4 ms·

Chastising a man that’s complaining about our loss of freedom of speech? The irony! Censor him! He’s pointing out a disturbing trend, if you are pro democracy

Chastising a man that’s complaining about our loss of freedom of speech? The irony! Censor him! He’s pointing out a disturbing trend, if you are pro democracy and pro freedom of speech. What’s wrong with that? Not everyone believes in democracy / freedom of speech, but these two things go hand in hand. You can’t have democracy without freedom of speech and vice versa. The disturbing trend towards censorship is the first step towards totalitarianist dictatorships. A lot of people will argue this state is “inevitable” but resisting the urge towards tyranny is an ongoing fight.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
TomMarius 6y ago
Of course you can have freedom of speech without democracy. Why do you think you need democracy for that? There are many not democratic countries with freedom of speech, and many democratic countries without freedom of speech; and many ideological directions that don't even allow to control a person whatsoever.
- nicodjimenez 6y ago
  Please provide examples of totalitarian dictatorships with freedom of speech.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
ztjio 6y ago
The article doesn't cite even one sample of a violation of freedom of speech. Freedom of speech doesn't entitle you to a presence on someone else's platform. Freedom of speech protects you from oppression of your voice from the government, and even then it's heavily qualified to disallow incitement and such. As far as I can tell there is no violation at all. In fact, I applaud the non-government organizations taking on the absolutely critical and necessary act of moderating their platforms, they should be doing it vastly more than they are. The whole point of the internet is you can go and put up your own thing. Thinking the Googles and Facebooks have an obligation to amplify your voice no matter what you say is asinine and flat out wrong. If platforms were responsible for what they actually distribute there would be fewer of these mega platforms and the world would be dramatically better off for it. Let these doctors put their own video on their own website on their own computers. If ISPs decided to censor that then I'll start to see your side because ISP choice is limited at least in part by government restriction. But even then, the constitution doesn't ever mention the internet or anything like it. These people can all go out in public and say what they like still. They have not had any rights violated.
- JPKab 6y ago
  "In fact, I applaud the non-government organizations taking on the absolutely critical and necessary act of moderating their platforms, they should be doing it vastly more than they are." To quote a Star Wars movie, "this is how democracies die, with thunderous applause". These platforms are monopolies due to network effects. You know that. When someone says that they're going to shut down Facebook post for organizing protests, they're not motivated to not have the posting be present. Their motivation is to prevent the protest from happening in the actual physical space. Politicians have pressured these platforms to do this. Again the agenda isn't to remove offensive content. The agenda is controlling the public. If that doesn't disturb you then you don't really get it.
sameers 6y ago
Thanks for engaging - I appreciate the chance to have a discussion. I don't intend to chastise Taibbi at all. I am a fan of much of what he writes - I share his disdain for the journalistic class as a whole, and I like that he gets so mad about stuff. However, I do chastise his tone and direction with this essay. This essay in itself doesn't convince me that "freedom of speech" is at peril, nor do I think it is, now more so than previously in the United States. And Taibbi's style and targets isn't convincing me otherwise at all. What are the markers of a trend away from free speech? How is there more government suppression of private opinion now than 10, 20, 30, whatever years ago? I have really heard no convincing argument, though I have read and heard dozens of alarmist critiques that focus on this campus protest and that YouTube video personality, without making a strong argument that these are systematic, government-led, erasures of minority opinions.
- nicodjimenez 6y ago
  If you don’t think freedom of speech is in trouble in the US right now, you’re not paying attention. The NBA, Bloomberg News killing stories, YouTube getting bolder about censorship...

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

TomMarius 6y ago

Of course you can have freedom of speech without democracy. Why do you think you need democracy for that? There are many not democratic countries with freedom of speech, and many democratic countries without freedom of speech; and many ideological directions that don't even allow to control a person whatsoever.

nicodjimenez 6y ago
Please provide examples of totalitarian dictatorships with freedom of speech.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

ztjio 6y ago

The article doesn't cite even one sample of a violation of freedom of speech. Freedom of speech doesn't entitle you to a presence on someone else's platform. Freedom of speech protects you from oppression of your voice from the government, and even then it's heavily qualified to disallow incitement and such. As far as I can tell there is no violation at all. In fact, I applaud the non-government organizations taking on the absolutely critical and necessary act of moderating their platforms, they should be doing it vastly more than they are. The whole point of the internet is you can go and put up your own thing. Thinking the Googles and Facebooks have an obligation to amplify your voice no matter what you say is asinine and flat out wrong. If platforms were responsible for what they actually distribute there would be fewer of these mega platforms and the world would be dramatically better off for it. Let these doctors put their own video on their own website on their own computers. If ISPs decided to censor that then I'll start to see your side because ISP choice is limited at least in part by government restriction. But even then, the constitution doesn't ever mention the internet or anything like it. These people can all go out in public and say what they like still. They have not had any rights violated.

JPKab 6y ago
"In fact, I applaud the non-government organizations taking on the absolutely critical and necessary act of moderating their platforms, they should be doing it vastly more than they are." To quote a Star Wars movie, "this is how democracies die, with thunderous applause". These platforms are monopolies due to network effects. You know that. When someone says that they're going to shut down Facebook post for organizing protests, they're not motivated to not have the posting be present. Their motivation is to prevent the protest from happening in the actual physical space. Politicians have pressured these platforms to do this. Again the agenda isn't to remove offensive content. The agenda is controlling the public. If that doesn't disturb you then you don't really get it.

sameers 6y ago

Thanks for engaging - I appreciate the chance to have a discussion. I don't intend to chastise Taibbi at all. I am a fan of much of what he writes - I share his disdain for the journalistic class as a whole, and I like that he gets so mad about stuff. However, I do chastise his tone and direction with this essay. This essay in itself doesn't convince me that "freedom of speech" is at peril, nor do I think it is, now more so than previously in the United States. And Taibbi's style and targets isn't convincing me otherwise at all. What are the markers of a trend away from free speech? How is there more government suppression of private opinion now than 10, 20, 30, whatever years ago? I have really heard no convincing argument, though I have read and heard dozens of alarmist critiques that focus on this campus protest and that YouTube video personality, without making a strong argument that these are systematic, government-led, erasures of minority opinions.

nicodjimenez 6y ago
If you don’t think freedom of speech is in trouble in the US right now, you’re not paying attention. The NBA, Bloomberg News killing stories, YouTube getting bolder about censorship...