5 ms·

This seems to be the public perception: only one side demands censorship. This isn't quite true and only shows you how well one side is at publicizing that they

This seems to be the public perception: only one side demands censorship. This isn't quite true and only shows you how well one side is at publicizing that they're being censored, which, ironically, means they're censored -less-. Palestinian accounts on facebook have been deleted for years when they were trying to report on occupation. Facebook also deleted all the accounts of Nicaraguan socialists trying to counter the Western narratives about their election. Anything on social media that is anti-imperialist, especially when it comes from the actual global south, has been silenced, and also silently silenced - because it' not part of the mainstream discourse, so people often don't realize it's gone because they never knew it was there to begin with. It was easy to quietly sweep under the rug. The new right isn't so easy to quietly sweep under the rug, because it's loud and it's next door to many people in the West, so you notice when the posts are gone, people yell about it and call wolf - which means they have the voice to yell, and the power to cry wolf. It's an old (very, very old) insight that rules for censorship are made with the the excesses of the right as legitimation for it, and then used against the left. Which is why, on the left, it would be pragmatically and strategically smart to stop clamoring for the censorship of the right. We're just handing the agents of control the tools to silence us with.

exceptione 5y ago
I am not sure about your reasoning. Parent is talking about vaccine opposers, while you are talking about Nicaraguan socialists and Palestinians. Could we really draw such lines?
- jahearn 5y ago
  Parent seemed to not be talking about vaccines, but that censorship only was being applied to one "side." So this comment was intentionally describing issues that are from different sides to point out that (A) it doesn't only happen to the "right," and (B) the fact that we hear about it so much from the "right" might actually be because they're censored less. Then (C) they describe that this is potentially even an intentional pattern used by more middle-leaning "left" to justify censorship against the "right" and then leverage against their own, more radical, side. Not necessarily defending the idea, but comment seemed relevant to the parent, to me.
native_samples 5y ago
Well, I was using vaccines as an example because it's mentioned in the article (which appears to be prompted by some flak from the Guardian). I don't know about Palestinians and Nicaraguan socialists. Are they demanding that their critics be silenced? I doubt they're in any position to even imagine demanding that. "It's an old (very, very old) insight that rules for censorship are made with the excesses of the right as legitimation for it, and then used against the left." Maybe it's old because it's no longer true? I'm approaching middle age now, and the best examples of right wing censorship I can think of are all related to sexual morals and porn. But at least in the UK left wing parties usually support censoring that stuff too, e.g. here's an old article about the current head of the UK Labour Party being concerned about internet porn and other Labour party figures supporting the idea of internet censorship: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2169509/Internet-porn-making-teenage-relationships-violent-says-countrys-law-chief.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2169509/Internet-po... If the left has ever been the side of free speech it must have been some time before I was born. I suspect the reality is that the people who want censorship are typically those in power or most aligned with power, and that swings back and forth over time.
- jimkleiber 5y ago
  > the best examples of right wing censorship I can think of are all related to sexual morals and porn While those topics do come up for censorship here in the US, some people are also demanding to remove topics related to race and other interpretations of history, and sometimes for curse words. For example, two trending topics in the US today are Dan Bongino getting kicked off YouTube and the book Maus being restricted/removed/relegated in a school district in Tennessee, and people complaining from both sides of being censored.

exceptione 5y ago

I am not sure about your reasoning. Parent is talking about vaccine opposers, while you are talking about Nicaraguan socialists and Palestinians. Could we really draw such lines?

jahearn 5y ago
Parent seemed to not be talking about vaccines, but that censorship only was being applied to one "side." So this comment was intentionally describing issues that are from different sides to point out that (A) it doesn't only happen to the "right," and (B) the fact that we hear about it so much from the "right" might actually be because they're censored less. Then (C) they describe that this is potentially even an intentional pattern used by more middle-leaning "left" to justify censorship against the "right" and then leverage against their own, more radical, side. Not necessarily defending the idea, but comment seemed relevant to the parent, to me.

native_samples 5y ago

Well, I was using vaccines as an example because it's mentioned in the article (which appears to be prompted by some flak from the Guardian). I don't know about Palestinians and Nicaraguan socialists. Are they demanding that their critics be silenced? I doubt they're in any position to even imagine demanding that. "It's an old (very, very old) insight that rules for censorship are made with the excesses of the right as legitimation for it, and then used against the left." Maybe it's old because it's no longer true? I'm approaching middle age now, and the best examples of right wing censorship I can think of are all related to sexual morals and porn. But at least in the UK left wing parties usually support censoring that stuff too, e.g. here's an old article about the current head of the UK Labour Party being concerned about internet porn and other Labour party figures supporting the idea of internet censorship: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2169509/Internet-porn-making-teenage-relationships-violent-says-countrys-law-chief.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2169509/Internet-po... If the left has ever been the side of free speech it must have been some time before I was born. I suspect the reality is that the people who want censorship are typically those in power or most aligned with power, and that swings back and forth over time.

jimkleiber 5y ago
> the best examples of right wing censorship I can think of are all related to sexual morals and porn While those topics do come up for censorship here in the US, some people are also demanding to remove topics related to race and other interpretations of history, and sometimes for curse words. For example, two trending topics in the US today are Dan Bongino getting kicked off YouTube and the book Maus being restricted/removed/relegated in a school district in Tennessee, and people complaining from both sides of being censored.