4 ms·

Your bait aside, are you seriously saying that there's no room for hyperbole in common discourse?

by dvt 6y ago

dvtrn 6y ago
There is absolutely room for hyperbole in common discourse. But reading the room, actually, check that: reading the state of the fucking nation surely elevates this to something far more than mere “common discourse” when one is talking about beheading government officials and calling it a “warning” to others Stop acting like this was said in a vacuum of just “common discourse”, I think you know full damn well that’s not the case here.
- dvt 6y ago
  > Stop acting like this was said in a vacuum of just “common discourse” Even though I am a bit of a free speech absolutist, he said it on his podcast. I can probably find a million examples[1] of Joe Rogan being hyperbolic or saying something inflammatory on his podcast. [1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/joe-rogans-podcast-sparks-tensions-inside-spotify-11604156400 https://www.wsj.com/articles/joe-rogans-podcast-sparks-tensi...
  - dvtrn 6y ago
    Okay. Challenge accepted. Find me ONE example of Joe Rogan talking about beheading a government official and putting their heads on pikes. I will happily eat my words if you can find one.
tartoran 6y ago
The instigating to violence type? Nope. No room for that
thex10 6y ago
Not when the discourse is on a privately-owned platform and that hyperbole happens to violate that platform's TOS, perhaps.
ineedasername 6y ago
At a time when mobs are trying to run busses of the road over political affiliation I'd say the line between hyperbole & advocacy is much easier to cross.
manicdee 6y ago
There is no room for hyperbole when speaking from the president’s lectern. In “common discourse” where the rabble you are rousing is the crowd at your local fight-a-night pub is whatever you want it to be, but when the rabble you are rousing is the bunch of Second Amendment defenders looking to start a shooting war in my neighbourhood, please consider your civic responsibility to allow others the peaceful enjoyment of their homes.
- dvt 6y ago
  > There is no room for hyperbole when speaking from the president’s lectern. Bannon wasn't speaking from the President's lectern, he was speaking on his podcast.
Fezzik 6y ago
There is, but when you consider that at least a small portion of Trump’s base and the people this Bannon ghoul appeal to are brazen and stupid enough to plan and prepare to kidnap a state’s governor you need to be pretty careful about what these ding-a-lings have access to as far as encouragement is concerned. Remember the moron that shot up the pizza shop in NY because the internet said there was pedophile ring being coordinated out of the non-existent basement? We’re not really talking about “common discourse” at that point. Edit, to add: also, remember that Dr. Fauci has already received numerous death threats from Trump supporters.
- dvt 6y ago
  I'd like to posit that curbing free speech because there might be morons out there is a dangerous slippery slope. After all, there are always morons out there. Simply consider the alternative: authoritarian and ad-hoc censorship (in this case perpetrated by tech companies that don't have the public's best interest in mind). You may agree with it today -- in fact, on a surface level, so do I -- but will we agree with it tomorrow? It's important not to lose sight of the future and accidentally throw the baby out with the bathwater. I have a feeling you might disagree, but that's a hill I'm willing to die on.
  - Fezzik 6y ago
    Twitter has nothing to do with free speech. Twitter is free to decide who can and cannot use their platform and run their TOSs how they see fit. The government has taken no steps to curtail Mr. Bannon’s free speech. If they had, I would be livid. He is free to go to the town square and project his crazy rantings until his lungs give-out or he becomes a nuisance.
    - dvt 6y ago
      > Twitter has nothing to do with free speech. Can we at least disagree in good faith? Let's not pretend massive social networks with billions of users have "nothing to do with free speech." The status of these tech companies (and more specifically, Section 230) will be almost certainly litigated in the upcoming decade[1]. There's also some precedent when it comes to TV networks (see the Turner rule[2]). [1] https://regproject.org/blog/big-tech-the-whole-first-amendment/ https://regproject.org/blog/big-tech-the-whole-first-amendme... [2] https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/512/622/ https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/512/622/

Your bait aside, are you seriously saying that there's no room for hyperbole in common discourse?

by dvt 6y ago

Your bait aside, are you seriously saying that there's no room for hyperbole in common discourse?

