5 ms·

The threat is already very real now and anyone who claims it's a partisan issue exclusive to one party is part of the problem. They're dismantling free speech r

The threat is already very real now and anyone who claims it's a partisan issue exclusive to one party is part of the problem. They're dismantling free speech rights, that's arguably even more dangerous than anything Trump has done. First they came for your right to free expression, and I did not speak out because I couldn't anymore. The end.

cool_dude85 5y ago
Sorry, how are "they" dismantling free speech rights in the US?
- weimerica 5y ago
  Private corporations spend the last decade+ consolidating communications, then the USG works with those corporations to censor anything they deem "problematic?" Really, that falls into a textbook fascist definition. Consider that virtually every other mass-communication medium CAN'T do what the social firms are getting away with currently, rather than cheer on your "right side of history" allies.
- crisdux 5y ago
  Okay, I'll bite. Free speech is a legal doctrine and an aspect of culture that America has traditionally valued. Few examples below. * The Biden administration is working with technology companies to flag users and posts for removal. * Journalists and whistleblowers are being censored, monitored and even jailed. * More Americans than ever say they cannot speak their mind or they risk losing their livelihoods. * The public isn't allowed to have reasonable discussions on scientific research or theory if it is counter to the prevailing narrative or they risk being censored and removed from platforms. See ivermectin and lab leak. * Our biggest newspapers cannot report on majority held beliefs and perspectives without retribution from activists. * Our institutions are referring to books they don't like as "violence." * Our nation's intelligence agencies have embedded agents into our corporate news media that works as efficient propogandists. Disinformation sourced from these agencies is disseminated through these channels, reported as facts, and then used as a cudgel to silence and censor critics.
  - BatFastard 5y ago
    >The Biden administration is working with technology companies to flag users and posts for removal. Is the spreading of misinformation "free speech". I agree people have the right to have different opinions, but when those opinion have been proven to be false, do you give up the right to spread it? A bit of a slippery slope. >Journalists and whistleblowers are being censored, monitored and even jailed. Journalists have been censored for the past 200 years. I see it getting better under the Biden admin, not worse. Whistleblowers were a particular problem for the Trump admin, not so much Biden admin. >Our biggest newspapers cannot report on majority held beliefs and perspectives without retribution from activists. Our institutions are referring to books they don't like as "violence." Any proof on this? Last one is just crazy.
    - crisdux 5y ago
      Among all the posts Facebook is saying is "misinformation", which I agree some of it is, they are removing legitimate claims from users that they are being harmed by vaccines. This isn't misinformation. Whistleblowers had a field day under Trump. Under Biden journalists are again being caught up in NSA surveillance, likely being illegally unmasked and then leaked to other members of the media. See Tucker Carlson. honestly, this isn't even about tucker. It's very likely illegal. These people are emboldened. Nothing ever happens to them. The American Booksellers Association yesterday referred to their promotion of an "anti-trans" book as violence. I think the last one is pretty easy to defend. Glen Greenwald documents this pretty extensively. All of our corporate media employ folks who previous worked for NSA, CIA, FBI, etc. They literally put them on TV with a moniker "Previous CIA Agent", etc. These people serve the purpose as "experts" and commonly report information from "anonymous sources" within the agencies. Their purpose is to effect public opinion. Recently see Russiagate, Boutygate, Hunter Biden laptop. The Iraq war and Vietnam War deployed these tactics too. We know for a fact that the CIA lied to us during the Iraq war. And they deployed these tactics. How is this crazy? The New York Times has reported on this relationship between intelligence agencies and the media extensively in the past. It was scandal in the 70s! This stuff is still alive and well.
throwaway6734 5y ago
Yes they are trying to dismantle free speech rights by forcing private companies to provide platforms to publish content they do not want to. There's a reasonable threat in 24 that if the election is close state legislatures will override the will of the people and submit a different set of electoral votes. This was attempted in 2020 but thankfully failed. Edit: 2016->2020
- selimthegrim 5y ago
  Who attempted this? Biden shot down Pramila Jayapal objecting to the certification then.
  - throwaway6734 5y ago
    The former president pressured the vice president not to certify election results, members of the house voted not to certify election results, the former president reached out to state legislatures to get them to override the public vote, the former president prematurely declared electoral victory, and the former president still has not conceded electoral defeat
    - selimthegrim 5y ago
      You said 2016, not 2020.
      - throwaway6734 5y ago
        Apologies, I meant 2020. will edit nkwt
- weimerica 5y ago
  > Yes they are trying to dismantle free speech rights by forcing private companies to provide platforms to publish content they do not want to. Communications carriers providing content-neutral service? Thank God the post office, USPS, FedEx, phone, fax, ISP, cell-phone, sat-phone, and handheld radio companies have the freedom to engage in partisan political censorship as they please. It would be a tyranny on those poor corporations were it not the case. Oh won't someone think of the shareholders!

