1. in terms of these "should they be fired for their tweets & bad opinions" controversies, the one I remain most conflicted about -- I mean genuinely torn -- is Quinn Norton.
-
-
5. I think the most charitable possible view of Norton's thinking on Nazis is that it is super-naive. It comes from a place of extreme, radical innocence.
Show this thread -
6. Being charitable, we can say that Norton thought it was possible to befriend Nazis & talk with them in their own language without being effected. Her assumption was she could pull them to her, not that they would drag her down. Which is naive & wrong but not vile.
Show this thread -
7. The question then becomes (if we accept the most charitable possible view of Norton) whether being super-naive is firing offense. When you're job includes writing on politics (as she was going to) I think it is.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This bit is an example: slurs are absolutely lingua franca among the people Quinn engaged with, because, well, they’re bad people with bad ideas. The slur normalization didn’t arise sui generis, it’s part and parcel of what the alt-right is all about
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
are you really taking this at face value?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
there are plenty of traditions, radical and not, that do not believe this is a crackpot idea: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/11/23/conversion-via-twitter-westboro-baptist-church-megan-phelps-roper …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.