4 ms·

I think the gray area is why the far right thinks that "free speech" means "free-from-consequences speech". They have their free speech already. They go on var

I think the gray area is why the far right thinks that "free speech" means "free-from-consequences speech". They have their free speech already. They go on various platforms, and say whatever they want until people get mad and private companies make a money-based decision to ban them. According to the libertarian view of the world: this is all working exactly as intended. Everyone in the system is making a private decision and speaking with their wallets.

nailer 6y ago
> They go on various platforms, and say whatever they want until people get mad and private companies make a money-based decision to ban them. The far right is general taken to mean ultra nationalists that attack minority groups. Every major social network has hate speech in their terms of service, and very few people complaining about censorship are complaining about enforcement of rules against actual hate speech.
- ggggtez 6y ago
  > very few people complaining about censorship are complaining about enforcement of rules against actual hate speech. Citation needed. But honestly, it doesn't matter because it doesn't change the fact that this is the libertarian ideal situation. The government is not mandating anything. All "cancel culture" is created from private individuals making their own private decisions, and that includes corporations banning anyone they like for any reason. It's right there in the name "culture". No one is required to do anything, it's just that it's an advantageous decision at the cultural level to do what most people want. Any suggestion that there is a problem with this is in contradiction to the libertarian idea of free speech.
  - nailer 6y ago
    > Citation needed. Likewise. Can you name a single high profile twitter ban that was due to promotion of white supremacy, sexism, or similar? > But honestly, it doesn't matter because it doesn't change the fact that this is the libertarian ideal situation. Monopolies are not free markets.
    - ggggtez 6y ago
      Twitter isn't a monopoly, now you're just being silly. > Can you name a single high profile twitter ban that was due to promotion of white supremacy, sexism, or similar? Since you only asked for one, I'll give you probably the most clear cut example that can be asked for: David Duke, well known former KKK grand wizard. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53608106 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53608106 There you go, now you have one. If you want more, I'm sure you're more than capable of doing the research yourself.
      - nailer 6y ago
        Twitter isn’t a monopoly? What’s the other popular social network where political discussion happens? You coming up with David Duke as an example of a controversial ban is an excellent example of my argument. Was this considered controversial? Who supported Duke remaining on Twitter?

nailer 6y ago

> They go on various platforms, and say whatever they want until people get mad and private companies make a money-based decision to ban them. The far right is general taken to mean ultra nationalists that attack minority groups. Every major social network has hate speech in their terms of service, and very few people complaining about censorship are complaining about enforcement of rules against actual hate speech.

ggggtez 6y ago
> very few people complaining about censorship are complaining about enforcement of rules against actual hate speech. Citation needed. But honestly, it doesn't matter because it doesn't change the fact that this is the libertarian ideal situation. The government is not mandating anything. All "cancel culture" is created from private individuals making their own private decisions, and that includes corporations banning anyone they like for any reason. It's right there in the name "culture". No one is required to do anything, it's just that it's an advantageous decision at the cultural level to do what most people want. Any suggestion that there is a problem with this is in contradiction to the libertarian idea of free speech.
- nailer 6y ago
  > Citation needed. Likewise. Can you name a single high profile twitter ban that was due to promotion of white supremacy, sexism, or similar? > But honestly, it doesn't matter because it doesn't change the fact that this is the libertarian ideal situation. Monopolies are not free markets.
  - ggggtez 6y ago
    Twitter isn't a monopoly, now you're just being silly. > Can you name a single high profile twitter ban that was due to promotion of white supremacy, sexism, or similar? Since you only asked for one, I'll give you probably the most clear cut example that can be asked for: David Duke, well known former KKK grand wizard. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53608106 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53608106 There you go, now you have one. If you want more, I'm sure you're more than capable of doing the research yourself.
    - nailer 6y ago
      Twitter isn’t a monopoly? What’s the other popular social network where political discussion happens? You coming up with David Duke as an example of a controversial ban is an excellent example of my argument. Was this considered controversial? Who supported Duke remaining on Twitter?