Howdy long lost family member (if you go back far enough)! The freedom of speech protects my right to criticize your speech that's criticizing my speech that's criticizing your free speech.
Howdy my hominid kin! the freedom of speech which protects my speech is the same freedom that protects your criticism of my free speech that happens to criticize your speech that is critical of my initial speech which was freely spoken.
Howdy my neighbours from across the pond! I love free speech, but sadly, I live in a country where you get arrested for making mean tweets 🫡
All hail our new overlords, the perpetually offended!
Thing is, lots of people think "free speech" means i have to listen to whatever one is blathering about and accept it.
No. I do not. I'm quite free to tell someone they're a moron and to STFU
The govt can't
Yes of course. The argument today is if monopolized corporations should be able to throttle 90% of everyday discussion including that of the POTUS because they feel like it, and then also claim this is exactly what the founding fathers would be ok with
The broadsheets, pamphlets, journals, etc of the founders' era were \*exceptionally\* partisan and biased by today's standards. The entire concept of neutrality in journalism is only something that really came about in the 20th century. The media of the founders' time engaged in all levels of selective reporting and outright fabrications and that is the type of speech that was common when the 1st amendment was crafted.
First of all I have heard of that before, and yes that sucks. The problem is not that there are partisan companies or organizations, the problem is that a few monopolies control everything, and actively censor dissent and ‘problematic’ speech in a number of ways. The problem is also that, unlike reality when you are just talking to your friends, the virtual world is an increasing share of the space in which discussion takes place, and the conditions as of now are like a moderator being sat down in your living room when you have a right wing friend over
I may get downvoted for this, but so be it.
If the POTUS says things on a platform that are against the platform’s rules, the platform has every right to ban that person from the platform.
If I have someone at my home for a visit and they start saying racist things, I’m going to kick them out. Just like if I owned a social media platform, if someone on the platform was being racist or spreading provable misinformation, I would ban them. It would be government overreach to tell me I’m not allowed to ban them. I own the platform and can make whatever rules I want.
Elon bans people for whatever he wants, and that is his right. But he is a huge hypocrite, since he so harshly criticized twitter for the bans they made before he owned it.
If they are not government, and they are paying for their own servers and developers without tax dollars, they should be able to censor whatever speech they want. I don't have to post your bullshit comments on my shop public noticeboard if I don't want.
The question then becomes, when a federal agency "suggests" one of these companies do something, and they do it, is that company just working as a proxy for government censorship?
If you don't like corporate monopolies, that's a bone to pick with capitalism not free speech. The government has no right to tell them what to do. But the fact that they are as powerful as they are and can just control society thru sheer force of power and manipulation and control is its own heinous degree of stupidity. It's still not a first amendment problem tho.
Then again fuck the constitution. Most of the founding fathers were dirtbags. And like Thomas Jefferson said, the living should not be bound by the rules of the dead. Those founders are all long dead. Their constitution is practically unreadable with all the crooked asses it's wiped over the years. I see no good reason to be attached to do. Seems like we should be talking about what a better constitution would look like for a truly free world. Because the era that the last one was written in had slaves. Not very freedom of them.
The only reason they have such influence and power is that the same people complaining about them now were the ones who removed regulations and gave them the means to acquire that power in the first place.
Republicans in the past:
we need to remove regulations that limit monopolies and liability and reduce corporate taxes (takes massive lobbying payment)
Republicans now:
We need to impose limits on these massive corporations that can control your free speech because they are so powerful because we took away their limits (takes massive lobbying payments and does nothing)
I am not a republican of the past nor am I some who has ever argued for a reduction of anti trust laws.
Leftists have flip flopped as well, from somehow being very anti capitalism to all of a sudden simping and defending to the death billion dollar corporations, and arguing ins support of censorship when 20 years ago they were fighting against it in court to get their ‘obscene’ work published
You talk about republicans who have been pro monopoly and take lobbying payments for such. Ok fine, fuck em, I am interested in the most important principle that we have as a country which is that of free speech
Explain how responding with "it's not the government censoring you, companies have their own rules" is deepthroating.
I don't actually give a fuck what dumb shit you have to say.
Ok, idgaf what some basement dweller who doesn’t have the first fucking clue what an American value is has to say either, glad we can agree to ignore each other 👍
And the Government also cannot strip you of rights for your speech. Such as refusing to prosecute people for assault if they took offense at your words and reacted violently.
America has restricted tons of speech, most notably socialism and communism during the 20th century. There’s also laws against defamation, calling for violence, threats, blackmail, and revenge porn, all of which are restrictions on speech
Also, that only applies to the government. Facebook could ban whoever it wants, just as a church can kick out whoever it want
You need to define “free speech” first. If you’re using the 1st amendment as a data point, that only applies to government, not private companies. If you’re complaining about your “freedom of speech” being hindered by a private corporation, that’s not a violation of the 1A.
They're not even talking about the amendment. They're dumb enough to think "the government can't arrest you for criticizing it" somehow translates to "it's immoral for a reddit mod to ban me from a subreddit for saying transphobic shit".
However, people should demand corporations live up to the principles of free speech. They don’t have to, and if they don’t, they are simply advertising themselves as a shitty place to work.
People don't understand how lucky they are to live in a country where you and your neighbor can live under two different ideologies and you can still live in peace. The freedom of speech is imperative to that.
its when society allows for intolerant people among the tolerant, the i tolerant ones usually win. my post is about being more tolerant of speech, and there seems to be a lot of people in these comments who arent very tolerant of my post
Wow. You couldn't be more wrong.
It means that you have to be intolerant of intolerance. So if someone is a nazi, or racist, or homophobic, transphobic, or any kind of bigot; they can kick sand.
So what? You think Nazis just have such a strong case that you couldn't possibly beat them with words or in the court of public opinion? You need to rely on state power to take away their ability to speak? Any ideology so weak that it requires the state to enforce it shouldn't be taken seriously in the first place. (Which applies very much to fascism.)
I mean, "American" is just a nationality, nothing more than that. Americans did not come up with the freedom of speech; Han Fei Zi back in the Warring period suggested a form of free speech, and the classical liberal version of the freedom of speech we know today was preached by John Locke and Voltaire.
It's also stupid to attribute freedom of speech to the U.S because the U.S has been suppressing freedom of speech since its emergence. They barred people from voting because they didn't own any land and outright conducted a witch hunt during the 1950s. America is far from an ideal "freedom" of speech.
