4 ms·

I have an honest question: many people here are not angry because they are not allowed to talk, but because a platform allows other opinions to voice. You guys

I have an honest question: many people here are not angry because they are not allowed to talk, but because a platform allows other opinions to voice. You guys never thought that one day, and this day will come, the side you don't like will be in power, and they may censor you like hell? They may brand your legitimate dissent as outlandishly immoral or hate speech or whatever, and therefore censor you, cancel you, or even jail you? And downvote me however you like, but please don't think that it wouldn't happen, as it has happened so many times before. Case in point, did you know that it was a crime to even listen to Voice of America back in the early 80s in China? And three years and 7.5 years for memes, however offensive they were, is justice? And just because you publish a comic to mock Jesus or whatever deity you don't like, you get to be bombed or beheaded or be threatened or rioted? Do you really want that? You don't think that all starts with something from the powerful like "hey, I think there's some misinformation or hey I think this is offensive"?

techfeathers 2y ago
One perspective that I don’t know 100% agree with but I often observe. There’s no such thing as a conpromise on free speech, and that’s not the goal. The objective is not to find a center but to pull as far to my side as I can. That’s why I might support censorship of the other side. _because_ I know when they get in power they’ll do the same on the opposite side. This theory is played out by the fact that Facebook does a 180 like days before Trump takes over. Not censoring the other side isn’t functionally useful, in fact, if I don’t censor the other side the pendulum will swing even farther. In general I feel like there’s this false premise that if the left had handled this better the right wouldn’t be so mad. I think that’s wrong the right was always going to pull right, no matter the starting point.

techfeathers 2y ago

One perspective that I don’t know 100% agree with but I often observe. There’s no such thing as a conpromise on free speech, and that’s not the goal. The objective is not to find a center but to pull as far to my side as I can. That’s why I might support censorship of the other side. _because_ I know when they get in power they’ll do the same on the opposite side. This theory is played out by the fact that Facebook does a 180 like days before Trump takes over. Not censoring the other side isn’t functionally useful, in fact, if I don’t censor the other side the pendulum will swing even farther. In general I feel like there’s this false premise that if the left had handled this better the right wouldn’t be so mad. I think that’s wrong the right was always going to pull right, no matter the starting point.