4 ms·

Stupid HN denied me commenting "You're posting too fast". But it let you know that only when you submit the comment. So I'll post the comment from the fresh acc

Stupid HN denied me commenting "You're posting too fast". But it let you know that only when you submit the comment. So I'll post the comment from the fresh account. > the fact that you equate protesting getting killed with looting and rioting rubs Sorry, I could not understand that phrase. Who is getting killed, and what I equate to what? > Oh and then denying racist policies are, in fact, racist just because they don't meet the dictionary definition of it. It's really hard to talk to people which like to redefine words. Calling everything and everyone racists and literal nazis just because they don't like it. I'll stick to the dictionary. > And left-leaning activists shutting it down? Jesus dude. Read the constitution. You clearly have no idea what freedom of speech (in America) is. Freedom of speech is far broader term than US constitution even in the US. For example, UK has freedom in speech, but it is not in the constitution. On the other hand, many authoritarian countries have more more freedom of speech in the constitution than the US. But they don't really have free speech. "Cancelling" people for speech reduces that free speech even if it does not violate constitution. I must say, you have no idea what freedom is speech is. > I mean, Florida (a state run by a pretty right-wing governor) just passed a law essentially denying tech companies freedom of speech. The projection from the right is absolutely ridiculous at this point. Denying companies right to deplatform people might be a limitation of business freedom or whatever, but calling it attack on freedom of speech, this is a hot take. Yeah, we definitely have very different understanding of freedom of speech. Just in case, this is a quote from wikipedia: Freedom of speech: Freedom of speech is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction. Censorship: Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information. ... Censorship can be conducted by governments, *private institutions*, and other controlling bodies. Emphasis mine.