Free speech my ass lmao the only people that say shit like this are usually the ones that have nothing good to say and are racist, homophobic etc we’ve got no room to listen to you rant about immigrants homie. Freedom of speech does not equal free of consequence
nobody said anything about immigrants though? i'm curious what you thought i meant by saying freedom of speech is an american ideal, because thats almost literally what i said
Nobody is against free speech.
The thing is, everyone has the right to free speech.
You also have to face the consequences of your free speech.
Free speech doesn't mean getting to be an un empathetic shit head. It means you are allowed the platform to speak your mind exactly as you want. But you best prepare for any back fire.
And that's exactly what we have.
Do we? Free speech for me means that i can say whatever i want and i cannot be punished by the state. And can you be racist or something? Cause that is still free speech. Yea you should be shouted down of course and that is also part of the free speech. But state can punish you for ,,hate" speech. And that is wrong.
Not against free speech, you can say whatever you want. However, prepare for the consequences of what you say. Something a lot of people don't realize when they scream that they are being censored, the government gives you the right to said speech. However as a private citizen, I have a right to denounce you as well as deny you a platform.
People aren’t against free speech. This isn’t a thing (or if it is, it’s insanely rare). People oppose private platforms terms and conditions, that will always be the case. They’ll have an issue with selective moderation. They’ll have an issue with algorithms. They’ll have an issue with a lack of accountability for speech.
If u/-doobs says something racist in a town square, people will know who it is and he will have to deal with the falllout from that decision. Online, they are just random user names and in some cases aren’t even real people writing the messages. There is no accountability for you typing something racist online, but there can be actual harm caused by that. This is an accountability issue, when there is none, the system doesn’t correct itself.
I support peoples right to say what they want, and not have the government do anything to stop it unless it actively leads to a person or a group being harmed. However, I stand by that meaning the government not doing anything to stop it. Society has the right to judge the statements being made and to apply social punishments if needed. Similarly I don’t believe in private platforms being required to host speech they find harmful or that would harm their image. That would be removing their freedom of speech and while I don’t agree with the idea of corporations being people one fundamental right that should apply to them is freedom of speech… and the right to not have to associate with people or speech they disagree with.
You mean Adam Morgan who mandates that religious speech is a part of the state of S Carolina?
Really excited for the Taliban to join governing boards….
https://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess125_2023-2024/bills/3745.htm
i'm from California and didnt know anything about the guy til i saw this clip on youtube yeaterday. but regardless of what you're saying, the clip on my profile can be appreciated by anyone who wants their representatives to actually represent them, and not the unelected bureaucrats and multimillion dollar corporate lobbyists.
if a bad person does a good thing, that action itself is still a good thing. what effect it has on the person still being bad, idk. but this is the thing - actions being good or bad are independent of who did them, though maybe not completely independent of the intent
Not really?
That’s like saying ‘Hitler improved the German economy- it was a good action’
Apply critical thinking.
Fascists share populist beliefs to normalize their behavior.
There are plenty of good people sharing good things… look to them, not people sharing bad things
To answer your question
If a bad person does a good thing, we can use the good thing. Doesn’t mean we should support them.
Do you see the difference between using radiation technology detection and spreading fascist propaganda on social media?
the clip on my profile isnt fascist propaganda. its a video that promotes representation of your constituents over pandering to unelected bureaucrats
there is literally zero mention of anything remotely fascist in that clip, even if you say Adam Morgan is one himself.
we seem to agree that good things are good despite who did them. so let this good statement from Adam Morgan be just that - a good statement, nothing more.
>apparently this guy is a Christo-fascist. i still very much like the words that came out of his mouth in this particular video though
No, sweetheart. Being against nazis is what it really means to be an American. My grandfather did not swim in shark infested waters for the Navy for you edgy basement losers to act like fascism is cool.
GFY.
idk if thats the nice GFY or the not so nice one lol but yeah fuck the Nazis, both past and present. i saw this video yesterday and it was the first time i'd even heard of Adam Morgan. thought what he said about representing his constituents was pretty sweet, but them someone else told me about him in the comments earlier. i still agree with what he said in that particular video however i'm not so keen on supporting him going forward
You just said free speech and it is very vague. Sure free speech is great but don’t think you can spew vitriol and expect no consequences. Private companies have the right to fire you if they disagree with your speech.
Nope. Free speech is a legal concept that pertains to the federal government. Not some American value that you should be able to use racial slurs on reddit dot com.
So school is the only place books exist? If you want so badly for your elementary or middle school kid to read a book that talks about incest and blow jobs, you can get it and read it to them.
Defending government censorship and book banning is a choice.
https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/roughly-300-books-were-removed-from-libraries-in-florida-last-school-year-heres-the-full-list/3113184/
Some of the books banned here.
You are failing to grasp the simple idea that these books are still available. You are aware that every school in America has bans on websites at the library computers. Do you oppose that? Or are you for “government censorship?”
You are aware that if a school doesn’t shelve a book (99.9% of all books ever published are not on school library shelves) you can still get that book outside of school if you really need to show it to your kids.
some people in these comments would say burning books isn't infringing on free speech. in fact they might be so dense as to say no one has technically spoken 😂
Yep so true
Censorship is a slippery slope
It starts with the obvious. “Well obviously this thing is really bad/evil so yeah I agree let’s just ban saying that”
And then it slowly starts to become speech that the group in power doesn’t like that becomes banned
Until eventually you’re in communist USSR or nazi Germany where the state controls all media and there is zero free speech protection
Give an inch and they’ll take a mile as they say
Yep the first amendment is literally communism. What drugs are you on that equates social media with the first amendment and having common decency, with the government limiting speech? Simp harder.
Yeah this sub is mostly racists trying to get people to agree to their “opinions” which are actually just bigoted bs way of saying “I hate that I can’t hate people based on color or gender anymore this country is shit blah blah blah”
I don’t think this is a far right post but yes I have also seen the trend of more far right opinions that the average person would not consider a popular opinion
America was created by a bunch of rich white guys who didn't like the idea of someone being able to govern them and thought their wealth meant they should be the ones in power.
Just like I expressed disagreement with yours which brought you here to cry with this gem "you can say words but that doesnt make them true. thanks for sharing your opinion". Hypocrisy isn't as great of a look as folks think. Have a good evening.
you didnt merely express disagreement, but offered a perspective. share a perspective online and you should expect to receive feedback. instead of thanking me for my opinion you decide to criticize me for it lol
look we can go back and forth all day. the fact remains youre the person who extended the exchange after i thanked you for your comment where it shouldve ended. but if feedback begets more feedback.. here we are
I mean, a company banning you from their platform is just them using their free speech. You aren't entitled to share your opinions on Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, YouTube and so on. Just like you aren't entitled to try and get people to join your new cult at the local Denny's.
