4 ms·
> Attempts to turn this into a debate about political censorship are not being made in good faith But it is political. This summer saw widespread political vio
by mopsi 6y ago
> Attempts to turn this into a debate about political censorship are not being made in good faith
But it is political. This summer saw widespread political violence, including attacks on government institutions, not to mention billions in property damage, but the mainstream reaction to that was "Show me where it says protests are supposed to be polite and peaceful"[1] with massive support for the riots from Silicon Valley companies. Kaepernick praised the violence and Dorsey gave him $3m.[2] The double standard is just sickening.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-zb58uiFjU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-zb58uiFjU
[2] https://i.imgur.com/uM1iQ5R.jpg https://i.imgur.com/uM1iQ5R.jpg
- flowside 6y agoNone of these companies severing ties with Parler or other far-right presences are making political decisions. These are all business decisions, because they are businesses. I've explained this elsewhere, but what if a boycott were to start because the company refused to cut ties with Parler? They should just eat the loss? No, in any market, people vote with their dollars, and the vast majority of tech customers just happen to also be politically liberal. This is what we signed up for when we decided to operate in a free market system.
- Dylan16807 6y agoEverything a company does is a business decision. But it can also be a political decision.
- Arkhaine_kupo 6y agoIt is funny that you quoted that the arguments are not being made in good faith and then proceeded to make a bad faith argument. Lets go through some quick fire bullet points, 93% of the summer protests where peaceful, most of the damage was on insured property with no loss of life, the cause of the riots was the unashamed and unlawful treatment of minorities in America. It was a grassroots movement. Now lets compare that to, a mob that straight away turned to violence, caused loss of life (and bashed the head of a police man with a fire extinguisher), mob had gallows and chanted to kill the vice president, pipe bombs, molotov cocktails and hostage situation zip ties where found on the scene, and it all started from a conspiracy theory that 51 different judges have considered meritless, our congress has considered meritless and the vice president of his own administration considered debunked. I wonder who is the one with a double standard here?
- totony 6y ago>no loss of life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_and_controversies_during_the_George_Floyd_protests#Deaths https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_and_controversies_dur... >most of the damage was on insured property Government property is insured by taxpayers >93% of the summer protests where peaceful I'm not sure how to confirm/disprove that statement. I'd posit that most protestors at the capitol were peaceful, but I'm not sure how to confirm/deny that either. >mob had gallows and chanted to kill the vice president Where I live "ACAB" is a trendy chant used to devil-ify police EDIT: Also, is this not the same thing? https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3217754/Black-Lives-Matter-backs-pigs-blanket-fry-em-like-bacon-chant-Minnesota.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3217754/Black-Lives... - not sure how trustworthy this is > molotov cocktails and hostage situation zip ties where found on the scene, I have seen molotovs used at BLM protest All this to say - it's not black and white; I also feel there clearly is some double standard going on here. I disagree with (what i think is) the premise of the capitol protests, but it does not strike me as that much worse than what people were supporting a few months ago.