United States Corrupt Twattery

Raven

Raven

Fuck the Tories!
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 27, 2003
Messages
44,800
He will lose, then build an election campaign out of it.
 
Scouse

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
36,688
Wij said:
I THOUGHT WE HAD FREE SPEECH!!!!1
Click to expand...
Yeah no.

They kicked the elected president of the USA off their platforms for what he said. That's censorship.

Yes, he might have been talking utter utter wank - and he was (and to be clear, he's 100% thundercunt) - but he was irrefutably censored.

You can argue about private companies and standards etc etc. but I still fall on the side of being allowed to say whatever you like, wherever you like - and people being allowed to argue against you in any manner they like.


One almighty bunfight. That's the correct way forward. Not whiny no-platforming shite.
 
Wij

Wij

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
18,404
Scouse said:
Yeah no.

They kicked the elected president of the USA off their platforms for what he said. That's censorship.

Yes, he might have been talking utter utter wank - and he was (and to be clear, he's 100% thundercunt) - but he was irrefutably censored.

You can argue about private companies and standards etc etc. but I still fall on the side of being allowed to say whatever you like, wherever you like - and people being allowed to argue against you in any manner they like.


One almighty bunfight. That's the correct way forward. Not whiny no-platforming shite.
Click to expand...
I will defend your right to be completely wrong about this.
 
Scouse

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
36,688
Wij said:
I will defend your right to be completely wrong about this.
Click to expand...
Thanks dude :)

In the meantime I'll await your list of what's acceptable for people to think and hear with baited breath!
 
Wij

Wij

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
18,404
Scouse said:
Thanks dude :)

In the meantime I'll await your list of what's acceptable for people to think and hear with baited breath!
Click to expand...
When the Daily Mail publishes my penis musings I'll let you know.
 
Scouse

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
36,688
Wij said:
When the Daily Mail publishes my penis musings I'll let you know.
Click to expand...
I hope you'd let the whole world know m8.

If you write an article using only your cock for the Mail then that'd signify a massive upturn in quality for them.
 
DaGaffer

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
18,497
Scouse said:
Yeah no.

They kicked the elected president of the USA off their platforms for what he said. That's censorship.

Yes, he might have been talking utter utter wank - and he was (and to be clear, he's 100% thundercunt) - but he was irrefutably censored.

You can argue about private companies and standards etc etc. but I still fall on the side of being allowed to say whatever you like, wherever you like - and people being allowed to argue against you in any manner they like.


One almighty bunfight. That's the correct way forward. Not whiny no-platforming shite.
Click to expand...

You're wrong. He was thrown off Twitter for basically "shouting fire in a theatre". His comments after Jan 6 were incitement to violence from a man who'd lost the election and who was trying to mobilise a coup. As it happens, the First Amendment is there to protect private citizens from government interfering with their speech, First Amendment protections for members of government (as Trump technically still was) are intentionally reduced. You give up some freedoms when you're in power. "With great power comes great responsibility" etc.

So not only does he have no rights in relation to free speech on a private platform, he almost certainly didn't have the right to say what he did under the First Amendment either because he wasn't speaking as a private citizen.

www.politico.com

Opinion | Trump’s Incitement Was Not ‘Free Speech’

Republicans defending the president’s right to due process and free speech are getting the Constitution backward.
www.politico.com www.politico.com
 
Wij

Wij

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
18,404
DaGaffer said:
You're wrong. He was thrown off Twitter for basically "shouting fire in a theatre". His comments after Jan 6 were incitement to violence from a man who'd lost the election and who was trying to mobilise a coup. As it happens, the First Amendment is there to protect private citizens from government interfering with their speech, First Amendment protections for members of government (as Trump technically still was) are intentionally reduced. You give up some freedoms when you're in power. "With great power comes great responsibility" etc.

So not only does he have no rights in relation to free speech on a private platform, he almost certainly didn't have the right to say what he did under the First Amendment either because he wasn't speaking as a private citizen.

www.politico.com

Opinion | Trump’s Incitement Was Not ‘Free Speech’

Republicans defending the president’s right to due process and free speech are getting the Constitution backward.
www.politico.com www.politico.com
Click to expand...
Plus, he didn't respect the CoC.
 
Scouse

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
36,688
DaGaffer said:
You're wrong. He was thrown off Twitter for basically "shouting fire in a theatre". His comments after Jan 6 were incitement to violence from a man who'd lost the election and who was trying to mobilise a coup. As it happens, the First Amendment is there to protect private citizens from government interfering with their speech, First Amendment protections for members of government (as Trump technically still was) are intentionally reduced. You give up some freedoms when you're in power. "With great power comes great responsibility" etc.