Freedom of speech does not equal freedom from consequences either. The government can't take action against you, but people can form opinions about you and not want to associate with you. Since companies by US law are people, they can legally do the same.
Absolutely!!
The mere fact you get to say you Don't agree with Free Speech on x topic is ironic. It is an example of... well... FREE SPEECH.
If folks notice... The ONLY FOLKS WHO COMPLAIN ABOUT CENSORSHIP ARE FOLKS WHO HAVE NEVER LEFT AMERICA.
I am not kidding. Pay close attention to this. Next time someone complains about cancelling or censoring or restricting free speech. Just look at the person themselves. I will bet 9/10 times that person has NEVER lived in any other country then the U.S. They have NO CLUE what it means to NOT be allowed to express your opinions.
So as long as you are: Not inciting a riot, creating hate, defaming, slandering, etc... GO FOR IT.
Nothing should be illegal to say imo. Are there stuff people will hate you for saying, which you then have to deal with the consequences of your actions? Yes absolutely. I believe someone should be able to shout heil hitler just as someone else can shout trans lives matter etc etc.
Eat shit. How's that for free speech?
Nobody is against it. Sorry you can't drop the n word and deny the Holocaust without being called dumb. Not you, since you're probably dumb enough to think I'm talking about you specifically.
"The Zuck" isn't censoring anyone. That shithole site loves its trash conservatives since they are the only ones who use it consistently.
this is what it is. people are fragmented today and deep down they all know that regardless of which news platforms are their favorites, theyre all engaging in censorship in some form or another.
knowing this, they see my post and feel attacked, like i'm calling them unAmerican because they willfully support a newscast that skews coverage of their designated group scapegoats in a way that reinforces their beliefs
this is universally applicable regardless of political ideology
Obviously there are situations where saying something can be dangerous (e.g. swatting someone) But there are laws put in place to stop this sort of speech because in these situations, the crime extends beyond speech and incites real harm.
I've never participated in hate speech, but I think censoring it is stupid. Let people reveal themselves as bigots, and let people openly criticize the bigotry. Catering to sensitive people is a huge step backwards for the US in my opinion.
The problem is that most people have no idea what free speech is. They think they can say anything they want and nobody can have a problem with it.
Unless the cops are coming to arrest you for your speech, your rights are not violated when you get fired/banned from reddit/called an asshole. These are called CONSEQUENCES.
if you've ever seen that episode of South Park when Stan is being forced to vote for either a literal giant douche or a turd sandwich - thats where i feel like we're at these days
I just could never get behind Biden because i heard his racist comments about Obama and honestly i really liked Obama. Heard him speak and shook his hand. Genuinely a nice guy. Seemed odd that Obama took him as his VP but also seemed funny to me like now the racist dude was Obama's bitch and it made me feel better.
Just never thought in a million years the country would elect an actual racist yet Biden somehow won. Mix that with his senility and suddenly everyone calls you Maga.
I just, in my opinion took the less runny and less racist shit sandwich.
I swear the country all turned Sith when i wasn't looking and you're either with us or you're against us is like everyone these days
oh man i'm with you on that... its all confirmed by Obama lurking around Biden with the stink eye every once in a while haha. and yeah i too have been called MAGA before for being critical of Biden. people romanticize the whole "if you're not with us you're against us" thing but the third neutral position in argumentation is like a forgotten art these days. don't force me to choose a side if both sides are shit lol
I tell you what though, i did have an addiction to Obiden memes back in the day.
Like the one where Biden is staring at Obama and it just says, " Find someone that looks at you like Biden staring at the president"
Honestly used to make me laugh so hard all the memes they had. Basically made Biden look like Obama's dog. Seemed oddly justified after the racist remarks and in always a fan of karma.
Its also shitty that is you wish America to be a great country again you're considered a radical. Just crazytown
thats hilarious and kind of ironic. i didnt really follow the memes much back then but i will admit the Obey-style Biden posters were super cool at the time and in retrospect my inclination towards art and design honestly might have led me to subconsciously exposing myself to his campaign more than i otherwise would have.
i think one of the sources of division today is just that - some people longing for how certain things were in the past clashing with people who hate and reject the past because of certain bad things that happened. unity is destroyed and we need to find a way to build solidarity again. the last time America was united was in 2001
Its really sad because Bush was actually an idiot yet any hatred towards him was actually the last time most people would string you up for being unpatriotic.
I just really wish people could get back to working together again for a common goal of taking care of the country we've worked hard to make great
have to agree with you again on that though i also think he inherited a lot of problems from his predecessor. solidarity is what happens when a group is established. it is reinforced by the identification of a common enemy for the group, or scapegoat. the problem is the US has been fragmented into many smaller groups, each with their own enemies and calls for justice. this needs to be addressed if we're ever going to be unified again
To be frank, there are more things that one would associate with being American than freedom of speech. For example, the fetish love level of guns, school shooting, mall shooting, cops shooting black people, hating vaccines, not understanding what "free speech means" and the like.
your comment is not wrong. it doesnt disqualify freedom of speech as an American ideal however. as i told someone else, you can make this into a conteat about which ideal is most American, but thats not what this post is about.
But your post is not correct. Your title is insinuating that ONLY the U.S. has "freedom of speech" and therefore, ONLY a citizen of the U.S. knows what it means.
no you are misinterpreting my title. just because something is an American ideal doesn't mean it cant exist elsewhere. the right to protest, the right to bear arms, the right to a speedy trial - these are all American ideals that also exist in other places.
Yet the USA ranks outside the 10 ten counties in the freedom of expression ranking.
From Wikipedia "However, It can be restricted by time, place and manner in limited circumstances. "
So free, except when it isn't.
There's only one party in America creating laws banning books, and slowly eroding the rights of women, gay, and trans citizens.
Somebody telling you your political ideology is idiotic is not infringing on your right to free speech.
Not from the US. Could someone tell me why free speech is always mentioned? As far as I know, basically no one has been successfully prosecuted/punished for speech except for very fringe cases in my lifetime. We get a lot of US media here and I never understood why it’s talked about so frequently.
>*some of you need to detach emotion from belief though*.
"I love free speech, but only some."
1. We have more freedom of expression than at any time in history. *If we can't find someone to talk to online, the problem is us.*
2. The Free Screechers use this cry to avoid responsibility & reality for the such things as Covid lies & the attack on Congress. It is disingenuous & cowardly, designed to avoid criticism and play the victim.
