8 ms·

I mean where are the supposed free-speech defenders? Especially after hearing non-stop about the supposed free-speech concerns of a twitter algorithm that they

I mean where are the supposed free-speech defenders? Especially after hearing non-stop about the supposed free-speech concerns of a twitter algorithm that they were convinced was partially benefiting one side more than the other. Something trivial in scope and still not entirely clear was actually happening - here we have actual insane free speech authoritarian concerns and it's crickets. You must register with the state before speaking out against a government authority, or will be fined daily if you don't. So much complaining about why can't they use the n-word more often and yet when it comes to actual serious immensely consequential free-speech concerns from a potential leading presidential candidate nothing. The hypocrisy is unbearable at this point. No different than Elon the supposed free speech proponent whose main act has been to ban people speaking out against him.

bandyaboot 4y ago
> I mean where are the supposed free-speech defenders? > Especially after hearing non-stop about the supposed free-speech concerns of a twitter algorithm that they were convinced was partially benefiting one side more than the other. They’re frauds. It was never about protecting free speech. It was about protecting speech that they like.
klyrs 4y ago
I hold the same cynicism, but in the spirit of generous optimism, I'm looking forward to a FIRE lawsuit in defense of our civil liberties. Edit: oh good https://www.thefire.org/news/fire-statement-florida-senate-bill-1316 https://www.thefire.org/news/fire-statement-florida-senate-b...
basch 4y ago
Isn't this just state funded campaigning? They know the law wont go anywhere, but it's a win for commercial time. Really has nothing to do with speech at all, and everything to do with appearing anti woke. Posturing.
- AlexandrB 4y ago
  How is getting bloggers to register with a govt. agency anti-woke?
  - basch 4y ago
    Because their candidate proposed it. When it comes time to spin it, itll be sold as "put an end to under the table woke lobbying"
x86_64Ubuntu 4y ago
Nowhere to be seen, as expected. They've only been worried about authoritarian-lite ideas receiving poor play in the marketplace of ideas and sometimes even social consequences. But using the state and it's monopoly on violence to enshrine such ideas doesn't run counter to their desired worldview so it's crickets from their corner.
engineer_22 4y ago
The article in Ars was published 3 hours ago. Give it a few days. This proposed law is obviously un-American, and may not hold up to judicial scrutiny. Edit: it may not even hold up to public scrutiny!
Ajedi32 4y ago
Who specifically are you accusing of hypocrisy here? Because yeah, as a "free-speech defender" this is pretty blatantly unconstitutional, and will almost certainly never pass, and it should probably raise questions about the guy who authored it (who I've never heard of).
- klyrs 4y ago
  Anti-wokeness is frequently couched on a basis of free speech. DeSantis, at the very least, is shown to be unprincipled in this regard.
- Eddy_Viscosity2 4y ago
  The republican party, from whence this came, are being accused of hypocrisy. As are the likes of Elon, Tucker, etc who would be VERY vocal about any such thing common from a democrat, but here remain silent. The fact that its blatantly unconstitutional makes even more hypocritical from a party who regularly claim unconditional allegiance to this document. Bills like this aren't meant to pass on the first go. They are just testing the waters. But its existence is clear evidence of what they really want. Same goes for that bill that, if enacted, would eliminate the democratic party [0] or the bills that did get passed which is letting Desantis exert control over Disney, with the stated goal of making a private company change its content to what he favours. Viewed collectively they show a coherent pattern. [0] https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/florida-republicans-bill-ban-state-democratic-party-rcna72917 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/florida-repub... [1] https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/03/desantis-promises-florida-will-control-disney-content.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/03/desantis-promises-fl...
  - klyrs 4y ago
    Hooeee, [0] is a whopper. If that passed, a bill to amend the constitution, forbidding punitive slavery, would become must-pass legislation. That'd really fuck Florida's economy if the state had to pay prisoners minimum wage.
    - dragonwriter 4y ago
a4isms 4y ago
The "hypocrisy" is only hypocrisy if you think that conservatives believe that all citizens should be treated equally. They do not, never have, and never will. Composer Frank Wilhoit's observation keeps coming up because it explains literally everything: Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect. They want the law to protect conservative speech, but not bind it. They want the law to bind moderate and liberal speech, but not protect it.
matthewaveryusa 4y ago
it’s a litmus test on their voting base just to make sure desantis voters care more about desantis and ‘owning the libs’ than they care about policy or ideology. It really is fascinating to see ideology decoupling from voting. The best I can come up with is voting for political aesthetics. I wonder if this was always the case but we were always too embarrassed to admit it because political elites kept the ideology and aesthetic inline. Reagan was an actor after all
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  General voting for President has always been an absurd idea. It's impossible for most people to make an informed choice on who's best for such a role—it is guaranteed to turn into a propaganda and showmanship contest. That's why we have the electoral college. Unfortunately, that was poorly-designed and fell to games-playing pretty much immediately, so never actually worked the way it was supposed to, and now we're stuck with the downsides of that and the downsides of a kind of weird not-quite popular election for the position, without the benefits of either.
- badwolf 4y ago
  > It really is fascinating to see As someone in a minority group that Desantis is specifically going after, I don't really find it very fascinating, more terrifying.
  - x86_64Ubuntu 4y ago
    What's a thought experiment in a philosophy class for some has horrible real world ramifications for the rest of us.
inetknght 4y ago
From another comment on this post [0] > this only applies to bloggers who are being paid to blog So uhh... is it really free speech if you're getting paid to speak? I would argue not so. I would argue: if you're getting paid to speak then you're neither speaking freely in the "free as in free beer" nor the "free as in free speech" interpretations of free. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35015088 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35015088
- bentley 4y ago
  Do I have to shut down my Patreon and demonetize my YouTube videos or risk being fined?
  - inetknght 4y ago
    Perhaps so if you live in Florida
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- fnordpiglet 4y ago
  “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” I see no carve out about being paid. Your reasons for your speech are your own, you shouldn’t be forced to register to voice opinion about a government official even if you’re employed to give opinions. This stuff isn’t about transparency in government like lobbyist rules. It’s about intimidated critics, which is precisely the reason the first amendment was deemed necessary.
  - inetknght 4y ago
    Yup, cool. This isn't the U.S. Congress, this is Florida.
    - 4y ago
willcipriano 4y ago
> where are the supposed free-speech defenders? "and there was no one left to speak for me." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...
- bandyaboot 4y ago
  What point are you making here?

