Jump to content

Freedom of speech


sunday

Recommended Posts

No, it's just one example. I've that Sword of Damocles hanging over my head as well where I work. But then a large percentage of the technologists lean more conservative. 

We have FAR more examples across the public right now where this problem is manifesting. It's been going on a while. Stephen Pinker is an example. Dr Weinstein and Dr Heying too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 403
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 hour ago, EchoFiveMike said:

People need to actually look around then, watch what people actually do (often to opposite of what they say) and then use that thing that's keeping their ears apart to consider what it means.  Frankly, most people go around actively avoiding any observation of their environment because it's such shit and it causes them emotional pain because what they are told is so contrary to what they see. 

IOW, cognitive dissonance.

Occasionally he stumbled over the truth but he always picked himself up and hurried on as if nothing had happened. (Winston Churchill)

Referencing British PM Stanley Baldwin who was Prime Minister between 1935 and 1937.

When folks cling to fictions despite easily observed reality, its usually either to rationalize hatreds or to self-absolve from their inaction or error.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As much as I hate Trump and his most violent supporters, and as much as I believe the first amendment doesn’t ensure that a business can’t set its own standards, I do find the coordinated ban of Paler discomforting.

There was a post either here or on Warships that stated that unless conservatives could have thier own slice of the culture - their own tech, universities, businesses, etc...that they would never overcome the current hardship. If someone could point me to that post, I’m almost certain it was on this site, I would appreciate it.

but to that point I have to ask: why do you think it is that the media, universities, tech, etc are anti conservative in the first place? How are we here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, sunday said:

Yesterday, one member of this Grate Sight notified us he was going to lose work because some posts he just liked in Facebook.

That's pretty much nuts, and probably grounds for a successful lawsuit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jeff said:

Then promise us that if the worst happens to him, you will come back and publicly admit what an idiot you were.

I stand by the post you quoted here - nitflegal talked of a possibility and sunday was saying it was a certainty... that's being dishonest from the start.  What nitflegal's going through must suck, and what's encompassed parts of the college scene in this country is deplorable (no one on TN has ever argued against that fact that I can remember), but it doesn't pay to get pissed off over what might happen.

And if we want to talk about publicly admitting when one's an idiot... when are folks like sunday going to stand up to the plate?  Himself and others here on TN still throw out this notion that the election was rigged/stolen despite numerous Fed and State investigations turning up nothing and countless court cases getting thrown out for lack of evidence (and no, it's not just procedural catches that led to those cases getting tossed like so many of you were grasping at most recently).  What about yourself?  Pushing BS like how HCQ was banned last year in the COVID thread, being shown it was untrue, and yet sticking to your guns on multiple occasions.

Seriously... Mikel2 back during the run-up to the 2016 general election bemoaned that Trump may lead to the decline of the R party for years to come and he was blown off.  We're here actually seeing it happen... and most of you all are helping in the efforts to sink your own ship.  I'd laugh at how ridiculous it is if it weren't for the fact this means the Ds are going to get close to free reign politically for years and what that will entail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was your last gaslighting attempt that I am going to see, Skywalkre, doubling down in the false accusation of dishonesty.

That is a lie, and this time could not be explained by carelessness.

There is lot of evidence of fraud during both the presidential elections, and the last senatorial elections in Georgia.

Writing otherwise is to lie.

Supreme Court of the US set the date of January, 22nd, for the hearing on some Pennsylvania matter. Then, not before, you would be able to say anything about the evidence.

Stating otherwise is to lie.

So, as a proven liar in my eyes, you are going to be ignored.

Edited by sunday
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nobu said:

That's pretty much nuts, and probably grounds for a successful lawsuit.

Yes, it is nuts, probably grounds for a successful lawsuit too, but odds are they will get their way in the country of Politically Correct States of America, formerly known as United States of America.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, sunday said:

So... you are going to be ignored.

Amusing how my 'better' has to run and hide in a bubble from me.  :rolleyes:

Edited by Skywalkre
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, sunday said:

That was your last gaslighting attempt that I am going to see, Skywalkre, doubling down in the false accusation of dishonesty.

That is a lie, and this time could not be explained by carelessness.

There is lot of evidence of fraud during both the presidential elections, and the last senatorial elections in Georgia.

