Same for you with "Americans" I guess.
Gun Control
- Thread starter Throatpunch
- Start date
Hoplite
Worth 1/5th of 100 grams of tea
Do you somehow doubt whether or not he's American or something?
No? Why would I. But are "Americans" somehow special people now where they are above learning from the mistakes from other nations? It's not like I am saying Americans have to adopt anything here.
Hoplite
Worth 1/5th of 100 grams of tea
We aren't. But the First Ten Amendments have been part of this country since it's inception.
Hell, the 2nd clearly states plain as day "The right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed.", the first states that fucking with free speech and religion is illegal as fuck. Those two are the center of American society.
Hell, the 2nd clearly states plain as day "The right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed.", the first states that fucking with free speech and religion is illegal as fuck. Those two are the center of American society.
But we haven't been talking necessarily about the second amendment right now which I do not want to remove or change. We've been been talking about the effect of hate speech (like the KKK, Neonazis, Islamic Extremists etc.) and propaganda on the general population and what ever if you should offer it a platform for "debate" or not and what ever if it is a violation of free speech if Youtube, Facebook and other social media platforms/companies decide to remove someone like Alex Jones from their platforms. Which by the way, is also a right.
Only the right kind of propaganda, I'm sorry, educational content should be allowed.
Hoplite
Worth 1/5th of 100 grams of tea
Removal of content from your site is a right, yes, but it should still be considered bad form to silence someone on a public platform.
My personal philosophy, not that anyone cares, is that as disgusting as the KKK/Nazis/Islamic Extremists/Antifa members/hardcore commies that preach death to the rich/rich fucks who preach death to the poor/furries are, you don't win by kicking them into the dirt and making them pariahs and martyrs.
They have a right to express their opinions and thoughts. I wish they wouldn't, but at least they do it loudly enough so that I don't have to associate with them
My personal philosophy, not that anyone cares, is that as disgusting as the KKK/Nazis/Islamic Extremists/Antifa members/hardcore commies that preach death to the rich/rich fucks who preach death to the poor/furries are, you don't win by kicking them into the dirt and making them pariahs and martyrs.
They have a right to express their opinions and thoughts. I wish they wouldn't, but at least they do it loudly enough so that I don't have to associate with them
TheGM
The voice of reason
How else you would you know that the Black Israelites are the real jews and that chemically castrating 8 year olds is perfectly reasonable? Right Crni.
Che? See. This is the stuff where you loose me. It's a clear black and white situation I am talking about here (Neonazis, KKK, Alex Jones). As far as I cna remember one can still go on Youtube and have all the fun with PragerU, Ben Shapiro, Sargon of Akkad, Molyneux and watch their content. So I am really not sure what you're complaining about. And I kinda have a feeling that you're spinning this in to a whataboutism thing, where "leftist" SJWERs, PC/libtard/whatdoIknow are still allowed to spread "their" propaganda. Like how there would be some kind of equivalency going on here.
In the case of Jones? No. Again the guy was caught lying and sued for it. If companies like Youtube decide not to want someone like him around anymore, that's well not "silencing" someone. It's like throwing out a guy in your store for throwing poop around.
Look I am not saying companiees like Yutube or Facebook are saints here, god no. They do a hell of a lot of questionable things. But at the end of the day their largest concern is in making money. But in the end they make the rules what they allow on their platform and what they do not allow on their platform. That might not always be a good thing. But it is not a violation of free speech. Jones is still allowed to spread his information like always. He's just not allowed to use the service of those platforms. Do you want to force Youtube into giving him access now? On what basis?
Hoplite
Worth 1/5th of 100 grams of tea
On the basis that it's a public platform. The least they could do is hold their favorite mouthbreathers in the same regard
Well, you're applying double standards. Neonazis and KKK and Alex Jones (murder, arson, jaywalking?) are fully ok to be banned, but anyone else calling for the death of wrongthinkers? That appears to be fine, or otherwise you might mention them from time to time.
I can only repeat my self here. You do not have more of a right as an individual to use Youtube for spreading your messages then to force the Washington post or Fox News to make an article about you.
Also same to you, everyone has a right to report the "other" side if you feel they violated the Userterms of Youtube or any other platform.
No. That's you putting words in my mouth and drawing conclusions from things I never said. Or do you want to tell me because someone else who's in your words "calling for the death of wrongthinkers" means we have to give Neonazis a platform to make things even? Go and report those that call for the death of others in their Youtube videos or Facebook then. And if they really do not remove them and their content then this would be really shit. But again, I do not see how one wrong makes the other wrong right. It means that Youtube would have shit policies. You do not see me here demanding Stalinists calling for purges to be given a platform if Neonazis would be allowed to spread their messages about genocides. We're not playing a game of Quid-pro-Quo here.
Hoplite
Worth 1/5th of 100 grams of tea
>Implying that YouTube does anything about reports that aren't in line with their political goals
I don't work at Youtube, what do I know. But you can get in there and look at their user terms and start from there. You think someone violates them? Go and report them. I mean for fucks sake, we banned Neonazis in the past and Bethesda trolls on THIS(!) very forum as well. Hass even just recently banned MutantScalper for a week for his behaviour. And yet, I see no one here running around crying that their rights to free speech was violated.
