter of literal genocide.
because it's free speech today but tomorrow it's actual violence, as we've seen time and time again.
there's no world where holocaustal propaganda should be given a platform. if it was a "Muslim terrorist organisation" y'all would change your tune real quick
Substack addressed this a year ago. They aren't going to remove or ban anything that isn't illegal under US law. Get over it.
I'm disgusted that they won't take it down. Disappointed as well.
Oh, I'm not disappointed. I agree with them.
nothing is illegal under US law, except… arresting pedophiles. I mean you can kill each other as long as the other is labelled a domestic terrorist.
not the highest standard to hold yourself to imo but anyways, war has started so that's fun.
To me it's about precedent. Banning nazis sounds reasonable, but the owners of the platform ultimately decide who is a 'nazi.' Look how Putin justified the invasion of Ukraine, it was by claiming he was 'denazifying' the country. Or how Zionists will call anyone who opposes the actions of Israel anti-semetic nazis. Or look how the Trump admin got control of TikTok and immediately banned any mention of Epstein. However, when the platform maintains a principled defense of free speech, to the point of keeping nazis on the platform, I have much greater faith that they will not censoring real important issues due to capitalist or political pressure.
And for the record I support Muslim terrorist organizations being allowed on Substack.
I mean, having a swastika all over your profile and posting Nazi content kinda goes beyond the need for “hmmm I wonder if this person is a Nazi”
Maybe ask Google who Ghislaine's father is. And then ask Google what publishing companies he owned. After that you can ask if he was a mossad agent. And then you'll know the truth about the jews and the nazis. Oh yeah, don't forget to ask Google how many jews lived in Germany before the holohoax and after the holohoax.
You sound like you watch TV and still vote.
But with violence the government will take action against you. That’s how you know you’ve crossed the line.
Free speech means precisely that you’re free to say it and not be subject to consequences. That’s what you’re “free” from, consequences.
that's quite literally the biggest misconception about free speech
free speech means you are free to say what you want without GOVERNMENT intervention. you are free from consequences enforced on you by the GOVERNMENT, and even then, the law can and will give you the consequences necessary if you're viewed as a terrorist organisation, or if you've defamed someone.
private entities, social media platforms, and employers are allowed to enforce their own regulations on speech in their spaces.
free speech allows unpopular or offensive speech, NOT incitement to violence and direct threats to safety, which is what Nazi rhetoric generally is.
a right does not absolve you of the responsibility and consequences of that right. every right has a responsibility, and ignoring that responsibility will have a consequence. come on guys, let's get it together
I don’t disagree with you until the very last paragraph, so you’re making too much of this “biggest misconception about free speech”.
And to add extra detail, social media platforms enforce their own regulation but controlling participation. Meaning if you want to say that you can’t participate here. They don’t impose consequences like if you say that here you’ll pay a fine or spend 30 days in prison or lose your job, etc. They can control who participates in their network, which gets into the freedom of participation territory.
You just want to be able to impose your own consequences basically since the law won’t impose any on the people you find distasteful. That’s all this is for.
“a right does not absolve you of the responsibility and consequences of that right.”
The right is given by law but the responsibilities are apparently levied not by the law but by…you and other righteous vague, undefined, social groups, sth sth?! Make that make sense.
Wow you're terrible. And an extreme hypocrite. Go fuck yourself. You'd do the world a favour.
go die👎🏽
They did. They learned that you are the fascists and that losing you and people like you because of your baby feelings about being mad that you're not in control of the censorship on the platform would improve the platform, not harm it.
You're the Nazis.
wow this is so impeccably out of touch, I'm so bored💀
Feel free to self censor. Glad Substack doesn't capitulate to this arrogant nonsense though.
Authoritarians gonna attempt to oppress.
Thank you for speaking up about this platforms lack of action.
dang they haven’t - what’s wrong with this app
I don’t like Nazis. At all. But it’s free speech, man. Let the haters hate. Just don’t give them more air than necessary.
