4 ms·

>No citizen of the US needs to be protected. ...what?

by lobf 9y ago

pdx 9y ago
He said "No citizen of the US needs to be protected". US Citizens are allowed to hear opinions of others when engaging in political discussion. That's why it's called a discussion. If you "protect" them, because the opinion they are hearing might be from a boilerroom overseas or more likely, a DNC or RNC funded organization here in the US, you are almost certainly going to swing the pendulum too far and end up doing far more destruction to the democratic process than those you started off "protecting" us from. Look at Facebook's use of snopes.com as their "fact checkers". We now know that snopes.com is extremely politically biased. People who say they are protecting you from something are usually victimizing you instead. Please don't protect me.
- chipotle_coyote 9y ago
  We now know that snopes.com is extremely politically biased. Do we know that? Really? Or do "we" mean "it seems to me that Snopes.com is debunking reports from my side of the political aisle more than they are from the other side, therefore Snopes.com is extremely politically biased?" Because even if that initial premise is true, "Snopes is unfair to my side" is not the only possible explanation.
  - ddingus 9y ago
    We find all that out through real, open discussion. You really should not be delegating these things to Snopes without having a robust check in place.
- s73ver_ 9y ago
  "We now know that snopes.com is extremely politically biased." Do we? Or have you just disagreed with them?
syphilis2 9y ago
Protected from other's speech is what I infer.
- ddingus 9y ago
  Yes.
- lobf 9y ago
  What about propaganda?
  - ddingus 9y ago
    What about it? In my primary education, early 80's era, we learned all about propaganda. I remember those few days very well as they were eye opening! We studied the 7 basic forms in the context of advertising. Everyone found samples of each, and created an ad centered on a favorite of the forms. Once that made sense, there was some additional discussion on propaganda aimed at citizens, with samples and discussion. My own kids, did not get this, and a lot of other basic and important civics related education. Of course, I did it, and did it the same basic way I experienced the topic, and the results were similar. The First Amendment does not contain a shield. This means a few things many Americans are struggling with right now, and I believe that struggling centers on the lack of civics education and a cultivation of victim culture related to news / media / opinion consumption / discussion. The answer to free speech we don't like is more free speech! Let them put propaganda here. When we educate our people, and our press is functional (right now it's not very functional, being largely access journalism), propaganda won't be all that effective. Never is. Ask yourself, why did we quit basic education on these things?
ddingus 9y ago
From speech globally. What? Gosh, they might find out our health care policy sucks, for example.

>No citizen of the US needs to be protected. ...what?

by lobf 9y ago

>No citizen of the US needs to be protected. ...what?

pdx 9y ago

He said "No citizen of the US needs to be protected". US Citizens are allowed to hear opinions of others when engaging in political discussion. That's why it's called a discussion. If you "protect" them, because the opinion they are hearing might be from a boilerroom overseas or more likely, a DNC or RNC funded organization here in the US, you are almost certainly going to swing the pendulum too far and end up doing far more destruction to the democratic process than those you started off "protecting" us from. Look at Facebook's use of snopes.com as their "fact checkers". We now know that snopes.com is extremely politically biased. People who say they are protecting you from something are usually victimizing you instead. Please don't protect me.

chipotle_coyote 9y ago
We now know that snopes.com is extremely politically biased. Do we know that? Really? Or do "we" mean "it seems to me that Snopes.com is debunking reports from my side of the political aisle more than they are from the other side, therefore Snopes.com is extremely politically biased?" Because even if that initial premise is true, "Snopes is unfair to my side" is not the only possible explanation.
- ddingus 9y ago
  We find all that out through real, open discussion. You really should not be delegating these things to Snopes without having a robust check in place.
s73ver_ 9y ago
"We now know that snopes.com is extremely politically biased." Do we? Or have you just disagreed with them?

syphilis2 9y ago

Protected from other's speech is what I infer.

ddingus 9y ago
Yes.
lobf 9y ago
What about propaganda?
- ddingus 9y ago
  What about it? In my primary education, early 80's era, we learned all about propaganda. I remember those few days very well as they were eye opening! We studied the 7 basic forms in the context of advertising. Everyone found samples of each, and created an ad centered on a favorite of the forms. Once that made sense, there was some additional discussion on propaganda aimed at citizens, with samples and discussion. My own kids, did not get this, and a lot of other basic and important civics related education. Of course, I did it, and did it the same basic way I experienced the topic, and the results were similar. The First Amendment does not contain a shield. This means a few things many Americans are struggling with right now, and I believe that struggling centers on the lack of civics education and a cultivation of victim culture related to news / media / opinion consumption / discussion. The answer to free speech we don't like is more free speech! Let them put propaganda here. When we educate our people, and our press is functional (right now it's not very functional, being largely access journalism), propaganda won't be all that effective. Never is. Ask yourself, why did we quit basic education on these things?

ddingus 9y ago

From speech globally. What? Gosh, they might find out our health care policy sucks, for example.