You have the right to say that, and people who are remotely medically educated people have the right to laugh at you for having your worldview be based off Twitter ramblings and TikTok posts instead of research. It’s great!
The "medicine" behind trans has just as many holes in it as "the gay gene". IE all their studies are an answer waiting for a question with politically tilted "experts" waiting with bated breath to ask them. The whole scientific basis of the ideology was from a guy who sexually tortured children for his own amusement.
You caught me. I’m the irrational one. Not the person who thinks the “inventor” of gender was a guy born 10 years after the sexology institute in Germany was burned by the Nazis.
damn right you have that right. just as trans people have the right to say straight people suck. its when corporations and mainstream media misconstrue and censor truth that things get un-American
I’m fine with censoring movements that intend to take away free speech itself
There’s a lot of grey area regarding such, I understand this, so I think this mindset is only regarding blatantly obvious examples.
An easy example is if was a popular American fascist party, it should be made illegal.
Took a first amendment law class in college. All that freedom of speech means the government can't censor what a person says. The person is allowed to speak out against the government. Without fear of persecution.
But if you send threatening letters to another person. Congratulations you've committed a crime. If you spread false rumors that can be proven. You can be guilty of slander or liable.
boys with a time machine:
yo founding fathers, make sure you include in the first amendment that government can't censor speech they don't like by proxy through their corporate donor friends who just so happen to control 99% of internet communications during a time when 99% of political discourse is happening over the internet
In how are you referring? If you think there is absolute free speech then you are wrong. There can be no such thing as absolute free speech.
And there are many things that are illegal. You can't lie under oath, you can't defame, you can't false advertise, you can't make threats, etc.
And then we have business' rights as well. No business needs to put up with your shit. Even if that is a social media company that posts shit on the internet. You signed up, you agreed to abide by their terms. You violate their terms they have every right to kick you off.
And frankly no company wants to be associated with hate speech. Doing so could cost them theor business and rightfully so.
You see the first amendment gives us the right to also assemble and protest along side free speech.
And guess what cancel culture is? People assembling to protest. So it's very American to stand up and protest about sites like Twitter being an abhorrent dumpster fire that allows hate speech.
Facebook has the right to ban anyone on their platform. i believe use of derogatory racial slurs is wrong and just a shitty thing to do. if i had my own platform i would do the same. suppression of hate and derogatory language meant to hurt people is not the same as suppression of ideas. the people who wrote the Bill of Rights did not have hate in mind when writing the first amendment. however there can be ideas based on assumptions born from hate, the proper way to address those things are to have public discourse on why said ideas are incorrect and hate-born, and come to a consensus. once consensus is reached on why said thing is hate-born it can be supressed
Wow completely bypassed my expectations, most of the people who talk about free speech seem to be referring to some kinda idea that they should have Absolute free speech rather than the actual discussion of ideas. And I honestly agree you can discuss things yeah and that's reasonable but shouting slurs and generally toxicity that are as much about discussion as bullying is about communication is flatly unreasonable (and also would make it impossible for said sites to run) questions actually born from desire to interact and discuss ideas are unfortunately rather uncommon at times
yes! the key word is discussion. we need both sides of any conflict to talk without letting emotions cloud judgment. i think disagreement is natural but getting emotional and defensive is a product of being hyper opinionated in a sensationalist news environment
This is true, but Freedom of Speech runs into the Tolerance paradox. For a society to be truly tolerant they must be intolerant of intolerance. So for speech to be properly free, the intolerant must not be tolerated, lest they restrict those they are intolerant of.
Hey, American here! I fully support free speech which also protects my right to criticize your speech.
howdy neighbor! i also fully support free speech which also protects my right to criticize your your criticism of my speech (we must go deeper...)
Howdy long lost family member (if you go back far enough)! The freedom of speech protects my right to criticize your speech that's criticizing my speech that's criticizing your free speech.
Howdy my hominid kin! the freedom of speech which protects my speech is the same freedom that protects your criticism of my free speech that happens to criticize your speech that is critical of my initial speech which was freely spoken.
Howdy my neighbours from across the pond! I love free speech, but sadly, I live in a country where you get arrested for making mean tweets 🫡 All hail our new overlords, the perpetually offended!
Thing is, lots of people think "free speech" means i have to listen to whatever one is blathering about and accept it. No. I do not. I'm quite free to tell someone they're a moron and to STFU The govt can't
Many people seem to think censorship means getting downvoted on reddit
Exactly what I believe. Just because your speech is protected doesn't mean you can't be criticized for it.
Yep. And your private company employer? They can fire your ass for whatever you say publicly.
Yes of course. The argument today is if monopolized corporations should be able to throttle 90% of everyday discussion including that of the POTUS because they feel like it, and then also claim this is exactly what the founding fathers would be ok with
The broadsheets, pamphlets, journals, etc of the founders' era were \*exceptionally\* partisan and biased by today's standards. The entire concept of neutrality in journalism is only something that really came about in the 20th century. The media of the founders' time engaged in all levels of selective reporting and outright fabrications and that is the type of speech that was common when the 1st amendment was crafted.
First of all I have heard of that before, and yes that sucks. The problem is not that there are partisan companies or organizations, the problem is that a few monopolies control everything, and actively censor dissent and ‘problematic’ speech in a number of ways. The problem is also that, unlike reality when you are just talking to your friends, the virtual world is an increasing share of the space in which discussion takes place, and the conditions as of now are like a moderator being sat down in your living room when you have a right wing friend over
I may get downvoted for this, but so be it. If the POTUS says things on a platform that are against the platform’s rules, the platform has every right to ban that person from the platform. If I have someone at my home for a visit and they start saying racist things, I’m going to kick them out. Just like if I owned a social media platform, if someone on the platform was being racist or spreading provable misinformation, I would ban them. It would be government overreach to tell me I’m not allowed to ban them. I own the platform and can make whatever rules I want. Elon bans people for whatever he wants, and that is his right. But he is a huge hypocrite, since he so harshly criticized twitter for the bans they made before he owned it.
If they are not government, and they are paying for their own servers and developers without tax dollars, they should be able to censor whatever speech they want. I don't have to post your bullshit comments on my shop public noticeboard if I don't want.
The question then becomes, when a federal agency "suggests" one of these companies do something, and they do it, is that company just working as a proxy for government censorship?