Writing otherwise is to lie.

Supreme Court of the US set the date of January, 22nd, for the hearing on some Pennsylvania matter. Then, not before, you would be able to say anything about the evidence.

Stating otherwise is to lie.

So, as a proven liar in my eyes, you are going to be ignored.

I haven't actually seen you explicitly say you've set me to ignore yet, though maybe it was simply done with little fanfare. So I find the above surprising. I think you're missing out and firing your guns at anything that moves if you ignore Skywalkre; he's hardly a far left radical. His posts and positions and generally well thought out and if you disagree with them, at a minimum they deserve a reasoned response. I'm probably much more to the left than him, and I certainly post more offensive things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Josh said:

As much as I hate Trump and his most violent supporters, and as much as I believe the first amendment doesn’t ensure that a business can’t set its own standards, I do find the coordinated ban of Paler discomforting.

There was a post either here or on Warships that stated that unless conservatives could have thier own slice of the culture - their own tech, universities, businesses, etc...that they would never overcome the current hardship. If someone could point me to that post, I’m almost certain it was on this site, I would appreciate it.

but to that point I have to ask: why do you think it is that the media, universities, tech, etc are anti conservative in the first place? How are we here?

 

 

Well PRC media is eating it up.

Quote

Social media's permanent silencing of US President Donald Trump again exposed the country's double standards, and stripped Washington's "moral high ground" in lecturing other nations about "freedom of speech," Chinese observers said, adding that the recent development on the presidential transition, including the storming of Capitol hill, has taught the US a lesson: freedom of speech has boundaries.

Using the excuse of a potential risk of further incitement of violence, social media platforms, Twitter announced the permanent suspension of Trump's accounts.

Google also followed suit. Shortly after Twitter  announced on Friday to suspend Trump's account, Google  shared that they were removing Parler,  a conservative social media app, from their Play Store immediately, saying they were suspending the app until the developers committed to a moderation and enforcement policy that could handle objectionable content on the platform.

It is not only the accounts of Trump that have been suspended. Twitter also removed the accounts of Michael Flynn, Trump's former national security adviser who has received a presidential pardon; and pro-Trump lawyer Sidney Powell, for breaching policies that ban users from engaging in "coordinated activity" that results in online and real-world harm. 

In a press statement released on Friday evening, Trump responded to his suspensions by saying "Twitter has gone further and further in banning free speech."

The incident has fully exposed the US' double standards when it spares no efforts to criticize other nations' "violations of free speech," whilst taking the drastic move to the restrict the speech of its own president, Li Haidong, professor at the Institute of International Relations, China Foreign Affairs University, told the Global Times on Saturday.

He said such blatant double standards stripped the US of its "moral high-ground" when it intends to bellow about other nations' "violations of freedom of speech."

China has long been devoted to regulating harmful content, such as violence, pornography and personal attacks on its internet. Yet such a move has fallen into the US muzzle of attacking China for "restricting freedom of speech."

"Maybe it is only until today, the US has learned the lesson that freedom of speech is not without limits. No government can have an unregulated internet," Shen Yi from the School of International Relations and Public Affairs of Fudan University, told the Global Times.

Yet he said the US has a long way to go regarding internet regulation. "We regulated the internet to provide a healthy online environment for the public; but US platforms started an internet purge because those platforms are tilting toward certain political parties, and some speeches are not in accordance with the political interests they upheld."

Li noted that after the incident, the US should not treat itself as special and perfect, differentiating itself from every country in the world. “It has fallen to a laughing stock for the world to see.”

The suspension of Trump and his followers' account also stirred waves of mocking on the Chinese internet. The hashtag "Twitter announced permanent suspension of Trump's account" has generated over 400 million views as of press time.

"We really have witnessed history; witnessed the true colors of the US political system and its double standards," said one Sina Weibo user. 

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202101/1212286.shtml


 

Quote

 

Twitter banned the account of US President Donald Trump. Other US social network giants followed suit. The impact might be even larger than that from the intrusion into the Capitol by Trump's supporters. Divergences on the silencing of Trump are greater than the riot itself, and such divergences would further divide US society and lead to more hatred and confusion.