bavent 5y ago
> Sorry, I could not understand that phrase. Who is getting killed, and what I equate to what? People were out protesting the murders of black men by police, and you refer to them as looters and rioters in your prior comments - along with some defenses of Gab/Parler - both of which I was banned from for posting things that weren't right wing enough. Great freedom of speech there. I was cancelled by the right! > Freedom of speech is far broader term than US constitution even in the US. Right, that's why I said "in America" - which is commonly where people make up complaints about supposed leftists trying to get rid of it - when nearly every law limiting it in my lifetime has been proposed by either Republicans or Democrats - neither of which are leftist. >"Cancelling" people for speech reduces that free speech even if it does not violate constitution. No, it doesn't. If I choose to shop somewhere else because I think your products suck, or because I disagree with your views, I'm not reducing the total freedom of speech - I am using my right, in a semi-free market, to give business to whomever I choose. If you come into my house and say things I don't want being said in my house, it's my right to ask you to leave. If I go into a business with no shirt and no shoes - guess what - I get no service. I broke the rules, they don't have to serve me. This does not "reduce free speech" in any way. Free speech doesn't mean you get to do anything you want, and besides which, there are already limits on it - speech that incites violence, things like yelling "fire", making false statements under oath, threatening to kill someone, we had all kinds of anti-smut laws for decades here, on and on. I mean, do you bitch when AMC won't show a movie that isn't rated by the MPAA? Is that "censorship" or is it a business exercising their right to not show something they disagree with? Political belief is not (and should not be) a protected class, therefore nobody is required to transact with you, they have a choice. It's also your choice to get butthurt and complain about being cancelled (on the very platforms that are supposedly doing the cancelling, just like Marjorie Green wearing a "censored" mask while speaking on national TV). I get the the right has never really had to suffer any consequences ever, at least in America, for anything, so this may be a little disconcerting. Go ahead and look up how many right wing groups the FBI/CIA infiltrated just for being right wing, and compare that to America going out of it's way around the world to disrupt anything even remotely left of liberal. Or how many left wing publications have been targeted over the years by the government. Or how communism (as much as I disagree with it) was the biggest scare in the world and would get you blacklisted ("cancelled") here in the 50's for even being remotely associated or making someone think you might be associated with it, even if you were a famous physicist who led the development of the atomic bomb. Or you know, the Bush years, where I was teargassed and arrested for peacefully protesting the fact that my tax dollars were being used to bomb people who didn't do anything to me. Have you been teargassed or arrested for exercising your supposed right to free speech? I know the people arresting me DEFINITELY weren't spending their nights reading Chomsky, so if they weren't leftists "cancelling" me, then who were they?
- lightgreen 5y ago
  > People were out protesting the murders of black men by police, and you refer to them as looters and rioters in your prior comments No, I referred to people who were looting and rioting. Also, it was not murder. George Floyd case was manslaughter at best. I think it is not even manslaughter, but I'm not a lawyer. Again, as I said before, it's hard to talk to people who redefine words for their advantage. > along with some defenses of Gab/Parler - both of which I was banned from for posting things that weren't right wing enough. Great freedom of speech there. I was cancelled by the right! It is called deplatforming, not cancelling. If that's true, shame on them! Show me the proof, I'm condemn both of these platforms. > If I choose to shop somewhere else because I think your products suck, or because I disagree with your views, I'm not reducing the total freedom of speech - I am using my right, in a semi-free market, to give business to whomever I choose. Yes. But if you dig 10 years old tweet, and then demand a company to fire an employee, and gather a big crowd, that is cancelling. By the way, my personal policy is to ignore companies which participate in any political activity, whether they support gay rights, christian rights, nazi rights, black rights, human rights, animal rights or whatever, I don't care, I would pick a company which just sells a product. Simply because dividing society is bad, and I support companies which do not do that. > Free speech doesn't mean you get to do anything you want, and besides which, there are already limits on it - speech that incites violence, things like yelling "fire" Technically it does limit free speech. And limiting free speech is sometimes acceptable, when it is universally acceptable. Only a dozen of knuckleheads would support freedom to shout "fire" in a theater. > do you bitch when AMC won't show a movie that isn't rated by the MPAA? Is that "censorship" or is it a business exercising their right to not show something they disagree with? It is not freedom of speech issue for several reasons: they are not monopoly, their resource is limited, there are children who watch TV etc. > I get the the right has never really had to suffer any consequences ever, at least in America, for anything, so this may be a little disconcerting. Go ahead and look up how many right wing groups the FBI/CIA infiltrated just for being right wing Technically it was never? just because they are left wing, US has so many laws, there's a law to harass anyone. Ruby Ridge was one of many case where right-leaning people were harassed by the government. But I agree, until recently, left wing were harassed by the government more often. That statement of yours looks like you are willing to retaliate against rights for injustices of the past. This is very shortsighted, let alone inhumane. Those FBI/CIA agents and their bosses are long dead. Don't punish children for the sins of their fathers. > Have you been teargassed or arrested for exercising your supposed right to free speech? I can tell you my story, and there are unpleasant parts in it, believe me, I know what I'm talking about. But that story is not for this website, we can continue in e-mail if you wish. farright@altmails.com is a redirect e-mail. Anyway, I'm always on the side of those oppressed. When free speech is restricted for someone, I'm all for them regardless of their political views, lefts, rights, jews, arabs, blacks, whites, gays, christians, nazis, doesn't matter. When peaceful protesters get arrested, again, they have my full support regardless of their views. But when people start burning buildings because of police incident resulting in non-intentional killing of junkie criminal resisting arrest, they have no my support.