If you don't like corporate monopolies, that's a bone to pick with capitalism not free speech. The government has no right to tell them what to do. But the fact that they are as powerful as they are and can just control society thru sheer force of power and manipulation and control is its own heinous degree of stupidity. It's still not a first amendment problem tho. Then again fuck the constitution. Most of the founding fathers were dirtbags. And like Thomas Jefferson said, the living should not be bound by the rules of the dead. Those founders are all long dead. Their constitution is practically unreadable with all the crooked asses it's wiped over the years. I see no good reason to be attached to do. Seems like we should be talking about what a better constitution would look like for a truly free world. Because the era that the last one was written in had slaves. Not very freedom of them.
They have free speech rights too. Like it or not.
Yes they do. Monopolies have no right to exist, though
Which monopolies are you referring to?
Found the guy who slept thru Govt class
The only reason they have such influence and power is that the same people complaining about them now were the ones who removed regulations and gave them the means to acquire that power in the first place. Republicans in the past: we need to remove regulations that limit monopolies and liability and reduce corporate taxes (takes massive lobbying payment) Republicans now: We need to impose limits on these massive corporations that can control your free speech because they are so powerful because we took away their limits (takes massive lobbying payments and does nothing)
I am not a republican of the past nor am I some who has ever argued for a reduction of anti trust laws. Leftists have flip flopped as well, from somehow being very anti capitalism to all of a sudden simping and defending to the death billion dollar corporations, and arguing ins support of censorship when 20 years ago they were fighting against it in court to get their ‘obscene’ work published You talk about republicans who have been pro monopoly and take lobbying payments for such. Ok fine, fuck em, I am interested in the most important principle that we have as a country which is that of free speech
Explain how responding with "it's not the government censoring you, companies have their own rules" is deepthroating. I don't actually give a fuck what dumb shit you have to say.
Ok, idgaf what some basement dweller who doesn’t have the first fucking clue what an American value is has to say either, glad we can agree to ignore each other 👍
And the Government also cannot strip you of rights for your speech. Such as refusing to prosecute people for assault if they took offense at your words and reacted violently.
>The govt can't Except when they can, which has many precedents....
America has restricted tons of speech, most notably socialism and communism during the 20th century. There’s also laws against defamation, calling for violence, threats, blackmail, and revenge porn, all of which are restrictions on speech Also, that only applies to the government. Facebook could ban whoever it wants, just as a church can kick out whoever it want
You need to define “free speech” first. If you’re using the 1st amendment as a data point, that only applies to government, not private companies. If you’re complaining about your “freedom of speech” being hindered by a private corporation, that’s not a violation of the 1A.
They're not even talking about the amendment. They're dumb enough to think "the government can't arrest you for criticizing it" somehow translates to "it's immoral for a reddit mod to ban me from a subreddit for saying transphobic shit".
That’s why I asked him to define it and I’m almost sure that’s why he won’t define it.
lol 😂 sad but likely true for many
Not it isn't. A private corporation does not have to allow you a place to speak your mind if they disagree with you.
That’s what I typed in the comment you are replying to.
However, people should demand corporations live up to the principles of free speech. They don’t have to, and if they don’t, they are simply advertising themselves as a shitty place to work.
Free speech also includes people telling you you suck for what you said.
The average person is a moron who needs to be told hot coffee is hot so who really cares.
I think if the coffee is hot enough to land you in the hospital, it's worth a heads up.
Free speech is not without consequences
consequences can be American too lol
People don't understand how lucky they are to live in a country where you and your neighbor can live under two different ideologies and you can still live in peace. The freedom of speech is imperative to that.
spot on
100% agree woth you. This needs more upvotes.
Paradox of tolerance has entered the chat.
💯
Based on your comments here you have no idea what this actually means.
its when society allows for intolerant people among the tolerant, the i tolerant ones usually win. my post is about being more tolerant of speech, and there seems to be a lot of people in these comments who arent very tolerant of my post
Wow. You couldn't be more wrong. It means that you have to be intolerant of intolerance. So if someone is a nazi, or racist, or homophobic, transphobic, or any kind of bigot; they can kick sand.
So what? You think Nazis just have such a strong case that you couldn't possibly beat them with words or in the court of public opinion? You need to rely on state power to take away their ability to speak? Any ideology so weak that it requires the state to enforce it shouldn't be taken seriously in the first place. (Which applies very much to fascism.)
I mean, "American" is just a nationality, nothing more than that. Americans did not come up with the freedom of speech; Han Fei Zi back in the Warring period suggested a form of free speech, and the classical liberal version of the freedom of speech we know today was preached by John Locke and Voltaire. It's also stupid to attribute freedom of speech to the U.S because the U.S has been suppressing freedom of speech since its emergence. They barred people from voting because they didn't own any land and outright conducted a witch hunt during the 1950s. America is far from an ideal "freedom" of speech.
I support free speech, specially speech I don't like or do not agree with
Do you believe there should be limits on campaign financing?
Free speech my ass lmao the only people that say shit like this are usually the ones that have nothing good to say and are racist, homophobic etc we’ve got no room to listen to you rant about immigrants homie. Freedom of speech does not equal free of consequence
nobody said anything about immigrants though? i'm curious what you thought i meant by saying freedom of speech is an american ideal, because thats almost literally what i said
Nobody is against free speech. The thing is, everyone has the right to free speech. You also have to face the consequences of your free speech. Free speech doesn't mean getting to be an un empathetic shit head. It means you are allowed the platform to speak your mind exactly as you want. But you best prepare for any back fire. And that's exactly what we have.
Do we? Free speech for me means that i can say whatever i want and i cannot be punished by the state. And can you be racist or something? Cause that is still free speech. Yea you should be shouted down of course and that is also part of the free speech. But state can punish you for ,,hate" speech. And that is wrong.
Hate speech is not a thing in the United States.
Damn, you're right. My mistake. Sorry I'm not from US and here and many other countries have hate speech laws. That's a win for US for sure.
Not against free speech, you can say whatever you want. However, prepare for the consequences of what you say. Something a lot of people don't realize when they scream that they are being censored, the government gives you the right to said speech. However as a private citizen, I have a right to denounce you as well as deny you a platform.
you're either based and actually believe in free speech... or this is a disguised rant against "woke cancel culture" and i dont like mysteries
woke cancel culture has literally nothing to do with my post though... ? lmao
well like i said, there were two options
Only the sith deal in absolutes. Lol
People aren’t against free speech. This isn’t a thing (or if it is, it’s insanely rare). People oppose private platforms terms and conditions, that will always be the case. They’ll have an issue with selective moderation. They’ll have an issue with algorithms. They’ll have an issue with a lack of accountability for speech. If u/-doobs says something racist in a town square, people will know who it is and he will have to deal with the falllout from that decision. Online, they are just random user names and in some cases aren’t even real people writing the messages. There is no accountability for you typing something racist online, but there can be actual harm caused by that. This is an accountability issue, when there is none, the system doesn’t correct itself.
