4 ms·

That boat has long sailed once Big Tech banned Parler and everyone cheered it. America is no longer a country where free speech is paramount. Atleast in other d

That boat has long sailed once Big Tech banned Parler and everyone cheered it. America is no longer a country where free speech is paramount. Atleast in other democratic countries Censorship happens through the elected Government. As a citizen you can always remove the elected representatives if you don't like the Censorship implemented by your elected representatives for whatever reason. You can't remove/vote out Facebook, Google, Twitter, Amazon et all because of the powerful grasp they have over digital communications and media. The very fact that Parler was banned by Big Tech and not by US Congress puts a very bad light on America. Why would any Government trust American Government's word if a Private Company can undo it or act unilaterally without Congress approval? What does it convey to the World leaders? Is there 1 power center in America or 2? We used to mock Pakistan for having dual power centers (the elected Government and the military since their military doesn't come under the control of the elected Government). It caused a lot of confusion for World powers to interact with Pakistan as no one knew who the controller was. Was it the elected Government or the military? I'm seeing the same thing happening in America. Why should my Government take US Government seriously if a private company can ban/censor US Government communications? Deleting a sitting US President's account is not going to be respected by any Government. Period.

Gibbon1 6y ago
> America is no longer a country where free speech is paramount. My answer to that is you and your friends have talked up sedition for so long that you've normalized it. And can't wrap your head around the thought that it's actually criminal and always has been. You've gotten away with that because up until now the government hasn't really cared. Take a note, after Jan 6th they now care.
- shripadk 6y ago
  I'm not an American. So what sedition are you talking about? I won't comment on the rest of your stupid statement as you haven't even understood what I was saying. Maybe learn to read the entire comment before you give your 2 cents. --- Editing because rate limited > Not being an American perhaps you should be even more concerned about what you say. This just doesn't change the US Governments view what what you've been up to, your government also will be taking a very dim view. Are you for real? I don't give a fuck as to what US Government thinks of me. I don't give a fuck to what my Government thinks of me. I have a clear view of what has transpired and I know the repercussions this will have on internet and our freedoms. No one can take that right of opinion away from me. Not you, not the American Government, not my Government. Neither have I been involved in any seditious activities nor will I ever be. It just goes to show how anti-free speech America has become these days. It shows in your replies to me that you can't even tolerate an opposing viewpoint without insinuations and veiled threats.
  - Gibbon1 6y ago
    Not being an American perhaps you should be even more concerned about what you say. This just doesn't change the US Governments view what what you've been up to, your government also will be taking a very dim view.
outside1234 6y ago
Parler banned Parler. They refused to take down material that was obviously detrimental to society. We would not put up with television stations planning to kidnap senators either. You don’t get to yell fire in a theatre. They were warned. They didn’t do anything. They banned themselves.
- shripadk 6y ago
  Why stop there? I'll add more to the list of Parler transgressions: 1. They live streamed NZ Mosque Shooter. https://www.thenews.com.pk/latest/444349-christchurch-shooter-live-streamed-mosque-firing-on-facebook https://www.thenews.com.pk/latest/444349-christchurch-shoote... 2. They helped ISIS in propagating terror material for 2 full years. They allowed ISIS to post beheading videos and threaten the then President of the United States Barack Obama. They even got sued for it but took protection behind Section 230: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-twitter-isis-lawsuit-idUSKCN0US1TA https://www.reuters.com/article/us-twitter-isis-lawsuit-idUS... and https://money.cnn.com/2016/12/20/technology/twitter-facebook-google-lawsuit-isis/index.html https://money.cnn.com/2016/12/20/technology/twitter-facebook... and https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/11/war-goes-viral/501125/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/11/war-goe... 3. It was used to incite Genocide of an ethnic group causing mass migrations: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/06/technology/myanmar-facebook.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/06/technology/myanmar-facebo... 4. They were party to toppling of foreign Governments: https://www.smh.com.au/technology/can-social-networking-overthrow-a-government-20110225-1b7u6.html https://www.smh.com.au/technology/can-social-networking-over... 5. They were used by foreign Governments to censor Citizens and Oppositon: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/7/16/it-exists-to-demobilise-opposition-how-twitter-fails-arabs https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/7/16/it-exists-to-demobi... > They banned themselves. Oh yes they banned themselves. The proof I have given above validates your point. I am wrong, you are right! Congratulations!
  - Veen 6y ago
    Is your point that Facebook and Twitter are just as culpable as Parler but held to a different standard?
scrollaway 6y ago
> The very fact that Parler was banned by Big Tech and not by US Congress puts a very bad light on America. That you think a private company being shunned by other private companies, is worse for free speech than a private company being banned by the government, shows you don't really understand the american definition of free speech.
- shripadk 6y ago
  I don't care about American Free Speech. I'm not an American. I'm an Indian. Yes it is worse for America's image that a competitor censors another competitor. It puts a bad light on the US Government itself that it cannot regulate private companies and are at the mercy of private companies that even Government communications can be censored. This is far beyond what free speech is all about. And don't tell me US Government hasn't banned private companies. Huawei ban immediately comes to mind. So many companies have been banned for nefarious activities including but not limited to fraud and scams. It is 100 percent in the purview of US Congress to ban for any violations of law. Free speech has nothing to do with powers the US Government enjoys vis-a-vis legal entities like a company or trust. A company is not an individual. A company is not a Citizen of the United States. A company doesn't enjoy free speech rights. It is a legal entity that was allowed to function because of the US Government. Not because Apple, Facebook, Twitter or Google decided to. Only the US Government can cancel trade licenses, company registration and debar individuals from ever holding directorship. That power is not vested in the hands of few silicon valley companies.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - scrollaway 6y ago
    Trade sanctions are a different thing to sanctions imposed for speech. I'm not american either but if I'm going to comment on the USA, I'm going to respect their own definitions and culture. Meanwhile you're trying to make a point you don't fully grasp yourself. Sorry.
  - gnarlysasquatch 6y ago
osacial 6y ago
True, though the bad light is not that some companies and groups in US are limiting Free Speech, but because US government has lost monopoly on violence, judging others and dealing punishment. All they key components that holds together any state - with or without Free Speech(which exists only few centuries or so). We do not know with whom we have to deal with - US government that is represented by People - including ELECTED President, or Thing that is not controlled by law and does not need to abide to it and can do as it wishes - just like terrorists. Essentially at this point US does not exist - when the Thing, that will arise in place in US will start to abide to law and make agreements with others, then others will be more relaxed, but currently Democracy citadel of the whole World has ended. No one is going to take US as an example anymore and it would take a lot of work to gain that position where US once was and usually there is no way to climb back after such actions. Not to mention what this all is causing to current World Order, where no one is going to seriously take US - all the doors that are now opened for all the shit to pour out.

