Free Speech

Author: Wagyu ,

Posts

Total: 86
Wagyu
Wagyu's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 130
1
2
4
Wagyu's avatar
Wagyu
1
2
4
What do we think about Trump being censored? Personally, I think that it's kinda unfair that he's been quite literally cancelled by media platforms, all of which are salty they have been exposed for clearly pushing "bad" information about Trump whilst instantly censoring anything negative about Biden. 
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 8,919
3
4
8
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
8
--> @Wagyu
(IFF) you think the TRUMP twitter ban is GOOD (THEN) you are BRAINWASHED

It is twitters website, they can ban whoever they like. Ideally sure they would be consistent and apply some form of objectivity to it but I don't see an issue with sites banning people if they are not controlled by any government form. Obviously, I am assuming twitter is not some secret part of what the opposite of Trump is but ideally just ban both presidents or all presidents and have their PR be the only ones allowed to post. That is their prerogative. It is their website. Same with Facebook all these places it is their website, sure they are smarmy and lie but if a site were truly honest and said "Hey we don't like your kind" then so be it, move along. Sites like those should then die out.
If anything Trump can just go take care of his trash some other way, Twitter hopefully then does take a stance against more of the things they feel do not align and hopefully are at least clear and honest about that with the knowledge they will lose plenty of users.
Bit of a mishmash really, as in there can be precedent set by a centralized social site for actual transparency about what they like vs trying to please the majority or whatever.
Will be interesting to see the twitter side. I have no interest for the other side which is just a breaking point in a system so tense with , I want to say retardation, that really any breaking point is worth watching and seeing what burns.
if they are not controlled by any government form.
Why do you think they waited until AFTER the election to ban trump from twitter?

Wouldn't it make way more sense to ban him from twitter during the impeachment (for threatening witnesses)?

Wouldn't it make way more sense to ban him from twitter when he started re-tweeting "racist" comments and video clips?

Also, do you think twitter and facebook and google qualify as, "the public square" ("public sphere")?

What percentage of person to person (peer-to-peer) communication happens "in real life"? What percentage of person to person (peer-to-peer) communication happens "over the internet"?
dustryder
dustryder's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 969
3
2
4
dustryder's avatar
dustryder
3
2
4
--> @3RU7AL
Do you not think incitement of civil unrest that contributed to tangible violent actions was a sensible point to ban him?

3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 8,919
3
4
8
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
8
--> @dustryder
Do you not think incitement of civil unrest that contributed to tangible violent actions was a sensible point to ban him?
Please provide a specific quote.
dustryder
dustryder's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 969
3
2
4
dustryder's avatar
dustryder
3
2
4
--> @3RU7AL
How about his messaging and promotion of the conspiracy theory that the election was stolen?
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 8,919
3
4
8
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
8
--> @dustryder
How about his messaging and promotion of the conspiracy theory that the election was stolen?
Is this a specific quote?
dustryder
dustryder's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 969
3
2
4
dustryder's avatar
dustryder
3
2
4
--> @3RU7AL
Is a description of general messaging insufficient to show usage of platform to sow civil unrest?
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 8,919
3
4
8
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
8
--> @dustryder
Is a description of general messaging insufficient to show usage of platform to sow civil unrest?
No.  At least not the general description you provided.

Look,

Do you believe vote rigging and or vote manipulation and or voter suppression and or voter manipulation is possible?

Do you believe that all claims related to these possible events and or activities should be systematically banned from all public discussion?

In broader terms,

Do you believe all criminal accusations and suspicions of criminal activity should be systematically banned from all public discussion?
dustryder
dustryder's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 969
3
2
4
dustryder's avatar
dustryder
3
2
4
--> @3RU7AL
I do understand where you are coming from in that conspiratorial conversation should not be a barrier to fact based conversation. However in this instance unfettered conspiratorial nonsense has lead to unrest, death and destruction, so it's justified in this instance
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 8,919
3
4
8
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
8
--> @dustryder
I do understand where you are coming from in that conspiratorial conversation should not be a barrier to fact based conversation. However in this instance unfettered conspiratorial nonsense has lead to unrest, death and destruction, so it's justified in this instance
A post-facto (consequentialist) criteria seems less than ideal.

Can't you think of some uniform and unbiased QUANTIFIABLE censorship standards?
dustryder
dustryder's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 969
3
2
4
dustryder's avatar
dustryder
3
2
4
--> @3RU7AL
I don't need to. It's Twitters platform. You may peruse their terms of service and community guidelines at your leisure.
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 8,919
3
4
8
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
8
--> @dustryder
Biden: "What we witnessed yesterday was not dissent. It was not disorder. It was not protest. It was chaos. They weren't protesters. Don't dare call them protesters. They were a riotous mob. Insurrectionists. Domestic terrorists. It's that basic, it's that simple." - - [LINK]

IT'S PRETTY HANDY TO BE ABLE TO CALL EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH YOU "TERRORISTS".
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 8,919
3
4
8
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
8
--> @dustryder
I don't need to. It's Twitters platform. You may peruse their terms of service and community guidelines at your leisure.
Interestingly, their banning policy has absolutely no statistical, legal, or logical correlation with their "terms of service".