cool_dude85 5y ago

Sorry, how are "they" dismantling free speech rights in the US?

weimerica 5y ago
Private corporations spend the last decade+ consolidating communications, then the USG works with those corporations to censor anything they deem "problematic?" Really, that falls into a textbook fascist definition. Consider that virtually every other mass-communication medium CAN'T do what the social firms are getting away with currently, rather than cheer on your "right side of history" allies.
crisdux 5y ago
Okay, I'll bite. Free speech is a legal doctrine and an aspect of culture that America has traditionally valued. Few examples below. * The Biden administration is working with technology companies to flag users and posts for removal. * Journalists and whistleblowers are being censored, monitored and even jailed. * More Americans than ever say they cannot speak their mind or they risk losing their livelihoods. * The public isn't allowed to have reasonable discussions on scientific research or theory if it is counter to the prevailing narrative or they risk being censored and removed from platforms. See ivermectin and lab leak. * Our biggest newspapers cannot report on majority held beliefs and perspectives without retribution from activists. * Our institutions are referring to books they don't like as "violence." * Our nation's intelligence agencies have embedded agents into our corporate news media that works as efficient propogandists. Disinformation sourced from these agencies is disseminated through these channels, reported as facts, and then used as a cudgel to silence and censor critics.
- BatFastard 5y ago
  >The Biden administration is working with technology companies to flag users and posts for removal. Is the spreading of misinformation "free speech". I agree people have the right to have different opinions, but when those opinion have been proven to be false, do you give up the right to spread it? A bit of a slippery slope. >Journalists and whistleblowers are being censored, monitored and even jailed. Journalists have been censored for the past 200 years. I see it getting better under the Biden admin, not worse. Whistleblowers were a particular problem for the Trump admin, not so much Biden admin. >Our biggest newspapers cannot report on majority held beliefs and perspectives without retribution from activists. Our institutions are referring to books they don't like as "violence." Any proof on this? Last one is just crazy.
  - crisdux 5y ago
    Among all the posts Facebook is saying is "misinformation", which I agree some of it is, they are removing legitimate claims from users that they are being harmed by vaccines. This isn't misinformation. Whistleblowers had a field day under Trump. Under Biden journalists are again being caught up in NSA surveillance, likely being illegally unmasked and then leaked to other members of the media. See Tucker Carlson. honestly, this isn't even about tucker. It's very likely illegal. These people are emboldened. Nothing ever happens to them. The American Booksellers Association yesterday referred to their promotion of an "anti-trans" book as violence. I think the last one is pretty easy to defend. Glen Greenwald documents this pretty extensively. All of our corporate media employ folks who previous worked for NSA, CIA, FBI, etc. They literally put them on TV with a moniker "Previous CIA Agent", etc. These people serve the purpose as "experts" and commonly report information from "anonymous sources" within the agencies. Their purpose is to effect public opinion. Recently see Russiagate, Boutygate, Hunter Biden laptop. The Iraq war and Vietnam War deployed these tactics too. We know for a fact that the CIA lied to us during the Iraq war. And they deployed these tactics. How is this crazy? The New York Times has reported on this relationship between intelligence agencies and the media extensively in the past. It was scandal in the 70s! This stuff is still alive and well.

throwaway6734 5y ago

Yes they are trying to dismantle free speech rights by forcing private companies to provide platforms to publish content they do not want to. There's a reasonable threat in 24 that if the election is close state legislatures will override the will of the people and submit a different set of electoral votes. This was attempted in 2020 but thankfully failed. Edit: 2016->2020

selimthegrim 5y ago
Who attempted this? Biden shot down Pramila Jayapal objecting to the certification then.
- throwaway6734 5y ago
  The former president pressured the vice president not to certify election results, members of the house voted not to certify election results, the former president reached out to state legislatures to get them to override the public vote, the former president prematurely declared electoral victory, and the former president still has not conceded electoral defeat
  - selimthegrim 5y ago
    You said 2016, not 2020.
    - throwaway6734 5y ago
      Apologies, I meant 2020. will edit nkwt
weimerica 5y ago
> Yes they are trying to dismantle free speech rights by forcing private companies to provide platforms to publish content they do not want to. Communications carriers providing content-neutral service? Thank God the post office, USPS, FedEx, phone, fax, ISP, cell-phone, sat-phone, and handheld radio companies have the freedom to engage in partisan political censorship as they please. It would be a tyranny on those poor corporations were it not the case. Oh won't someone think of the shareholders!