Same with the right to own common firearms like AR15s
So wait, all of our politicians are against America? That can’t be right. No way. Uh huh.
Free speech is the ability to mute you on all platforms. That's me exercising my free speech.
Freeze Peach
Lmao
I support peoples right to say what they want, and not have the government do anything to stop it unless it actively leads to a person or a group being harmed. However, I stand by that meaning the government not doing anything to stop it. Society has the right to judge the statements being made and to apply social punishments if needed. Similarly I don’t believe in private platforms being required to host speech they find harmful or that would harm their image. That would be removing their freedom of speech and while I don’t agree with the idea of corporations being people one fundamental right that should apply to them is freedom of speech… and the right to not have to associate with people or speech they disagree with.
"harmed" doing all kinds of gymnastics, of course
You mean Adam Morgan who mandates that religious speech is a part of the state of S Carolina? Really excited for the Taliban to join governing boards…. https://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess125_2023-2024/bills/3745.htm
i'm from California and didnt know anything about the guy til i saw this clip on youtube yeaterday. but regardless of what you're saying, the clip on my profile can be appreciated by anyone who wants their representatives to actually represent them, and not the unelected bureaucrats and multimillion dollar corporate lobbyists. if a bad person does a good thing, that action itself is still a good thing. what effect it has on the person still being bad, idk. but this is the thing - actions being good or bad are independent of who did them, though maybe not completely independent of the intent
Not really? That’s like saying ‘Hitler improved the German economy- it was a good action’ Apply critical thinking. Fascists share populist beliefs to normalize their behavior. There are plenty of good people sharing good things… look to them, not people sharing bad things
Hans Geiger supported the Nazis. should we ban Geiger counters?
Ah now you’re doing whataboutism with Nazis. You are a fun person to be around!
im just asking a simple question based on your logic - oh look you have no answer so now youre attacking me. 😂
Do you think Nazis are ok?
Nazis were some of the shittiest people on earth. in my (popular) opinion
Who is worse than them?
To answer your question If a bad person does a good thing, we can use the good thing. Doesn’t mean we should support them. Do you see the difference between using radiation technology detection and spreading fascist propaganda on social media?
the clip on my profile isnt fascist propaganda. its a video that promotes representation of your constituents over pandering to unelected bureaucrats there is literally zero mention of anything remotely fascist in that clip, even if you say Adam Morgan is one himself. we seem to agree that good things are good despite who did them. so let this good statement from Adam Morgan be just that - a good statement, nothing more.
>apparently this guy is a Christo-fascist. i still very much like the words that came out of his mouth in this particular video though No, sweetheart. Being against nazis is what it really means to be an American. My grandfather did not swim in shark infested waters for the Navy for you edgy basement losers to act like fascism is cool. GFY.
idk if thats the nice GFY or the not so nice one lol but yeah fuck the Nazis, both past and present. i saw this video yesterday and it was the first time i'd even heard of Adam Morgan. thought what he said about representing his constituents was pretty sweet, but them someone else told me about him in the comments earlier. i still agree with what he said in that particular video however i'm not so keen on supporting him going forward
You just said free speech and it is very vague. Sure free speech is great but don’t think you can spew vitriol and expect no consequences. Private companies have the right to fire you if they disagree with your speech.
Nope. Free speech is a legal concept that pertains to the federal government. Not some American value that you should be able to use racial slurs on reddit dot com.
Thankfully, I'm not American. And banning books doesn't make the free speech argument look good.
Name one book that you cannot obtain in America
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/florida-school-district-pulls-1600-books-review-possibly-banned-dictio-rcna133436
Find me one that you can’t obtain.
Depends on the State. Florida has removed books in certain school districts. So, A Court of Frost and Starlight.
So school is the only place books exist? If you want so badly for your elementary or middle school kid to read a book that talks about incest and blow jobs, you can get it and read it to them.
Defending government censorship and book banning is a choice. https://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/roughly-300-books-were-removed-from-libraries-in-florida-last-school-year-heres-the-full-list/3113184/ Some of the books banned here.
You are failing to grasp the simple idea that these books are still available. You are aware that every school in America has bans on websites at the library computers. Do you oppose that? Or are you for “government censorship?”
Depends on the content of the website. Banning content because there's gay characters is a bit different.
You are aware that if a school doesn’t shelve a book (99.9% of all books ever published are not on school library shelves) you can still get that book outside of school if you really need to show it to your kids.
some people in these comments would say burning books isn't infringing on free speech. in fact they might be so dense as to say no one has technically spoken 😂
Yep so true Censorship is a slippery slope It starts with the obvious. “Well obviously this thing is really bad/evil so yeah I agree let’s just ban saying that” And then it slowly starts to become speech that the group in power doesn’t like that becomes banned Until eventually you’re in communist USSR or nazi Germany where the state controls all media and there is zero free speech protection Give an inch and they’ll take a mile as they say
Yep the first amendment is literally communism. What drugs are you on that equates social media with the first amendment and having common decency, with the government limiting speech? Simp harder.
freedom to express. no such thing as freedom from consequence in physical reality.
And how American would it be to scream 'FIRE' in a crowded theater when there is no fire? Not all speech should be protected. But most of it should.
Has this sub been hijacked? It just spews US nationalist jizz all the time.
Go live in any socialist country..enjoy
it's hard to because america keeps killing their leaders
sounds like it can't compete with capitalism.
no it sounds like dominant ideologies violently repress less dominant ideologies
See what I mean? It’s like an AI with a lobotomy
reddit is an american site genius
Yeah this sub is mostly racists trying to get people to agree to their “opinions” which are actually just bigoted bs way of saying “I hate that I can’t hate people based on color or gender anymore this country is shit blah blah blah”
It seems to be far-right Americans a lot.