Does the silencing of Trump breach the principle of freedom of speech? No matter what the first amendment says, that Trump cannot express his opinions on social networks and lost the right that every ordinary American enjoys definitely violates the principle of freedom of speech endorsed by US political elites. "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." This is how the US, as "the beacon of freedom," has lectured the world.

In fact, the political connotation of freedom of speech has been concealed by the discourse power of the US and the West. Freedom of speech does have political and ethical boundaries. The silencing of Trump unveiled this true essence of freedom of speech.

Some claimed that the social networks' ban on Trump exactly shows US democracy and freedom. But this argument is pretty pale. Trump is outgoing and has been forsaken by the US system. He spoke freakishly when he was in power, and nothing happened. But as he is losing power, several US social media platforms staged a simultaneous "suppression," which reflects the true political scenario of his silence.

Besides being a right, freedom of speech is held high in political struggles. After all, the boundary of freedom of speech and freedom of speech itself are both defined by those in power. Trump lost the election, but persisted, and consequently he was pushed out of the boundary of freedom of speech by pro-Democrat social networks.

If Trump still does not surrender and has enough supporters, they will further challenge the US opinion order. As the situation exacerbates, it would become an ideological "civil war."

The US is reputed for its democracy and rule of law. But recent incidents are enough to prove that it is a society blatantly dominated by politics. US ideology endorses political struggles, so the rules of freedom of speech must be defined within the context of political struggles.

The US election has ended. Not only should the Republican Party admit its defeat, but also Trump and his hardcore fans. Trump's social media accounts have accumulated enormous political vigor. His attitude in refusing to admit his defeat will pose potential risks to the US system, and blocking his accounts is a way of rectification. As a political resource in the US, freedom of speech will not be allowed to oppose the US system and the victors in the system. That's why Trump's freedom of speech was ruthlessly deprived.

The US has been mired in chaos recently. The fight among different forces exposed the true nature of the US system. All the principles - democracy, freedom and human rights - are placed aside in the midst of domestic political tensions, and so is the high moral ground of the US system.

This will do no good to Washington if it wants to continually call itself the "beacon of freedom." But don't expect it to change course. It will play the same old tricks again.

The US relies on its advantage in strength to play hegemonism. As long as it is still the most powerful country in the world, it will stage rounds of ideological attacks based on its own interests.

Washington would still label the violent riots in Hong Kong as a "democracy movement." It would not feel ashamed of its double standards when it called those breaching the Capitol Hill as "rioters." It would continue to accuse China of suppressing freedom of speech, despite the fact that it suppressed President Trump's freedom of speech.

The world has undergone profound changes. The US has been stricken by both nature and its internal rifts. It is delusion that humanity will pretend nothing has happened and that unfair and unreasonable things will exist forever.

 

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202101/1212386.shtml

 


 

Quote

 

President Donald Trump lost his online megaphone after several US social media platforms collectively banned his personal accounts in response to the Wednesday Capitol chaos. Twitter announced on Friday that it permanently suspended his personal account. Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg said Thursday that the suspension of Trump's Facebook and Instagram accounts were indefinite. Google has suspended the social networking platform Parler, a popular app among Trump's supporters and right-wing conservatives.

Trump over the past four years has been regarded as "a commander in tweets." The frequency and number of tweets he posted have far exceeded those of any other leaders in the world. Many of his posts, however, were accused of being provocative, inflammatory and spreading falsehoods. Twitter accused two of his tweets posted Friday (one calling his supporters "patriots" and another saying he would not go to the presidential inauguration on January 20) of violating its rules against glorifying violence, following the storming of the US Capitol on Wednesday.

The permanent suspension of Trump's account has triggered controversy over freedom of speech in US society. Trump and his supporters accused Twitter of stifling "free speech," while US mainstream media outlets and Trump's opponents support the ban, arguing it's not an infringement upon freedom of speech. It's reported that First Amendment lawyers said the action didn't violate Trump's rights. They argued that the Constitution protects against government action censoring a citizen's speech, but Twitter is a private company.

Just imagine if an influential public opinion figure was banned on social media platforms in other countries, especially those deemed as enemies by the US. The US would vehemently accuse those countries of suppressing freedom of speech!

The hypocrisy and double standards of US democracy have increasingly been laid bare in recent years. Take freedom of speech. For American media outlets and many Americans, those who can speak and whose "freedom of speech" is protected are those who hold similar political viewpoints with them.

