4 ms·

Going’s step further, Are you saying it’s not okay to blacklist neo-nazis? I get there’s the issue of who decides, but I’d say its fair for companies to say bla

by mint2 5y ago

Going’s step further, Are you saying it’s not okay to blacklist neo-nazis? I get there’s the issue of who decides, but I’d say its fair for companies to say black list a neo nazi from working if that’s their desire. If someone walks in with a swastika tattooed on their forehead I wouldn’t hire them or serve them. Same with perceived “communists” it’s not a protected class, while I disagree with that particular instance of freedom of speech/association it seems totally within the rights. If the government is directing the blacklisting it’s a different matter. Private corporations and citizens are free to.

gruez 5y ago
> Going’s step further, Are you saying it’s not okay to blacklist neo-nazis? I get there’s the issue of who decides, but I’d say its fair for companies to say black list a neo nazi from working if that’s their desire. If someone walks in with a swastika tattooed on their forehead I wouldn’t hire them or serve them. I'm not arguing an absolutist position (ie. "corporations should never disassociate with someone") here. If someone has demonstrably done a Bad Thing, I'm for proportional actions being levied in response. That said, the examples[1] given are anything but proportional. [1] ie. "This movement began by targeting Russian artists and athletes who were told that they will be cancelled or blacklisted if they do not expressly denounce the Russian invasion of Ukraine and President Vladimir Putin."
- rosndo 5y ago
  It’s worth noting that Turley is defending Gabbard who goes on holidays with actual Nazis of the SSNP.
yucky 5y ago
[flagged]
lern_too_spel 5y ago
"Free speech" activists on the right are really concerned about restricting freedom of association. They don't want to restrict your freedom not to associate with people based on things those people can't change about themselves that are harmless to others, like skin color or sexual preference, but they do want to restrict your freedom not to associate with people based on what those people can change about themselves that are harmful to others, like racism or homophobia.

by mint2 5y ago

gruez 5y ago

> Going’s step further, Are you saying it’s not okay to blacklist neo-nazis? I get there’s the issue of who decides, but I’d say its fair for companies to say black list a neo nazi from working if that’s their desire. If someone walks in with a swastika tattooed on their forehead I wouldn’t hire them or serve them. I'm not arguing an absolutist position (ie. "corporations should never disassociate with someone") here. If someone has demonstrably done a Bad Thing, I'm for proportional actions being levied in response. That said, the examples[1] given are anything but proportional. [1] ie. "This movement began by targeting Russian artists and athletes who were told that they will be cancelled or blacklisted if they do not expressly denounce the Russian invasion of Ukraine and President Vladimir Putin."

rosndo 5y ago
It’s worth noting that Turley is defending Gabbard who goes on holidays with actual Nazis of the SSNP.

yucky 5y ago

[flagged]

lern_too_spel 5y ago

"Free speech" activists on the right are really concerned about restricting freedom of association. They don't want to restrict your freedom not to associate with people based on things those people can't change about themselves that are harmless to others, like skin color or sexual preference, but they do want to restrict your freedom not to associate with people based on what those people can change about themselves that are harmful to others, like racism or homophobia.