bandyaboot 4y ago

> I mean where are the supposed free-speech defenders? > Especially after hearing non-stop about the supposed free-speech concerns of a twitter algorithm that they were convinced was partially benefiting one side more than the other. They’re frauds. It was never about protecting free speech. It was about protecting speech that they like.

klyrs 4y ago

I hold the same cynicism, but in the spirit of generous optimism, I'm looking forward to a FIRE lawsuit in defense of our civil liberties. Edit: oh good https://www.thefire.org/news/fire-statement-florida-senate-bill-1316 https://www.thefire.org/news/fire-statement-florida-senate-b...

basch 4y ago

Isn't this just state funded campaigning? They know the law wont go anywhere, but it's a win for commercial time. Really has nothing to do with speech at all, and everything to do with appearing anti woke. Posturing.

AlexandrB 4y ago
How is getting bloggers to register with a govt. agency anti-woke?
- basch 4y ago
  Because their candidate proposed it. When it comes time to spin it, itll be sold as "put an end to under the table woke lobbying"

x86_64Ubuntu 4y ago

Nowhere to be seen, as expected. They've only been worried about authoritarian-lite ideas receiving poor play in the marketplace of ideas and sometimes even social consequences. But using the state and it's monopoly on violence to enshrine such ideas doesn't run counter to their desired worldview so it's crickets from their corner.

engineer_22 4y ago

The article in Ars was published 3 hours ago. Give it a few days. This proposed law is obviously un-American, and may not hold up to judicial scrutiny. Edit: it may not even hold up to public scrutiny!