For Trump's allies and supporters, banning Trump on Twitter and other social media platform is an attempt to wreck freedom of speech. It's unacceptable to them. But for Trump's opponents, it's a necessary measure to denounce violence, smash efforts to glorify violence, and protect social order and stability. The so-called freedom of speech is just a tool for Americans to attack each other, or insult other countries.

Regardless of US hypocrisy when it comes to freedom of speech, banning Trump on social media platforms offers us a chance to redefine and understand freedom of speech. "Even in the US, a country which claims itself to be the beacon of democracy, freedom of speech has boundaries and bottom lines," said Xin Qiang, deputy director of the Center for American Studies at Fudan University.

Free speech doesn't mean irresponsible narratives, including those inciting violence, racism and group discrimination. It does not mean spreading rumors and lies under the banner of freedom of speech, Xin noted.

The next time when the US points an accusing finger at other countries' efforts to regulate online contents, can it bear this fact in mind?

 

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202101/1212376.shtml

 


 

Quote

 

US social media platforms' sharply contrasting reactions to US President Donald Trump's messages of violent content and those of Hong Kong rioters have fully exposed their double standards when they spare no efforts to criticize other nations' "violations of free speech" while taking drastic moves to restrict the speech of their own incumbent president, Chinese observers said.

Using the excuse of the potential risk of further incitement of violence, social media platform Twitter announced Friday the permanent suspension of Trump's account.

Google and Apple followed suit. Shortly after Twitter announced that it would suspend Trump's account, Google said that it was removing Parler, a conservative social media app, from its Play Store. Google said the app was suspended until the developers committed to a moderation and enforcement policy that could handle objectionable content on the platform.

Late Saturday, Apple removed Parler from the App Store.

"We have always supported diverse points of view being represented on the App Store, but there is no place on our platform for threats of violence and illegal activity," Apple said in a statement provided to weekly magazine Variety.

Twitter also removed the accounts of Michael Flynn, Trump's former national security adviser who has received a presidential pardon, and pro-Trump lawyer Sidney Powell, for breaching policies that ban users from engaging in "coordinated activity" that results in online and real-world harm.

Twitter and Facebook failed to reply to the Global Times as of press time.

The moves are totally in sharp contrast to these platforms' reactions to violent riots in Hong Kong in 2019, which dragged the city into chaos lasting about one year and inflicted huge financial losses.

In addition to allowing speeches that spread and stirred violence, foreign social platforms Facebook, Twitter and Telegram have been popular tools for Hong Kong rioters to call for illegal assemblies and to doxx police officers. Posts promoting Hong Kong secession are rife on these platforms, the Global Times previously learned from the Hong Kong police.

Platforms such as Telegram have fallen into rioters' hands. These companies have always refused to cooperate with police on law enforcement issues, and because there were no legal terms, they only operated under corporation status, Ronny Chan, chairman of the Superintendents' Association of the Hong Kong Police Force, told the Global Times previously.

In early August 2019, Facebook and Twitter started to take down accounts from China in relation to protests in Hong Kong, facing strong backlash as many users complained that their Facebook and Twitter accounts were blocked after they voiced support for the Hong Kong police and posted pictures featuring the Chinese national flag.

Twitter user Sheryl's account was blocked just after she liked her idol Lay Zhang Yixing's post supporting Hong Kong police and a few comments denouncing violence protesters.     

In the US, social media platforms are actually private platforms with public attributes, which means they are controlled by capital or tilted toward a certain party.  If someone violates the interests of the capital invested in them, the person will get banned, Shen Yi from the School of International Relations and Public Affairs of Fudan University told the Global Times on Sunday.

Shen said that those platforms have a long way to go regarding internet regulation. "China has regulated the internet to provide a healthy online environment for the public; but US platforms started an internet purge because those platforms are tilting toward certain political parties, and some speeches are not in line with the political interests they uphold," Shen noted.

The suspension of Trump and his followers' accounts also stirred waves of mockery on the Chinese internet.

"The Hong Kong rioters who were actively inciting violence far outnumbered the US protesters, and lasted longer, why didn't they ban them? Those platforms will lose their moral high ground of advertising freedom of speech forever," a user of China's Twitter-like Sina Weibo platform said.