There is absolutely room for hyperbole in common discourse. But reading the room, actually, check that: reading the state of the fucking nation surely elevates this to something far more than mere “common discourse” when one is talking about beheading government officials and calling it a “warning” to others Stop acting like this was said in a vacuum of just “common discourse”, I think you know full damn well that’s not the case here.

dvt 6y ago
> Stop acting like this was said in a vacuum of just “common discourse” Even though I am a bit of a free speech absolutist, he said it on his podcast. I can probably find a million examples[1] of Joe Rogan being hyperbolic or saying something inflammatory on his podcast. [1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/joe-rogans-podcast-sparks-tensions-inside-spotify-11604156400 https://www.wsj.com/articles/joe-rogans-podcast-sparks-tensi...
- dvtrn 6y ago
  Okay. Challenge accepted. Find me ONE example of Joe Rogan talking about beheading a government official and putting their heads on pikes. I will happily eat my words if you can find one.

tartoran 6y ago

The instigating to violence type? Nope. No room for that

thex10 6y ago

Not when the discourse is on a privately-owned platform and that hyperbole happens to violate that platform's TOS, perhaps.

ineedasername 6y ago

At a time when mobs are trying to run busses of the road over political affiliation I'd say the line between hyperbole & advocacy is much easier to cross.

manicdee 6y ago

There is no room for hyperbole when speaking from the president’s lectern. In “common discourse” where the rabble you are rousing is the crowd at your local fight-a-night pub is whatever you want it to be, but when the rabble you are rousing is the bunch of Second Amendment defenders looking to start a shooting war in my neighbourhood, please consider your civic responsibility to allow others the peaceful enjoyment of their homes.

dvt 6y ago
> There is no room for hyperbole when speaking from the president’s lectern. Bannon wasn't speaking from the President's lectern, he was speaking on his podcast.

Fezzik 6y ago

There is, but when you consider that at least a small portion of Trump’s base and the people this Bannon ghoul appeal to are brazen and stupid enough to plan and prepare to kidnap a state’s governor you need to be pretty careful about what these ding-a-lings have access to as far as encouragement is concerned. Remember the moron that shot up the pizza shop in NY because the internet said there was pedophile ring being coordinated out of the non-existent basement? We’re not really talking about “common discourse” at that point. Edit, to add: also, remember that Dr. Fauci has already received numerous death threats from Trump supporters.

dvt 6y ago
I'd like to posit that curbing free speech because there might be morons out there is a dangerous slippery slope. After all, there are always morons out there. Simply consider the alternative: authoritarian and ad-hoc censorship (in this case perpetrated by tech companies that don't have the public's best interest in mind). You may agree with it today -- in fact, on a surface level, so do I -- but will we agree with it tomorrow? It's important not to lose sight of the future and accidentally throw the baby out with the bathwater. I have a feeling you might disagree, but that's a hill I'm willing to die on.
- Fezzik 6y ago
  Twitter has nothing to do with free speech. Twitter is free to decide who can and cannot use their platform and run their TOSs how they see fit. The government has taken no steps to curtail Mr. Bannon’s free speech. If they had, I would be livid. He is free to go to the town square and project his crazy rantings until his lungs give-out or he becomes a nuisance.
  - dvt 6y ago
    > Twitter has nothing to do with free speech. Can we at least disagree in good faith? Let's not pretend massive social networks with billions of users have "nothing to do with free speech." The status of these tech companies (and more specifically, Section 230) will be almost certainly litigated in the upcoming decade[1]. There's also some precedent when it comes to TV networks (see the Turner rule[2]). [1] https://regproject.org/blog/big-tech-the-whole-first-amendment/ https://regproject.org/blog/big-tech-the-whole-first-amendme... [2] https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/512/622/ https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/512/622/