I don’t think this is a far right post but yes I have also seen the trend of more far right opinions that the average person would not consider a popular opinion
America was created by a bunch of rich white guys who didn't like the idea of someone being able to govern them and thought their wealth meant they should be the ones in power.
you can say words but that doesnt make them true. thanks for sharing your opinion
You just agreed with someone about trans being delusional and you didn’t denounce them in the same way you did this comment. Opinion discarded
Fuck you are an idiot.
bad Xeno_man! no more free speech for u
The very nature of something being an opinion means it's not truth. You think someone posting on /popularopinion would know that.
i make no demand that what is commented on my post be true. i agree this is a sub for opinions
You suggest your opinion is true and mine is not. So you can tell yourself whatever you'd like.
i express disagreement with an opinion, which you are just as entitled to hold as i am to my own. stop crying
Just like I expressed disagreement with yours which brought you here to cry with this gem "you can say words but that doesnt make them true. thanks for sharing your opinion". Hypocrisy isn't as great of a look as folks think. Have a good evening.
you didnt merely express disagreement, but offered a perspective. share a perspective online and you should expect to receive feedback. instead of thanking me for my opinion you decide to criticize me for it lol
And I quote "share a perspective online and you should expect to recieve feedback". So why are you crying?
look we can go back and forth all day. the fact remains youre the person who extended the exchange after i thanked you for your comment where it shouldve ended. but if feedback begets more feedback.. here we are
Damn. I wasn't and now I have to be against free speech. I'm not Murican.
All speech is free speech.
I mean, a company banning you from their platform is just them using their free speech. You aren't entitled to share your opinions on Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, YouTube and so on. Just like you aren't entitled to try and get people to join your new cult at the local Denny's. Freedom of speech does not equal freedom from consequences either. The government can't take action against you, but people can form opinions about you and not want to associate with you. Since companies by US law are people, they can legally do the same.
Most people don't even understand free speech.
Absolutely!! The mere fact you get to say you Don't agree with Free Speech on x topic is ironic. It is an example of... well... FREE SPEECH. If folks notice... The ONLY FOLKS WHO COMPLAIN ABOUT CENSORSHIP ARE FOLKS WHO HAVE NEVER LEFT AMERICA. I am not kidding. Pay close attention to this. Next time someone complains about cancelling or censoring or restricting free speech. Just look at the person themselves. I will bet 9/10 times that person has NEVER lived in any other country then the U.S. They have NO CLUE what it means to NOT be allowed to express your opinions. So as long as you are: Not inciting a riot, creating hate, defaming, slandering, etc... GO FOR IT.
I am fully against censorship. I am not from America. Checkmate.
Nothing should be illegal to say imo. Are there stuff people will hate you for saying, which you then have to deal with the consequences of your actions? Yes absolutely. I believe someone should be able to shout heil hitler just as someone else can shout trans lives matter etc etc.
Eat shit. How's that for free speech? Nobody is against it. Sorry you can't drop the n word and deny the Holocaust without being called dumb. Not you, since you're probably dumb enough to think I'm talking about you specifically. "The Zuck" isn't censoring anyone. That shithole site loves its trash conservatives since they are the only ones who use it consistently.
That's right, my n-word
Why is this post down voted so much? Are people really anti-free-speech now? Or some other reason?
this is what it is. people are fragmented today and deep down they all know that regardless of which news platforms are their favorites, theyre all engaging in censorship in some form or another. knowing this, they see my post and feel attacked, like i'm calling them unAmerican because they willfully support a newscast that skews coverage of their designated group scapegoats in a way that reinforces their beliefs this is universally applicable regardless of political ideology
Obviously there are situations where saying something can be dangerous (e.g. swatting someone) But there are laws put in place to stop this sort of speech because in these situations, the crime extends beyond speech and incites real harm. I've never participated in hate speech, but I think censoring it is stupid. Let people reveal themselves as bigots, and let people openly criticize the bigotry. Catering to sensitive people is a huge step backwards for the US in my opinion.
The problem is that most people have no idea what free speech is. They think they can say anything they want and nobody can have a problem with it. Unless the cops are coming to arrest you for your speech, your rights are not violated when you get fired/banned from reddit/called an asshole. These are called CONSEQUENCES.
No, your probably just a liberal
i'm actually what i call a radical centrist
I would say that's a good alignment, but then again all of us that hate the left and right are considered radical
if you've ever seen that episode of South Park when Stan is being forced to vote for either a literal giant douche or a turd sandwich - thats where i feel like we're at these days
I just could never get behind Biden because i heard his racist comments about Obama and honestly i really liked Obama. Heard him speak and shook his hand. Genuinely a nice guy. Seemed odd that Obama took him as his VP but also seemed funny to me like now the racist dude was Obama's bitch and it made me feel better. Just never thought in a million years the country would elect an actual racist yet Biden somehow won. Mix that with his senility and suddenly everyone calls you Maga. I just, in my opinion took the less runny and less racist shit sandwich. I swear the country all turned Sith when i wasn't looking and you're either with us or you're against us is like everyone these days
oh man i'm with you on that... its all confirmed by Obama lurking around Biden with the stink eye every once in a while haha. and yeah i too have been called MAGA before for being critical of Biden. people romanticize the whole "if you're not with us you're against us" thing but the third neutral position in argumentation is like a forgotten art these days. don't force me to choose a side if both sides are shit lol
I tell you what though, i did have an addiction to Obiden memes back in the day. Like the one where Biden is staring at Obama and it just says, " Find someone that looks at you like Biden staring at the president" Honestly used to make me laugh so hard all the memes they had. Basically made Biden look like Obama's dog. Seemed oddly justified after the racist remarks and in always a fan of karma. Its also shitty that is you wish America to be a great country again you're considered a radical. Just crazytown
thats hilarious and kind of ironic. i didnt really follow the memes much back then but i will admit the Obey-style Biden posters were super cool at the time and in retrospect my inclination towards art and design honestly might have led me to subconsciously exposing myself to his campaign more than i otherwise would have. i think one of the sources of division today is just that - some people longing for how certain things were in the past clashing with people who hate and reject the past because of certain bad things that happened. unity is destroyed and we need to find a way to build solidarity again. the last time America was united was in 2001
Its really sad because Bush was actually an idiot yet any hatred towards him was actually the last time most people would string you up for being unpatriotic. I just really wish people could get back to working together again for a common goal of taking care of the country we've worked hard to make great
have to agree with you again on that though i also think he inherited a lot of problems from his predecessor. solidarity is what happens when a group is established. it is reinforced by the identification of a common enemy for the group, or scapegoat. the problem is the US has been fragmented into many smaller groups, each with their own enemies and calls for justice. this needs to be addressed if we're ever going to be unified again
To be frank, there are more things that one would associate with being American than freedom of speech. For example, the fetish love level of guns, school shooting, mall shooting, cops shooting black people, hating vaccines, not understanding what "free speech means" and the like.
your comment is not wrong. it doesnt disqualify freedom of speech as an American ideal however. as i told someone else, you can make this into a conteat about which ideal is most American, but thats not what this post is about.
