4 ms·
As much I condemn anti-vaxxers: “I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”
by rafaelturk 5y ago
As much I condemn anti-vaxxers: “I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”
- user-the-name 5y agoThis is not about "disagreeing with what you say". This is about people literally dying. Not just the people spreading the information either, innocent bystanders that get killed by the disease.
- the_snooze 5y agoThey still have every right to say what they want. YouTube also has the right not to aid them. This is the information version of "You don't have to go home, but you can't stay here."
- kkoncevicius 5y agoYouTube of course has the right not to aid them. But we also have the right to point out that YouTube is making a mistake by doing this.
- IgorPartola 5y agoSo this is your opportunity! Go make VaxxTube. The mistake they are making, if you are to be believed, is that they are leaving money on the table. Go pick it up.
- kkoncevicius 5y agoI am not talking about monetary mistakes, I also don't think they are making these changes and restrictions in order to increase profits.
- IgorPartola 5y agoSo what kind of mistake is it?
- kkoncevicius 5y agoImagine the government decided that you go to prison for speaking against vaccines. That would be a mistake. This is the same kind of mistake, but on a smaller scale.
- IgorPartola 5y agoImagine a straw man argument that has nothing to do with the current situation. Better yet, imagine if the government told you that you must post a sign in your front yard that says “vaccines are good” or “vaccines are bad”. That’s a much more relevant analogy here. Your right to not be prosecuted by the government for what you say is protected by the first amendment. YouTube’s right is similarly protected: they can say or not say what they want on their website without criminal consequences. So which is it, do you want the government to curtail YT’s free speech or not?
- kkoncevicius 5y agoI am for liberty. I don't like when governments censor their citizens and I don't like when corporations censor their users or customers. There is no contradiction. The fact that google and co can censor others is just thanks to the government being liberal and allowing action that goes against this value. This is similar to the paradox of tolerance except for liberty: "do we allow free expression for those who use it to restrict others?". And I say we do, but I don't pretend to be happy when they do.
- IgorPartola 5y agoThe contradiction is that you are saying the government can censor Google, just not you. So in other words you want to give the government the ability to tell Google “put this on your home page” for any value of “this”.
- kansface 5y agoAs if Youtube is any ordinary company. Some day in the future, with little doubt, the censorship shoe will be on the other foot.
- machiaweliczny 5y agoYT is monopoly
- evgen 5y agoLooks to me like they still have the right to say it, YouTube is just opting out of being their distribution system.
- root_axis 5y agoThey can say it, just not on YouTube.
- hef19898 5y ago"Your freedom to swing your fist stops where my nose begins". This anti-vaxx BS is already posing, or at least aggrevating, a serious public health issue. If it was just for the anti-vaxxers, I wouldn't care. It is affecting their children and people that simply cannot get the vaccine. At which point their freedom of reach (not necessarily expression, as far as I know their demonstrations are allowed) has to take the backseat when it comes to other people's health.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]