Gibbon1 6y ago

> America is no longer a country where free speech is paramount. My answer to that is you and your friends have talked up sedition for so long that you've normalized it. And can't wrap your head around the thought that it's actually criminal and always has been. You've gotten away with that because up until now the government hasn't really cared. Take a note, after Jan 6th they now care.

shripadk 6y ago
I'm not an American. So what sedition are you talking about? I won't comment on the rest of your stupid statement as you haven't even understood what I was saying. Maybe learn to read the entire comment before you give your 2 cents. --- Editing because rate limited > Not being an American perhaps you should be even more concerned about what you say. This just doesn't change the US Governments view what what you've been up to, your government also will be taking a very dim view. Are you for real? I don't give a fuck as to what US Government thinks of me. I don't give a fuck to what my Government thinks of me. I have a clear view of what has transpired and I know the repercussions this will have on internet and our freedoms. No one can take that right of opinion away from me. Not you, not the American Government, not my Government. Neither have I been involved in any seditious activities nor will I ever be. It just goes to show how anti-free speech America has become these days. It shows in your replies to me that you can't even tolerate an opposing viewpoint without insinuations and veiled threats.
- Gibbon1 6y ago
  Not being an American perhaps you should be even more concerned about what you say. This just doesn't change the US Governments view what what you've been up to, your government also will be taking a very dim view.

outside1234 6y ago

Parler banned Parler. They refused to take down material that was obviously detrimental to society. We would not put up with television stations planning to kidnap senators either. You don’t get to yell fire in a theatre. They were warned. They didn’t do anything. They banned themselves.

