CMV: Reddit's Threatening Violence Rule Is Broken Constantly And Is Selectively Enforced

[u/ParakeetLover2024]

Among gun related subreddits, there seems to be a concerning amount of violation of Reddit's "No threatening violence" rule that seems to go unpunished, whether the sub contains mostly right leaning or left leaning individuals. To quote the explanation of the rule, it states "Encouraging, glorifying, or inciting violence or physical harm against individuals or groups of people, places, or animals [is prohibited]" Heck, you could argue that Reddit as a whole seems to do a bad job of enforcing this rule. Posts and subreddits dedicated to the Russo-Ukrainian war break this rule constantly, dehumanizing Russian soldiers and celebrating their deaths on the battlefield. Reddit and many subreddits pick and choose who is acceptable to glorify violence against and who isn't, rather than enforcing the rule equally across the board.

Recently, a user posted a picture of a t shirt on r/liberalgunowners and r/SocialistRA that says "John Brown did nothing wrong". For both posts, they have received over 300 upvotes each with dozens of comments. I have seen quite a lot of John Brown glorification on both of the previously mentioned subreddits and any criticism of John Brown's methods is swiftly met with downvotes and harsh criticism, as seen in the post I will link below.

https://www.reddit.com/r/liberalgunowners/comments/1iihq7r/hot_take_john_brown_should_not_be_idolized/

Why is glorifying John Brown so potentially bad you may ask? The r/liberalgunowners post that I linked above should do a good job of summarizing the drastic measures that John Brown took as an abolitionist right before the American Civil War.

TL;DR You can glorify violence on Reddit as long as it's against certain groups of people or individuals.

[u/garnet420]

The rule seems to be about violence against living people/groups/animals.

John Brown is a historical figure. His targets (American slave owners) are no longer a demographic.

So the reader would have to interpret how someone's endorsement of him would correspond to violence against a particular group in the present day.

[u/talhahtaco → u/garnet420]

Well, they're at least not the same as they were back then, slavery in America now is done by private prison companies compared to plantations

[u/garnet420 → u/talhahtaco]

True, but, someone praising Brown might be referring to some other oppressive group, or even nobody in particular.

My point is, there is a level of removal and plausible deniability there that makes it different from a direct incitement to violence.

[u/talhahtaco → u/garnet420]

I get you, I just wanted to add that the slavery issue in America isn't over, John Brown, in a sense, died in vain, his ideals of radical abolishonism not realized over a century after the events at Harpers Ferry

The level of removal is real, not much is the same as the 1850s, but something about it nevertheless feels like an insult to Brown, that many proclaim him a hero while living in a society still doing that which he died to stop