So not only does he have no rights in relation to free speech on a private platform, he almost certainly didn't have the right to say what he did under the First Amendment either because he wasn't speaking as a private citizen.

www.politico.com

Opinion | Trump’s Incitement Was Not ‘Free Speech’

Republicans defending the president’s right to due process and free speech are getting the Constitution backward.
www.politico.com www.politico.com
Click to expand...
Two things:

1) he could have been impeached for what he said. I'm not against that or the arguments surrounding it (although I struggle to give much of a shit given the other problems we're facing). And I don't disagree with left-leaning politico's opinion on the first amendment either.

That's the Trump issue (the insignificant bit) dealt with.

2) The private companies (who I acknowledged have the power do what the fuck they like) exercised that power in a way that a lot of people agreed with - but a lot of other people don't.

I said this:
You can argue about private companies and standards etc etc. but I still fall on the side of being allowed to say whatever you like, wherever you like - and people being allowed to argue against you in any manner they like.
Click to expand...
And I stand by it - I don't really give a shit about first amendment rights, or Trump or the mechanisms for impeachment.

I do give a shit that private companies have control over what is allowed to be said in the public sphere. And they are the defacto "public" sphere.

The principle is this: Censorship of any form concentrates power in the hands of the censors (or those who set the terms), not "the people".

I'm totally comfortable with putting up with hearing abhorrent and idiotic things if that's the price we pay for being deemed adult enough to hear them.

People who favor censorship always think they're adult enough to hear <shit> without melting down or joining a riot - but the masses (the "other") can't, so they need to be stopped from hearing it. Obvs - that's why there are "reasonable limits" on free speech. But of course - what limits are put in place are down to who's in power and how they feel / what they agree with.

So I come back to this position, which is the only position that can solve that problem and actually meets the definition of free:
Scouse said:
One almighty bunfight. That's the correct way forward. Not whiny no-platforming shite.
Click to expand...
 
Scouse

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
36,688
**above approach also has the benefit of being the most fun :)
 
DaGaffer

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
18,497
Scouse said:
Two things:

1) he could have been impeached for what he said. I'm not against that or the arguments surrounding it (although I struggle to give much of a shit given the other problems we're facing). And I don't disagree with left-leaning politico's opinion on the first amendment either.

That's the Trump issue (the insignificant bit) dealt with.

2) The private companies (who I acknowledged have the power do what the fuck they like) exercised that power in a way that a lot of people agreed with - but a lot of other people don't.

I said this:

And I stand by it - I don't really give a shit about first amendment rights, or Trump or the mechanisms for impeachment.

I do give a shit that private companies have control over what is allowed to be said in the public sphere. And they are the defacto "public" sphere.

The principle is this: Censorship of any form concentrates power in the hands of the censors (or those who set the terms), not "the people".

I'm totally comfortable with putting up with hearing abhorrent and idiotic things if that's the price we pay for being deemed adult enough to hear them.

People who favor censorship always think they're adult enough to hear <shit> without melting down or joining a riot - but the masses (the "other") can't, so they need to be stopped from hearing it. Obvs - that's why there are "reasonable limits" on free speech. But of course - what limits are put in place are down to who's in power and how they feel / what they agree with.

So I come back to this position, which is the only position that can solve that problem and actually meets the definition of free:
Click to expand...

If a private company condoned calls for insurrection through inaction and there been significant deaths/casualties (other than the fuckwits who broke the law storming the Capitol that is), what do you think would have happened then? The social media platforms have a duty of care to their shareholders not to get sued into oblivion. They took the position (rightly) that Trump broke the law; that's what the ban is about, not a free speech issue.
 
Raven

Raven

Fuck the Tories!
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 27, 2003
Messages
44,800
Even if he was free to express his mad little ramblings, which he wasn't. He would still be able to set up his platform, loads of people would flock to it.

www.cnbc.com

Trump blog page shuts down for good

The page "From the Desk of Donald J. Trump" was "just auxiliary to the broader efforts" we have and are working on," Trump aide Jason Miller said.
www.cnbc.com www.cnbc.com
 
Scouse

Scouse

Giant Thundercunt
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
36,688
DaGaffer said:
If a private company condoned calls for insurrection through inaction and there been significant deaths/casualties (other than the fuckwits who broke the law storming the Capitol that is), what do you think would have happened then? The social media platforms have a duty of care to their shareholders not to get sued into oblivion. They took the position (rightly) that Trump broke the law; that's what the ban is about, not a free speech issue.
Click to expand...
Understand that perfectly. Give zero fucks. (Especially about Trump. zero fucks given for anything to do with him)

You're telling me how it does work (and I know it already - and have conceded the point). I'm interested in how things should work.


Massive, giant, free-for-all uncensored verbal bunfight. Any platform. Anywhere.
 
Raven

Raven

Fuck the Tories!
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 27, 2003
Messages
44,800
C

caLLous

I am a FH squatter
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
18,518
I'm still trying to wrap my head around this novel idea that somebody associated with the Trump administration might not be entirely on the straight and narrow.
 
SilverHood

SilverHood

FH is my second home
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
2,300
The Catholic Church in America are absolute scumbags, covering up their own rapists, pedophiles and worse. They're all going to hell for what they've done.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Top Bottom