shripadk 6y ago
Why stop there? I'll add more to the list of Parler transgressions: 1. They live streamed NZ Mosque Shooter. https://www.thenews.com.pk/latest/444349-christchurch-shooter-live-streamed-mosque-firing-on-facebook https://www.thenews.com.pk/latest/444349-christchurch-shoote... 2. They helped ISIS in propagating terror material for 2 full years. They allowed ISIS to post beheading videos and threaten the then President of the United States Barack Obama. They even got sued for it but took protection behind Section 230: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-twitter-isis-lawsuit-idUSKCN0US1TA https://www.reuters.com/article/us-twitter-isis-lawsuit-idUS... and https://money.cnn.com/2016/12/20/technology/twitter-facebook-google-lawsuit-isis/index.html https://money.cnn.com/2016/12/20/technology/twitter-facebook... and https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/11/war-goes-viral/501125/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2016/11/war-goe... 3. It was used to incite Genocide of an ethnic group causing mass migrations: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/06/technology/myanmar-facebook.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/06/technology/myanmar-facebo... 4. They were party to toppling of foreign Governments: https://www.smh.com.au/technology/can-social-networking-overthrow-a-government-20110225-1b7u6.html https://www.smh.com.au/technology/can-social-networking-over... 5. They were used by foreign Governments to censor Citizens and Oppositon: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/7/16/it-exists-to-demobilise-opposition-how-twitter-fails-arabs https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/7/16/it-exists-to-demobi... > They banned themselves. Oh yes they banned themselves. The proof I have given above validates your point. I am wrong, you are right! Congratulations!
- Veen 6y ago
  Is your point that Facebook and Twitter are just as culpable as Parler but held to a different standard?

scrollaway 6y ago

> The very fact that Parler was banned by Big Tech and not by US Congress puts a very bad light on America. That you think a private company being shunned by other private companies, is worse for free speech than a private company being banned by the government, shows you don't really understand the american definition of free speech.

shripadk 6y ago
I don't care about American Free Speech. I'm not an American. I'm an Indian. Yes it is worse for America's image that a competitor censors another competitor. It puts a bad light on the US Government itself that it cannot regulate private companies and are at the mercy of private companies that even Government communications can be censored. This is far beyond what free speech is all about. And don't tell me US Government hasn't banned private companies. Huawei ban immediately comes to mind. So many companies have been banned for nefarious activities including but not limited to fraud and scams. It is 100 percent in the purview of US Congress to ban for any violations of law. Free speech has nothing to do with powers the US Government enjoys vis-a-vis legal entities like a company or trust. A company is not an individual. A company is not a Citizen of the United States. A company doesn't enjoy free speech rights. It is a legal entity that was allowed to function because of the US Government. Not because Apple, Facebook, Twitter or Google decided to. Only the US Government can cancel trade licenses, company registration and debar individuals from ever holding directorship. That power is not vested in the hands of few silicon valley companies.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- scrollaway 6y ago
  Trade sanctions are a different thing to sanctions imposed for speech. I'm not american either but if I'm going to comment on the USA, I'm going to respect their own definitions and culture. Meanwhile you're trying to make a point you don't fully grasp yourself. Sorry.
- gnarlysasquatch 6y ago

osacial 6y ago

True, though the bad light is not that some companies and groups in US are limiting Free Speech, but because US government has lost monopoly on violence, judging others and dealing punishment. All they key components that holds together any state - with or without Free Speech(which exists only few centuries or so). We do not know with whom we have to deal with - US government that is represented by People - including ELECTED President, or Thing that is not controlled by law and does not need to abide to it and can do as it wishes - just like terrorists. Essentially at this point US does not exist - when the Thing, that will arise in place in US will start to abide to law and make agreements with others, then others will be more relaxed, but currently Democracy citadel of the whole World has ended. No one is going to take US as an example anymore and it would take a lot of work to gain that position where US once was and usually there is no way to climb back after such actions. Not to mention what this all is causing to current World Order, where no one is going to seriously take US - all the doors that are now opened for all the shit to pour out.