I don’t think “let the haters hate 😎😜” is a great response to the calling for the erasing of entire groups of people, but I guess that’s just a different opinion 👍
Nazis don't call for this, that would be the Jews and the left, faggot.
Not even sure what this means. Try speaking English.
It could not have been more clear, you realize I'm not replying to you?
Good, I guess?
I was just quoting Taylor Swift. 🤣
But seriously, lots of people are hateful idiots and they should be allowed to say or write what they think. No matter how irrational and dumb.
Allowing them their say doesn’t equate to endorsing their point of view.
Our job is to not police their words, but to avoiding becoming those hateful idiots ourselves.
Now, from the standpoint of a private company, like Substack, I guess they could choose to censor whatever they want on their own platform. Then they have to decide where to draw the line.
Nazi talking points don't count as "hate" and are not protected by "free speech" in most first and third world countries.
I’m speaking from my own context in the U.S. and yes, abhorrent, hateful, racist rhetoric IS protected in America—as long as it doesn’t cross the line into harassment, actual violence, or criminal conduct. This allowance is necessary in a truly free society.
see how I said "most"? I'm aware this kind of dehumanising speech is allowed in the U.S., the president is one of the loudest dehumanizers and H*tler supporters. in most of the rest of the world, Nazi rhetoric isn't protected by free speech because there's no reason you should be saying or supporting that kind of propaganda, because human rights and dignity should never be up for debate.
Soren, does it ever bother you that people can call you the n word legally, because of Free Speech, BUT if you question the Gaza situation you’re an antisemite and it’s an actual crime.
They’re the only group above Free Speech law. And the only people who never took their shit were the same people who fly the swastika
It’s a weird moral dilemma when you think about it
Everything is up for debate. Your life will be better when you accept that other people have ideas you don't like, and that's ok.
Trump is a shithead.
But the foundational U.S. principle of free speech existed before he was born.
The reason why we must allow such hateful speech is because if we don’t, whomever holds power can decide which speech is free and which speech is not. This is somewhat illustrated by Patient Zero’s comment about the n-word vs. anti-semitism. Why is one allowed and not the other? Why is one prohibited and not the other?
At some point you’re going to choose the evil terrible nazis or the fucks that rape and eat children. There were no NatSocs in the epstein files.
There are other options.
I become less convinced of that with every middle eastern war my country goes into for israels benefit that I am paying for.
No there's not. Everyone who isn't antisemitic is a worthless pussy.
Is this some kind of Russian troll account?
I've noticed that boomers call everyone who disagrees with them a "russian troll". You know "Russiagate" was debunked, right? Why don't you retards come up with a better line?
Haha. First, “Russian troll” is shorthand for bots, hackers and trolls from anywhere. I have no opinion of all that so-called Russia gate hoo ha.
Second, I was born in 1971 which puts me firmly in GenX territory.
Third, racism is not generational; it’s universal So, congratulations on being human, I guess?
Yeah I'm not sure where everyone's gonna move to but I found that account the other day and thought I'd shove it deep into the recesses of my mind and live in ignorance.
I just can't believe it's so blatant and hasn't been taken down
I share the concern. There’s a difference between protecting open discourse and failing to act on explicit harm. Platforms earn loyalty through how they handle moments like this. I hope Substack chooses wisely.
this title made me scream. and you are correct.
BARF. thank you for writing this and pointing out this fucking atrocity on substack’s part
awwwww poor man baby, too misogynistic to see the issue, aw gosh :((( and calling people slurs, too! you’re just not appreciatd enough, huh? :((
ohh! I forgot to take my schizophrenia meds! I’m so sorry- I only thought I saw a transphobic misogynistic piece of poorly packaged horse shit! my apologies, O Wise Man of the Superior Genders! Head as empty as a flowerpot, darlin <3
also, by the way, darlin, if you're gonna insult someone, you should at least refrain from calling someone "woman" or "ma'am" if you don't know who they are :) just a thought!