bavent 5y ago

> Sorry, I could not understand that phrase. Who is getting killed, and what I equate to what? People were out protesting the murders of black men by police, and you refer to them as looters and rioters in your prior comments - along with some defenses of Gab/Parler - both of which I was banned from for posting things that weren't right wing enough. Great freedom of speech there. I was cancelled by the right! > Freedom of speech is far broader term than US constitution even in the US. Right, that's why I said "in America" - which is commonly where people make up complaints about supposed leftists trying to get rid of it - when nearly every law limiting it in my lifetime has been proposed by either Republicans or Democrats - neither of which are leftist. >"Cancelling" people for speech reduces that free speech even if it does not violate constitution. No, it doesn't. If I choose to shop somewhere else because I think your products suck, or because I disagree with your views, I'm not reducing the total freedom of speech - I am using my right, in a semi-free market, to give business to whomever I choose. If you come into my house and say things I don't want being said in my house, it's my right to ask you to leave. If I go into a business with no shirt and no shoes - guess what - I get no service. I broke the rules, they don't have to serve me. This does not "reduce free speech" in any way. Free speech doesn't mean you get to do anything you want, and besides which, there are already limits on it - speech that incites violence, things like yelling "fire", making false statements under oath, threatening to kill someone, we had all kinds of anti-smut laws for decades here, on and on. I mean, do you bitch when AMC won't show a movie that isn't rated by the MPAA? Is that "censorship" or is it a business exercising their right to not show something they disagree with? Political belief is not (and should not be) a protected class, therefore nobody is required to transact with you, they have a choice. It's also your choice to get butthurt and complain about being cancelled (on the very platforms that are supposedly doing the cancelling, just like Marjorie Green wearing a "censored" mask while speaking on national TV). I get the the right has never really had to suffer any consequences ever, at least in America, for anything, so this may be a little disconcerting. Go ahead and look up how many right wing groups the FBI/CIA infiltrated just for being right wing, and compare that to America going out of it's way around the world to disrupt anything even remotely left of liberal. Or how many left wing publications have been targeted over the years by the government. Or how communism (as much as I disagree with it) was the biggest scare in the world and would get you blacklisted ("cancelled") here in the 50's for even being remotely associated or making someone think you might be associated with it, even if you were a famous physicist who led the development of the atomic bomb. Or you know, the Bush years, where I was teargassed and arrested for peacefully protesting the fact that my tax dollars were being used to bomb people who didn't do anything to me. Have you been teargassed or arrested for exercising your supposed right to free speech? I know the people arresting me DEFINITELY weren't spending their nights reading Chomsky, so if they weren't leftists "cancelling" me, then who were they?

lightgreen 5y ago
> People were out protesting the murders of black men by police, and you refer to them as looters and rioters in your prior comments No, I referred to people who were looting and rioting. Also, it was not murder. George Floyd case was manslaughter at best. I think it is not even manslaughter, but I'm not a lawyer. Again, as I said before, it's hard to talk to people who redefine words for their advantage. > along with some defenses of Gab/Parler - both of which I was banned from for posting things that weren't right wing enough. Great freedom of speech there. I was cancelled by the right! It is called deplatforming, not cancelling. If that's true, shame on them! Show me the proof, I'm condemn both of these platforms. > If I choose to shop somewhere else because I think your products suck, or because I disagree with your views, I'm not reducing the total freedom of speech - I am using my right, in a semi-free market, to give business to whomever I choose. Yes. But if you dig 10 years old tweet, and then demand a company to fire an employee, and gather a big crowd, that is cancelling. By the way, my personal policy is to ignore companies which participate in any political activity, whether they support gay rights, christian rights, nazi rights, black rights, human rights, animal rights or whatever, I don't care, I would pick a company which just sells a product. Simply because dividing society is bad, and I support companies which do not do that. > Free speech doesn't mean you get to do anything you want, and besides which, there are already limits on it - speech that incites violence, things like yelling "fire" Technically it does limit free speech. And limiting free speech is sometimes acceptable, when it is universally acceptable. Only a dozen of knuckleheads would support freedom to shout "fire" in a theater. > do you bitch when AMC won't show a movie that isn't rated by the MPAA? Is that "censorship" or is it a business exercising their right to not show something they disagree with? It is not freedom of speech issue for several reasons: they are not monopoly, their resource is limited, there are children who watch TV etc. > I get the the right has never really had to suffer any consequences ever, at least in America, for anything, so this may be a little disconcerting. Go ahead and look up how many right wing groups the FBI/CIA infiltrated just for being right wing Technically it was never? just because they are left wing, US has so many laws, there's a law to harass anyone. Ruby Ridge was one of many case where right-leaning people were harassed by the government. But I agree, until recently, left wing were harassed by the government more often. That statement of yours looks like you are willing to retaliate against rights for injustices of the past. This is very shortsighted, let alone inhumane. Those FBI/CIA agents and their bosses are long dead. Don't punish children for the sins of their fathers. > Have you been teargassed or arrested for exercising your supposed right to free speech? I can tell you my story, and there are unpleasant parts in it, believe me, I know what I'm talking about. But that story is not for this website, we can continue in e-mail if you wish. farright@altmails.com is a redirect e-mail. Anyway, I'm always on the side of those oppressed. When free speech is restricted for someone, I'm all for them regardless of their political views, lefts, rights, jews, arabs, blacks, whites, gays, christians, nazis, doesn't matter. When peaceful protesters get arrested, again, they have my full support regardless of their views. But when people start burning buildings because of police incident resulting in non-intentional killing of junkie criminal resisting arrest, they have no my support.