 

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202101/1212371.shtml

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Josh said:

I think you're missing out and firing your guns at anything that moves if you ignore Skywalkre; he's hardly a far left radical. His posts and positions and generally well thought out and if you disagree with them, at a minimum they deserve a reasoned response.

+1 on this sentiment.  

Edited by Nobu
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Skywalkre said:

Amusing how my 'better' has to run and hide in a bubble from me.  :rolleyes:

No, It's just he's refusing to deal with your points that are not honestly made or offered from a position of integrity. 
 

Edited by rmgill
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's be clear here. The US President is banned from a media platform that used him to make a LOT of $ and which is the current president of the US.

Iran's dictatorial religious leader is still on twitter. 
Fatah is still active on Twitter. 
China has already been mentioned. I'm pretty sure we've considered forced sterilization to be an aspect of eugenics and a crime against humanity. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The concerted effects sure look like an antitrust violation on the part of Apple, Google, Amazon and Twitter. If the actions violated contract law...could be bad for those companies. BUT it would require the FTC to have issue with it. And if the Biden Admin says "no big deal" I doubt anyone in DOJ will rock that boat. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, sunday said:

That was your last gaslighting attempt that I am going to see, Skywalkre, doubling down in the false accusation of dishonesty.

That is a lie, and this time could not be explained by carelessness.

There is lot of evidence of fraud during both the presidential elections, and the last senatorial elections in Georgia.

Writing otherwise is to lie.

Supreme Court of the US set the date of January, 22nd, for the hearing on some Pennsylvania matter. Then, not before, you would be able to say anything about the evidence.

Stating otherwise is to lie.

So, as a proven liar in my eyes, you are going to be ignored.

Seriously man, your conviction is your conviction, but stop acting like lastdingo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, sunday said:

That was your last gaslighting attempt that I am going to see, Skywalkre, doubling down in the false accusation of dishonesty.

That is a lie, and this time could not be explained by carelessness.

There is lot of evidence of fraud during both the presidential elections, and the last senatorial elections in Georgia.

Writing otherwise is to lie.

Supreme Court of the US set the date of January, 22nd, for the hearing on some Pennsylvania matter. Then, not before, you would be able to say anything about the evidence.

Stating otherwise is to lie.

So, as a proven liar in my eyes, you are going to be ignored.

Wow, congratulations, you just found another one of your "trolls".

The way I see it, you know have almost the entire group of outspoken opponents of Trump on ignore. Have fun in your echo chamber! 🤪

 

Edited by Der Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Nobu said:

+1 on this sentiment.  

I am for facts, not "feelings". There is no fair discussion possible with proved liars.

Edited by sunday
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, sunday said:

What namecalling? I did not call him names, I did state that he was engaging in gaslighting by misrepresenting statements, and he later admitted he was, but not willingly so, but only out of carelessness.

"I know it is difficult for one afflicted with TDS" 🤔

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Rickard N said:

"I know it is difficult for one afflicted with TDS" 🤔

Neither of us, Rickard, have English as first language. That could be understood as namecalling, or not.

But I understand you do not find anything wrong with that gaslighting attempt, as you have not written anything in that regard. Then, you are not an impartial observer, but you were taking a side, and continue on that side, the side of lies.

Is one that supports a lying side a liar himself?

Edited by sunday
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Rickard N said:

"I know it is difficult for one afflicted with TDS" 🤔

Rickard that it's even a remote possibility that 'liking' something as milquetoast as some conservative memes is potential grounds from being fired from a long time career is unconscionable. That its something more than an imagined possibility is ghastly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, sunday said:

Neither of us, Rickard, have English as first language. That could be understood as namecalling, or not.

But I understand you do not find anything wrong with that gaslighting attempt, as you have not written anything in that regard. Then, you are not an impartial observer, but you were taking a side, and continue on that side, the side of lies.

Is one that supports a lying side a liar himself?

Honestly, I think you need to step back a bit and think this through. Doesn't TDS stand for Trump Derrangement Syndrome? how can it not be a derogatory term?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, RETAC21 said:

Honestly, I think you need to step back a bit and think this through. Doesn't TDS stand for Trump Derrangement Syndrome? how can it not be a derogatory term?

What about you minding your own business if you are not going to add to the topic discussed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...