Ajedi32 4y ago

Who specifically are you accusing of hypocrisy here? Because yeah, as a "free-speech defender" this is pretty blatantly unconstitutional, and will almost certainly never pass, and it should probably raise questions about the guy who authored it (who I've never heard of).

klyrs 4y ago
Anti-wokeness is frequently couched on a basis of free speech. DeSantis, at the very least, is shown to be unprincipled in this regard.
Eddy_Viscosity2 4y ago
The republican party, from whence this came, are being accused of hypocrisy. As are the likes of Elon, Tucker, etc who would be VERY vocal about any such thing common from a democrat, but here remain silent. The fact that its blatantly unconstitutional makes even more hypocritical from a party who regularly claim unconditional allegiance to this document. Bills like this aren't meant to pass on the first go. They are just testing the waters. But its existence is clear evidence of what they really want. Same goes for that bill that, if enacted, would eliminate the democratic party [0] or the bills that did get passed which is letting Desantis exert control over Disney, with the stated goal of making a private company change its content to what he favours. Viewed collectively they show a coherent pattern. [0] https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/florida-republicans-bill-ban-state-democratic-party-rcna72917 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/florida-repub... [1] https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/03/desantis-promises-florida-will-control-disney-content.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/03/desantis-promises-fl...
- klyrs 4y ago
  Hooeee, [0] is a whopper. If that passed, a bill to amend the constitution, forbidding punitive slavery, would become must-pass legislation. That'd really fuck Florida's economy if the state had to pay prisoners minimum wage.
  - dragonwriter 4y ago

a4isms 4y ago

The "hypocrisy" is only hypocrisy if you think that conservatives believe that all citizens should be treated equally. They do not, never have, and never will. Composer Frank Wilhoit's observation keeps coming up because it explains literally everything: Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect. They want the law to protect conservative speech, but not bind it. They want the law to bind moderate and liberal speech, but not protect it.

matthewaveryusa 4y ago

it’s a litmus test on their voting base just to make sure desantis voters care more about desantis and ‘owning the libs’ than they care about policy or ideology. It really is fascinating to see ideology decoupling from voting. The best I can come up with is voting for political aesthetics. I wonder if this was always the case but we were always too embarrassed to admit it because political elites kept the ideology and aesthetic inline. Reagan was an actor after all

yamtaddle 4y ago
General voting for President has always been an absurd idea. It's impossible for most people to make an informed choice on who's best for such a role—it is guaranteed to turn into a propaganda and showmanship contest. That's why we have the electoral college. Unfortunately, that was poorly-designed and fell to games-playing pretty much immediately, so never actually worked the way it was supposed to, and now we're stuck with the downsides of that and the downsides of a kind of weird not-quite popular election for the position, without the benefits of either.
badwolf 4y ago
> It really is fascinating to see As someone in a minority group that Desantis is specifically going after, I don't really find it very fascinating, more terrifying.
- x86_64Ubuntu 4y ago
  What's a thought experiment in a philosophy class for some has horrible real world ramifications for the rest of us.

inetknght 4y ago

From another comment on this post [0] > this only applies to bloggers who are being paid to blog So uhh... is it really free speech if you're getting paid to speak? I would argue not so. I would argue: if you're getting paid to speak then you're neither speaking freely in the "free as in free beer" nor the "free as in free speech" interpretations of free. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35015088 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35015088

bentley 4y ago
Do I have to shut down my Patreon and demonetize my YouTube videos or risk being fined?
- inetknght 4y ago
  Perhaps so if you live in Florida
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
fnordpiglet 4y ago
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” I see no carve out about being paid. Your reasons for your speech are your own, you shouldn’t be forced to register to voice opinion about a government official even if you’re employed to give opinions. This stuff isn’t about transparency in government like lobbyist rules. It’s about intimidated critics, which is precisely the reason the first amendment was deemed necessary.
- inetknght 4y ago
  Yup, cool. This isn't the U.S. Congress, this is Florida.
  - 4y ago

willcipriano 4y ago

> where are the supposed free-speech defenders? "and there was no one left to speak for me." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_ https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...

bandyaboot 4y ago
What point are you making here?