But to say this, there is this idea that companies like Youtube (Google really), would be left leaning. Which couldn't be further away from the truth. Left leaning? I do not see youtube calling for nationalisation, taxing the wealthy and the like. Why are those large companies then pushing so much for "Sjw" topics, inclusion and multiculturalism. Easy. Because they do not want to get law suits and because the US is not their only market. That's why they are pushing for multicultural narratives, because the global market is a fucking multicultural one! 1 Billion Indians an god knows how many Asians out there are starting to become consumers, they are not going to consume "America first!" products where you have only the average American running around. This is the effect of globalisation. Not leftism. Because they want to reach as many consumers and customers as possible. And because more and more investors are also coming outside the United States (India, Russia and most importantly China). China is one of the largest investors in the American market, particularly Hollywood. Obviously large companies will cater to them and not anymore exclusively the American market and demopgrahic. And because they want to also avoid law suits in the work space they make sure to be extra carefull with language, addressing people and anything that could be even slightly experienced as sexual harassment.
So no. Corporations have no hidden "leftist" agenda here. They just don't want to loose money.
But to say this, there is this idea that companies like Youtube (Google really), would be left leaning. Which couldn't be further away from the truth. Left leaning? I do not see youtube calling for nationalisation, taxing the wealthy and the like. Why are those large companies then pushing so much for "Sjw" topics, inclusion and multiculturalism. Easy. Because they do not want to get law suits and because the US is not their only market. That's why they are pushing for multicultural narratives, because the global market is a fucking multicultural one! 1 Billion Indians an god knows how many Asians out there are starting to become consumers, they are not going to consume "America first!" products where you have only the average American running around. This is the effect of globalisation. Not leftism. Because they want to reach as many consumers and customers as possible. And because more and more investors are also coming outside the United States (India, Russia and most importantly China). China is one of the largest investors in the American market, particularly Hollywood. Obviously large companies will cater to them and not anymore exclusively the American market and demopgrahic. And because they want to also avoid law suits in the work space they make sure to be extra carefull with language, addressing people and anything that could be even slightly experienced as sexual harassment.
So no. Corporations have no hidden "leftist" agenda here. They just don't want to loose money.
Last edited:
TheGM
The voice of reason
Twitter has a leftist agenda and constantly LOSES money.
MutantScalper
Dogmeat
Eu-region should develop it's own Twitter. Why use competitors platforms? Same goes for Windows, Facebook, Google, etc.
DarkCorp
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Of course companies have a right to control content.
My argument is SHOULD they and how.
Look, we have all heard the saying you can't silence an idea. Imagine if someone accused me of embezzling funds. If I try to silence them, that makes me look super guilty. Get it now Crni? When Alex Jones got banned, he was vindicated on what he said and it could be argued that he got more followers as a result of all the ban business. Like you said Crni, we didn't cripple the Klan through censorship, we arrested them for ACTIONS.
One of the reasons the civil rights marchers won was because of the ACTIONS of the segregationists. The water hoses, dogs and beatings, were broadcasted for all to see. Talking racism is one thing but actively perpetuating it through ACTION is something else.
The racist whites during this time were routinely saying super racist things on camera, in the newspapers, in books, etc. That was just them talking. When the racists got violent however, then we did something.
We publicized the bad acts and let the public judge for themselves whether the neo nazi, KKK, Dylan Roof asshats were a bunch evil fucks.
Unlike you Crni, us Americans have a healthy fear of government over reach. We do not want the government to do the thinking for us. Also unlike you, we do not believe that the government should be able to regulate weapons because they look scary or otherwise regulate weapon ownership to the point where ownership is almost impossible.
Free speech exists for everyone or it cannot be called 'free', any longer.
You again also said it. It is not the racist Germans we speak of, we speak of Germans who are on the fence. Not every German who is against open borders or unlimited migrants is a fascist. When Merkel ignores the wishes of these Germans or attempts to silence them, all she succeeds in doing is pushing them into the arms of the AfD.
With the Nazis, your argument doesn't change the fact that their putsch failed, or do you disagree? Hitler had radio and news and the NSDAP was still outlawed. It was the other factors I mentioned that helped the Nazis recover. Without those other factors, the NSDAP would never have made its come back.
My argument is SHOULD they and how.
Look, we have all heard the saying you can't silence an idea. Imagine if someone accused me of embezzling funds. If I try to silence them, that makes me look super guilty. Get it now Crni? When Alex Jones got banned, he was vindicated on what he said and it could be argued that he got more followers as a result of all the ban business. Like you said Crni, we didn't cripple the Klan through censorship, we arrested them for ACTIONS.
One of the reasons the civil rights marchers won was because of the ACTIONS of the segregationists. The water hoses, dogs and beatings, were broadcasted for all to see. Talking racism is one thing but actively perpetuating it through ACTION is something else.
The racist whites during this time were routinely saying super racist things on camera, in the newspapers, in books, etc. That was just them talking. When the racists got violent however, then we did something.
We publicized the bad acts and let the public judge for themselves whether the neo nazi, KKK, Dylan Roof asshats were a bunch evil fucks.
Unlike you Crni, us Americans have a healthy fear of government over reach. We do not want the government to do the thinking for us. Also unlike you, we do not believe that the government should be able to regulate weapons because they look scary or otherwise regulate weapon ownership to the point where ownership is almost impossible.
Free speech exists for everyone or it cannot be called 'free', any longer.
You again also said it. It is not the racist Germans we speak of, we speak of Germans who are on the fence. Not every German who is against open borders or unlimited migrants is a fascist. When Merkel ignores the wishes of these Germans or attempts to silence them, all she succeeds in doing is pushing them into the arms of the AfD.
With the Nazis, your argument doesn't change the fact that their putsch failed, or do you disagree? Hitler had radio and news and the NSDAP was still outlawed. It was the other factors I mentioned that helped the Nazis recover. Without those other factors, the NSDAP would never have made its come back.
Last edited:
T
TorontoReign
Guest
D
Deleted member 53669
Guest
Hoplite
Worth 1/5th of 100 grams of tea
Welp, it took one genetically engineered Kung Flu to take the 2nd amendment out.