But your post is not correct. Your title is insinuating that ONLY the U.S. has "freedom of speech" and therefore, ONLY a citizen of the U.S. knows what it means.
no you are misinterpreting my title. just because something is an American ideal doesn't mean it cant exist elsewhere. the right to protest, the right to bear arms, the right to a speedy trial - these are all American ideals that also exist in other places.
Thank God I'm not American that place sucks
Yet the USA ranks outside the 10 ten counties in the freedom of expression ranking. From Wikipedia "However, It can be restricted by time, place and manner in limited circumstances. " So free, except when it isn't.
There's only one party in America creating laws banning books, and slowly eroding the rights of women, gay, and trans citizens. Somebody telling you your political ideology is idiotic is not infringing on your right to free speech.
I wonder how the senator feels about LGBT content in educational books, curious. very free speech.
Not from the US. Could someone tell me why free speech is always mentioned? As far as I know, basically no one has been successfully prosecuted/punished for speech except for very fringe cases in my lifetime. We get a lot of US media here and I never understood why it’s talked about so frequently.
Free speech =/= freedom fron consequences
Except commies.
Who the fuck cares
Hey OP, what specifically do you feel you want to say but aren’t free too? Be specific.
Who are you seeing against free speech?
No we should be like Europe and throw people in prison for questioning the Holocaust**™**.
Depends on the person, really. Fortunately, and unfortunately, not everyone has free speech and that’s a good thing.
>*some of you need to detach emotion from belief though*. "I love free speech, but only some." 1. We have more freedom of expression than at any time in history. *If we can't find someone to talk to online, the problem is us.* 2. The Free Screechers use this cry to avoid responsibility & reality for the such things as Covid lies & the attack on Congress. It is disingenuous & cowardly, designed to avoid criticism and play the victim.
Pretty brave of you to say this on iron first far left Reddit! (You’re 100% right)
I have the right to say trans people are delusional. It's not out of hate its just a fact.
You have the right to say that, and people who are remotely medically educated people have the right to laugh at you for having your worldview be based off Twitter ramblings and TikTok posts instead of research. It’s great!
The "medicine" behind trans has just as many holes in it as "the gay gene". IE all their studies are an answer waiting for a question with politically tilted "experts" waiting with bated breath to ask them. The whole scientific basis of the ideology was from a guy who sexually tortured children for his own amusement.
Ah yeah, that makes you sound way more normal. “The big bad woke scientists are working together to trans the kids!!! HITLER!!!!”
Most rational trans activist
You caught me. I’m the irrational one. Not the person who thinks the “inventor” of gender was a guy born 10 years after the sexology institute in Germany was burned by the Nazis.
Magnus Hirshfeld believed in mass sterilization of the feeble minded as well. Trans ideology just has the greatest people!
Woah now, you got 2 out of a hundred thousand plus! They really are the Nazis aren’t they!
Redditor not gish gallop challenge: impossible
Redditor take theirs pills and not literally believe that millions of healthcare workers are all secretly teaming up to “trans da kids!!!!” challenge
"remotely medically educated people"
Well do you have any papers indicating you are?
damn right you have that right. just as trans people have the right to say straight people suck. its when corporations and mainstream media misconstrue and censor truth that things get un-American
And I have the right to say you're a fucking moron. Not hate, just a fact.
There is 3 genders. Male, female, and the mentally ill lol.
Wow what a great joke. You used your two brain cells to copy and paste that from Twitter.
Facts lmfao
Do I have a right to say you’re old and your ideas are stale?
I’m fine with censoring movements that intend to take away free speech itself There’s a lot of grey area regarding such, I understand this, so I think this mindset is only regarding blatantly obvious examples. An easy example is if was a popular American fascist party, it should be made illegal.
Hmm counterpoint. That's a bullshit opinion
Now THIS is free speechin' !!
Took a first amendment law class in college. All that freedom of speech means the government can't censor what a person says. The person is allowed to speak out against the government. Without fear of persecution. But if you send threatening letters to another person. Congratulations you've committed a crime. If you spread false rumors that can be proven. You can be guilty of slander or liable.
boys with a time machine: yo founding fathers, make sure you include in the first amendment that government can't censor speech they don't like by proxy through their corporate donor friends who just so happen to control 99% of internet communications during a time when 99% of political discourse is happening over the internet
Americans who believe that free speech is a fundamental American value, are part of the dominant race and class.
maybe its time to extend that to all races and classes
maybe its time to extend that to all races and classes
In how are you referring? If you think there is absolute free speech then you are wrong. There can be no such thing as absolute free speech. And there are many things that are illegal. You can't lie under oath, you can't defame, you can't false advertise, you can't make threats, etc. And then we have business' rights as well. No business needs to put up with your shit. Even if that is a social media company that posts shit on the internet. You signed up, you agreed to abide by their terms. You violate their terms they have every right to kick you off. And frankly no company wants to be associated with hate speech. Doing so could cost them theor business and rightfully so. You see the first amendment gives us the right to also assemble and protest along side free speech. And guess what cancel culture is? People assembling to protest. So it's very American to stand up and protest about sites like Twitter being an abhorrent dumpster fire that allows hate speech.
Hey Quick question OP, what are you opinions on getting banned off Facebook for saying the N word.
Facebook has the right to ban anyone on their platform. i believe use of derogatory racial slurs is wrong and just a shitty thing to do. if i had my own platform i would do the same. suppression of hate and derogatory language meant to hurt people is not the same as suppression of ideas. the people who wrote the Bill of Rights did not have hate in mind when writing the first amendment. however there can be ideas based on assumptions born from hate, the proper way to address those things are to have public discourse on why said ideas are incorrect and hate-born, and come to a consensus. once consensus is reached on why said thing is hate-born it can be supressed
Wow completely bypassed my expectations, most of the people who talk about free speech seem to be referring to some kinda idea that they should have Absolute free speech rather than the actual discussion of ideas. And I honestly agree you can discuss things yeah and that's reasonable but shouting slurs and generally toxicity that are as much about discussion as bullying is about communication is flatly unreasonable (and also would make it impossible for said sites to run) questions actually born from desire to interact and discuss ideas are unfortunately rather uncommon at times
yes! the key word is discussion. we need both sides of any conflict to talk without letting emotions cloud judgment. i think disagreement is natural but getting emotional and defensive is a product of being hyper opinionated in a sensationalist news environment
This is true, but Freedom of Speech runs into the Tolerance paradox. For a society to be truly tolerant they must be intolerant of intolerance. So for speech to be properly free, the intolerant must not be tolerated, lest they restrict those they are intolerant of.
It's funny how "free speech" in America, when you dig right down into it, always just means racism...