They can ban anyone at any time for any reason.
dustryder
dustryder's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 969
3
2
4
dustryder's avatar
dustryder
3
2
4
--> @3RU7AL
Some were by definition no? Illegal acts of violence and/or intimidation against civilians with political purpose.

Interestingly, their banning policy has absolutely no statistical, legal, or logical correlation with their "terms of service".They can ban anyone at any time for any reason.
They certainly can and are entitled to as it's their platform. However the question is to what extent they exercise such powers in reality. In any case Trump has almost certainly violated whatever guidelines they have. His account was only kept open for so long by virtue of his presidency

3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 8,919
3
4
8
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
8
--> @dustryder
Some were by definition no? Illegal acts of violence and/or intimidation against civilians with political purpose.
Section 802 of the USA PATRIOT Act (Pub. L. No. 107-52) expanded the definition of terrorism to cover ""domestic,"" as opposed to international, terrorism.   A person engages in domestic terrorism if they do an act "dangerous to human life" that is a violation of the criminal laws of a state or the United States, if the act appears to be intended to:  (i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping.  Additionally, the acts have to occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States and if they do not, may be regarded as international terrorism.

Section 802 does not create a new crime of domestic terrorism.  However, it does expand the type of conduct that the government can investigate when it is investigating "terrorism."   The USA PATRIOT Act expanded governmental powers to investigate terrorism, and some of these powers are applicable to domestic terrorism.

The definition of domestic terrorism is broad enough to encompass the activities of several prominent activist campaigns and organizations. Greenpeace, Operation Rescue, Vieques Island and WTO protesters and the Environmental Liberation Front have all recently engaged in activities that could subject them to being investigated as engaging in domestic terrorism. [LINK]

THEY'VE BASICALLY EXPANDED THE DEFINITION OF "TERRORISM" IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO STRIP YOUR CIVIL RIGHTS IF YOU HAPPEN TO PROTEST ANY GOVERNMENT POLICY YOU DON'T LIKE.

SOMETHING AS SIMPLE AS BLOCKING TRAFFIC OR "GATHERING WITHOUT A PERMIT" QUALIFIES AS A "VIOLATION OF CRIMINAL LAWS".
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 8,919
3
4
8
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
8
--> @dustryder
They certainly can and are entitled to as it's their platform.
Luckily this is motivating some to move to DECENTRALIZED PLATFORMS.
Jasmine
Jasmine's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 126
0
3
6
Jasmine's avatar
Jasmine
0
3
6
I went on twitter, and found out that Trump was no longer there! Fuck Twitter 😡
dustryder
dustryder's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 969
3
2
4
dustryder's avatar
dustryder
3
2
4
--> @3RU7AL
I'm not sure how that's relevant to this case. In this particular instance of protest, there were bombs, assault, murder, destruction of property, theft, trespassing and death threats. You had congressmen, capitol hill staffers and policemen quivering behind seats.

I do find it curious that you would not label this as terrorism. Why not?
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,474
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
--> @3RU7AL
The hypocracy here is palpable.

Where were these concerned citizens as antifa and BLM burned down cities in 2020? 

My God, TDS is insidious! 
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 742
3
2
5
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
2
5
--> @3RU7AL
If Trump had said we found 1000 miscast votes (The Brennan Center for Justice in 2017 ranked the risk of ballot fraud at 0.00004% to 0.0009%) instead of "We won by a landslide", he wouldn't have been banned.
All this was inspired by the principle - which is quite true in itself - that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest purposes. 
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 64
Posts: 3,350
4
6
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
6
10
If the left is so bent on censorship as a response to the 1A, tell me who is to be qualified as the censor? You? I, for one, disagree. Censorship is an admission that you lack a backbone when you are offended. You have the right to be offended, yeah? Or don 't you? You must believe the latter, or p.c. would have never made it off the ground.
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 15
Posts: 4,526
3
3
3
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
3
--> @Jasmine
Why do you worship the Bleached Blond Man?

Have you ever really, analysed such a question?


Was Trump a megalomaniac obsessed with wealth and power?

Or was he an Old School Caucasian Hero?
Jasmine
Jasmine's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 126
0
3
6
Jasmine's avatar
Jasmine
0
3
6
--> @zedvictor4
I don't, I just went on his Twitter to argue with people. Joe Biden's Twitter doesn't have as many comments.
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 64
Posts: 3,350
4
6
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
6
10
I have just posted a debate to argue this point of Trump/supporters and their censorship by social media, et al.
fauxlaw
fauxlaw's avatar
Debates: 64
Posts: 3,350
4
6
10
fauxlaw's avatar
fauxlaw
4
6
10
--> @zedvictor4
Why do you worship the Bleached Blond Man?
Why do you insist it is a matter of worship. or it is nothing? Do progressives live only on the edges of excesses? That is the place where most contradictions occur. that's where progressivism lives.