4 ms·

I'm not left or right, but I see the hypocrisy of you cheering for the exact mistreatment you fought against a month ago. How's that about irony?

josephcsible 4y ago
Remember that the hypocrisy goes the other way too. Before Elon bought Twitter, the prevailing opinion was "it's okay for the people who own social networks to ban opposing viewpoints". The people who thought that now all suddenly think it's not okay, just because their side doesn't own the social network anymore.
- BulgarianIdiot 4y ago
- EnKopVand 4y ago
  In what world did you see this? At least here in Europe the main conversation about Social Media has been that it shouldn't be operated by big tech companies. We've always viewed Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Reddit, and so on. Basically the way Americans are now viewing TikTok. Especially in the wake of Snowden. It's true that more people are now putting actions behind their words, and leaving Twitter for the Fediverse because of the new leadership at Twitter, but this seem to be only partly because of the right-wing turn and much more because of the instability showing just how insane it is for the world to let a social media platform be moderated by the whims of a billionaire. I frankly think Trump is right to stay on Truth. Because what happens when Elon eventually loses interest in Twitter and sells it to someone else? That is the strength of the Fediverse to be honest. You get to operate your own servers that are part of the larger whole. This would let journalists, politicians and NGOs run, and more importantly moderate, their own "Twitter" that is still part of the larger whole. Here in Denmark it would allow our government agencies to operate a "Twitter" where all our elected officials could have an account and not have to rely on an American tech company to moderate their feeds, or risk being banned for violating American laws. Yes, the consequence will very likely be that ultra right-wing networks will be largely isolated, but that's still free speech.
- jrochkind1 4y ago
  Crimethinc, the same anarchist collective in the OP who is complaining about getting banned from twitter by Musk, has been banned by social media before. https://crimethinc.com/2020/12/21/surviving-the-social-media-crackdown-the-instagram-ban-and-how-to-keep-following-us https://crimethinc.com/2020/12/21/surviving-the-social-media... The idea that there are "two sides" and that one was "in power" before and the other now, is an over-simplification. I can't find an exact piece to quote now, but I know I saw crimethinc and/or other anarchists urging people not to get so excited about calling for twitter to ban things too, on the grounds of: Don't count on capitalists or the state to rescue us, they will much prefer to use their tools against us, and overall the power twitter has to control discourse is the problem and we've got to get off of it.

josephcsible 4y ago

Remember that the hypocrisy goes the other way too. Before Elon bought Twitter, the prevailing opinion was "it's okay for the people who own social networks to ban opposing viewpoints". The people who thought that now all suddenly think it's not okay, just because their side doesn't own the social network anymore.

BulgarianIdiot 4y ago
EnKopVand 4y ago
In what world did you see this? At least here in Europe the main conversation about Social Media has been that it shouldn't be operated by big tech companies. We've always viewed Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Reddit, and so on. Basically the way Americans are now viewing TikTok. Especially in the wake of Snowden. It's true that more people are now putting actions behind their words, and leaving Twitter for the Fediverse because of the new leadership at Twitter, but this seem to be only partly because of the right-wing turn and much more because of the instability showing just how insane it is for the world to let a social media platform be moderated by the whims of a billionaire. I frankly think Trump is right to stay on Truth. Because what happens when Elon eventually loses interest in Twitter and sells it to someone else? That is the strength of the Fediverse to be honest. You get to operate your own servers that are part of the larger whole. This would let journalists, politicians and NGOs run, and more importantly moderate, their own "Twitter" that is still part of the larger whole. Here in Denmark it would allow our government agencies to operate a "Twitter" where all our elected officials could have an account and not have to rely on an American tech company to moderate their feeds, or risk being banned for violating American laws. Yes, the consequence will very likely be that ultra right-wing networks will be largely isolated, but that's still free speech.
jrochkind1 4y ago
Crimethinc, the same anarchist collective in the OP who is complaining about getting banned from twitter by Musk, has been banned by social media before. https://crimethinc.com/2020/12/21/surviving-the-social-media-crackdown-the-instagram-ban-and-how-to-keep-following-us https://crimethinc.com/2020/12/21/surviving-the-social-media... The idea that there are "two sides" and that one was "in power" before and the other now, is an over-simplification. I can't find an exact piece to quote now, but I know I saw crimethinc and/or other anarchists urging people not to get so excited about calling for twitter to ban things too, on the grounds of: Don't count on capitalists or the state to rescue us, they will much prefer to use their tools against us, and overall the power twitter has to control discourse is the problem and we've got to get off of it.