Facebook Removes Congressman’s Post for Inciting Violence

Reading Time: 4 minutes.

Is Facebook finally looking to undo the damage they’ve done to this country? Facebook removed a U.S. Congressman’s post on Facebook, a move that shouldn’t be surprising, yet it is. Facebook rarely takes action to reign in threats of violence and hate speech, yet they acted quickly this time.

Clay Higgins, a Republican from Louisiana, shared an inflamatory post, stating he’d happily murder Black Lives Matter protesters. The post is a common sentiment among conservatives and those on militia pages, but Facebook seems to hold politicians to a higher standard than their user base.

Which, really, is exactly how it should be, but the difference shouldn’t be this drastic.

Inciting Violence

Conservatives often show up to protests with guns. When they marched against the mask orders that could have saved tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of lives if enforced, they did so armed. Police didn’t bother them in the same way they did Black Lives Matter protesters. People suggested that one of the reasons may be that conservatives show up armed. BLM protesters have now been doing the same, but have still been met with violence.

Strange.

In a response to Black men showing up to protests armed, taking advantage of the second amendment Republicans claim to love so much, one Republican took issue with this particular group, for some reason.

Curious.

He posted, along with a photo of Black men with guns at a protest, “One way ticket fellas. Have your affairs in order. Me? …I wouldn’t even spill my beer. I’d drop any 10 of you where you stand.” The post went on, “Nothing personal. We just eliminate the threat. We don’t care what color you are … If you show up like this … you won’t walk away.”

Yes, he was threatening to murder people for showing up to a protest armed, a stance he didn’t take when the protesters were white. He said he’d kill them without even spilling his beer.

Why is he killing people while drinking beer in his fantasies anyway?

Facebook removed Clay Higgins’ post. He, seemingly, considers this a grave injustice. He posted on Facebook later, “No, I did not remove my post. America is being manipulated into a new era of government control. Your liberty is threatened from within.” Yes, he’s claiming that Facebook, the private company, is controlling the government… of which Higgins is a member of. Apparently trying to stop people from glorifying lynchings is just too far in Higgins’ mind.

A Long History of White Conservatives and Gun Control

Clay Higgins is just holding up a long tradition of Republicans in favor of gun control. You may think of the NRA and Republican Party as staunch defenders of the second amendment, but the truth is, they’re more than happy to limit those rights when certain people own guns.

Back in the late 1960’s, the Black Panthers marched with guns, as it was their right to do so. They were marching for equality, something politicians still push back on. The NRA teamed up with Republicans, including Ronald Reagan, to write legislation to limit open carry and prevent people from carrying loaded weapons in California’s state capital. This was specifically to target the Black Panther protests, though, in the NRA’s defense, at the time they opposed any organized group that was armed, including those of white supremacists. The politicians they worked with, however, had far more obvious motivations.

We’re now seeing the same push back, with Republicans like Clay Higgins threatening to kill protesters, and even Donald Trump, now president, having asked his followers to “rough up” Black protesters at his rallies. History doesn’t repeat, but it certainly rhymes.

Free Speech Complaint

We also have to discuss the absurdity of free speech complaints every time a social network removes a Republican’s post for being overtly racist, violent, or false. Social networks are private companies and have the right to control what’s on their platforms. The fact is, hate speech, harassment, and calls for violence usually destroy a social network. Turns out it’s hard to have any discussions when people threaten violence constantly.

Threats of violence have always been non-protected speech. You can’t threaten to kill someone without a potential assault charge. You can’t shout “Fire” in a theater. And, I’d argue, that even hate speech online falls under this category, as, by dehumanizing and directing hate at a group of people, they are inciting violence. I believe that even hate speech is not protected speech.

However, regardless of the law (currently hate speech is safe, though prosecutors can use it as evidence to support a hate crime charge), threatening violence, directly saying you will kill people, is a threat. That is in no way protected speech. If it had been directed at an individual, a specific person, Higgins could be charged. Facebook is not required by law to have hateful or violent speech forced upon them. They can moderate however they want, it’s their business.

If Higgins doesn’t like it, he can leave. Parler is still technically up, for now.

What Needs to Happen

This was the tip of the iceberg. People make comments like this all the time on Facebook. Identifying potentially inflamatory posts is easy. Facebook should remove these posts as soon as anyone reports them. However, they can also use machine learning to identify posts that may have inflammatory messages, and remove them. The problem is that Facebook knows this would upset conservatives. They know that Republicans on their platform stir trouble and create conflict. That conflict drives up views and engagement with Facebook.

Until hate and violence stop being profitable for Facebook, they’re never going to apply these rules universally and rapidly for all users.But at least they’re making some progress in preventing elected officials from inciting more mass killings. They still have a lot of work to do.

---

Sources

• Susan Cornwell, Reuters
• Joshua Manson, BuzzFeed News
• Cristina Marcos, The Hill
• Thad Morgan, The History Channel
• Frank Smyth, The Washington Post (Opinion)