I think I've applied it accurately, since you posted a news story and captioned it with the word "troons" (slur btw, just so ya know love) and also refusing to acknowledge my gender by immediately assuming I was an adult woman :) you know what they say, assuming makes an ass out of you and ming!!
It’s the toxicity of our societal understanding of free speech. These platforms themselves are responsible for propagating the misunderstanding.
You don’t have freedom of speech when you step into an online space. Not the way we’ve come to understand it, which is basically as the right to say whatever we want, whenever we want, wherever we want, with no social or legal consequences whatsoever.
Free speech is reduced within the context of a private business or a government building. Virtually all spaces online are private businesses or government spaces.
Real world analog—you can go down to the local restaurant and yell slurs inside. You won’t be arrested for yelling the slurs. You might be arrested for trespassing when you’re trespassed and refuse to leave, but that’s not the same thing as being arrested for yelling as such.
Likewise, you won’t be arrested for yelling said slurs, but no one in the restaurant is obligated to tolerate you yelling them. You’re open to a variety of social consequences for your behavior, including but not limited to being a social pariah and being banned from the establishment.
That’s freedom of speech as it actually exists. One will not be arrested; that doesn’t mean they can’t be asked to leave the establishment or trespassed for refusing to leave, or that anyone has to talk to them nicely afterward.
What the free speech mob wants, and what a place like Substack is tacitly offering when it says freedom of speech, is the warped modern understanding. It’s the understanding that I should be able to say and do anything as vile as I want any time I want, anywhere I want, and no one should be able to stop me ever, at any time.
If I call you a slur, you should have to take it. If I get banned, that’s infringing on my speech.
Except it isn’t. You don’t have the same expectations in these spaces. And honestly, I can’t think of anywhere in the world you would reasonably have the expectation of immunity to social consequences.
And a lot of our decay as a society starts with that misunderstanding. It was never true that you were free to behave any way you wanted in online spaces. It was never true that the first amendment protected people from social consequences. Trolls might feel like a ban is the same as jail, but it really isn’t.
Which is all a really long winded way of saying that absolutely, and when Substack allows harassment, deepfake porn, revenge whatever, you name it, it’s not meeting the definition of freedom of speech. It’s just failing a portion of its users in favor of the people for whom freedom of speech is the right to reduce their entire vocabulary down to racial and sexual slurs.
You can have your booth. That is allowed, like it or not, one way or the other.
You can’t have a history of harassment and public disorder.
Substack and platforms that promise you freedom of speech are really just abdicating their responsibility to manage the latter, dressing it all as the former, and this gaslighting is happening at a national level.
Ban the trolls. Educate the public. Restore actual freedom of speech.
Its their establishment, they get to choose what they do with their establishment. You don't get to choose what they do with THEIR establishment, that they manage and control. They don't have a "social responsability" or whatever cope you come up with. If you don't like their establishment, leave. There's hundreds of options available for you. May i recommend you visit bluesky or weenie hut junior? Dumb cunt.
There’s a site called Bluesky. Go indulge your censorship over there.
Blue sky awaits you comrade
DO BETTER SUBSTACK
Thank you for writing this and naming the uncomfortable truth so clearly. As someone from Germany, this topic carries a different weight. There can be no excuse for giving space to this kind of thinking.
Platforms are not neutral when they allow hate to organize and spread. Silence is not harmless. I’m grateful you spoke up.
yep yep yep! thanks for sharing your voice on this aaron
Thank you, Aaron. I wasn't even aware that the Nazi page was a thing until today. I will never understand how the support team or whoever's supposed to be responsible to handle hate/harassment can continue to do nothing.
thank you for making a post about this 🫶
I’ve been hearing a lot about this going on. It’s insane.
I’m currently writing a post as well on what I’ve seen since returning to the platform and it is horrendous. I’m so glad we’re all speaking up about what’s happening and their lack of action
you have motivated me to continue writing my thoughts about this whole situation… thanks, dayana!
Ah really you didn’t miss me? Whatever will I do with myself now? Nut job.
Don’t like the nazis, don’t read the nazis. Block them, ignore them.