3 ms·

Freedom of speech is an ethical value. The first amendment is a legal element. Homosexuality used to be banned in the name of "decency" too.

UncleMeat 5y ago
"We have to platform Nazis because otherwise bad things will happen to gay people" is not an especially compelling approach, given that Nazis won't grant gay people the same rights if they do ever take power. If sane people are in power, we can simply protect gay rights. If fascists are in power, they won't hesitate to take rights away from people they don't like.
- vorpalhex 5y ago
  If Trump was re-elected tomorrow, do you want him to have these same powers? Do you trust your political opponents to use these same powers wisely? Humans are terrible arbiters of truth. The Hunter Biden laptop story was censored and now it's been confirmed. Was that "good" censorship? No man is fit to play the censor, regardless political party. Even Biden was anti-gay until the Obama administration and that was well past when many of us were arguing for LGBT acceptance and equality.
  - newacct583 5y ago
    > If Trump was re-elected tomorrow, do you want him to have these same powers? Uh... what powers? There's no government action at work here. We're talking about the refusal of a bunch of Mastodon services to federate with Gab. I wouldn't expect that to change at all under a different administration, precisely because the first amendment severely constrains the government's ability to regulate speech. Trump can't make Mastodon clients carry Gab any more than Biden can force them to ban it, and for exactly the same reason. > The Hunter Biden laptop story was censored and now it's been confirmed. This one I thought was hilarious. That story was covered full time for like six weeks on the most watched news network in the country! "Censored", pfft.
  - UncleMeat 5y ago
    I don’t believe that Trump particularly cares about what I think. This is the entire point of my argument. “But we didn’t censor you when we were in power” is not a real argument because people will just say “tough shit” and throw you in prison.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
    We were talking about F-Droid removing Gab from their platform. This has nothing to do with Trump/Biden/politics at all.
- brigandish 5y ago
  Freedom of speech has utility for 2 reasons: - It's the best method for approaching truth (for several reasons, one being challenge) - It allows disputes to be settled ("fought" might be a better term:) without recourse to violence. If Nazis are willing to fight their corner without using violence then I'm happy because their arguments are easily beaten (hence, why they needed to use violence to gain power in the past). The problem that social media companies have wrought is not giving people too much free speech, it's siloing opposing views away from each other because it makes some people uncomfortable. Without challenge, speech becomes dangerous, it is not free it is restricted. It's essentially a form of blasphemy law, its effects are just the same, but now we can have several different streams of negative thought growing unchallenged alongside each other because social media has been chopped up into silos. Insane people can't get into power as long as they can be challenged, that requires free speech. As long as these silos exist there is not free speech and we are in greater danger of insane or authoritarian government.
  - UncleMeat 5y ago
    Nazis are only willing to fight without violence (generally) now because they currently aren’t able to use violence without retaliation. I don’t believe that this “commitment to non-violence” would hold any sway whatsoever were they to hold real power. I also think it is just observably false that insane people cannot get into power if there is sufficient speech to resist them.
    - brigandish 5y ago
      You don't have to trust their commitment to non-violence, it's beside the point. As long as they are being non-violent and as long as we all have free speech then whatever problems National Socialism might bring if implemented cannot come to pass. > I also think it is just observably false that insane people cannot get into power if there is sufficient speech to resist them. You might provide an example.
    - dragonwriter 5y ago
      > Nazis are only willing to fight without violence (generally) now Er, Nazis keep fighting with violence recently, so I’m not convinced that this is accurate at all.

UncleMeat 5y ago

"We have to platform Nazis because otherwise bad things will happen to gay people" is not an especially compelling approach, given that Nazis won't grant gay people the same rights if they do ever take power. If sane people are in power, we can simply protect gay rights. If fascists are in power, they won't hesitate to take rights away from people they don't like.

vorpalhex 5y ago
If Trump was re-elected tomorrow, do you want him to have these same powers? Do you trust your political opponents to use these same powers wisely? Humans are terrible arbiters of truth. The Hunter Biden laptop story was censored and now it's been confirmed. Was that "good" censorship? No man is fit to play the censor, regardless political party. Even Biden was anti-gay until the Obama administration and that was well past when many of us were arguing for LGBT acceptance and equality.
- newacct583 5y ago
  > If Trump was re-elected tomorrow, do you want him to have these same powers? Uh... what powers? There's no government action at work here. We're talking about the refusal of a bunch of Mastodon services to federate with Gab. I wouldn't expect that to change at all under a different administration, precisely because the first amendment severely constrains the government's ability to regulate speech. Trump can't make Mastodon clients carry Gab any more than Biden can force them to ban it, and for exactly the same reason. > The Hunter Biden laptop story was censored and now it's been confirmed. This one I thought was hilarious. That story was covered full time for like six weeks on the most watched news network in the country! "Censored", pfft.
- UncleMeat 5y ago
  I don’t believe that Trump particularly cares about what I think. This is the entire point of my argument. “But we didn’t censor you when we were in power” is not a real argument because people will just say “tough shit” and throw you in prison.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
  We were talking about F-Droid removing Gab from their platform. This has nothing to do with Trump/Biden/politics at all.
brigandish 5y ago
Freedom of speech has utility for 2 reasons: - It's the best method for approaching truth (for several reasons, one being challenge) - It allows disputes to be settled ("fought" might be a better term:) without recourse to violence. If Nazis are willing to fight their corner without using violence then I'm happy because their arguments are easily beaten (hence, why they needed to use violence to gain power in the past). The problem that social media companies have wrought is not giving people too much free speech, it's siloing opposing views away from each other because it makes some people uncomfortable. Without challenge, speech becomes dangerous, it is not free it is restricted. It's essentially a form of blasphemy law, its effects are just the same, but now we can have several different streams of negative thought growing unchallenged alongside each other because social media has been chopped up into silos. Insane people can't get into power as long as they can be challenged, that requires free speech. As long as these silos exist there is not free speech and we are in greater danger of insane or authoritarian government.
- UncleMeat 5y ago
  Nazis are only willing to fight without violence (generally) now because they currently aren’t able to use violence without retaliation. I don’t believe that this “commitment to non-violence” would hold any sway whatsoever were they to hold real power. I also think it is just observably false that insane people cannot get into power if there is sufficient speech to resist them.
  - brigandish 5y ago
    You don't have to trust their commitment to non-violence, it's beside the point. As long as they are being non-violent and as long as we all have free speech then whatever problems National Socialism might bring if implemented cannot come to pass. > I also think it is just observably false that insane people cannot get into power if there is sufficient speech to resist them. You might provide an example.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > Nazis are only willing to fight without violence (generally) now Er, Nazis keep fighting with violence recently, so I’m not convinced that this is accurate at all.