Deplatform Parler good or bad?

[Egomaniac]

It's difficult to tell the difference between trolling and actual threats.

Then you remove them all.

But for free speech purposes, there is plenty of reasons to allow raw emotion on their platform such as the expressions of the desire to kill. It's healthy and good to express rage and anger. Venting is healthy.

For free Speech purposes there are plenty of reasons to allow companies to choose who they do and do not want to do business with.

Expressing the desire to kill someone is not covered by free speech and never has been.

Here's a thought experiment for you

If someone were to go on parler and "vent" about how much he wants to rape a child to death...would that be "healthy"?

[Sole-Warrior]

If someone were to go on parler and "vent" about how much he wants to rape a child to death...would that be "healthy"?

Venting about a corrupt political process is different than expression of a desire to harm children dude. Parler never permits content which normalizes child sexual abuse and never will. There is no benefit for permitting that crap on their platforms. Whether it actually gets enforced or not is hard to say considering the numerous problems with the platform. But clearly, the way that the election system is biased towards Democrats is a huge issue. It might not be completely rational to talk about how they want certain individuals dead, but these statements at least have some usefulness in them in the sense of expressing outrage and anger. Definitely they shouldn't actually carry these fantasies out, but fantasies of this kind are protected speech.

Then you remove them all.

Would be overbroad.

[Egomaniac]

Venting about a corrupt political process is different than expression of a desire to harm children dude.

Not when "venting" means threatening other people.

It might not be completely rational to talk about how they want certain individuals dead, but these statements at least have some usefulness in them in the sense of expressing outrage and anger. Definitely they shouldn't actually carry these fantasies out, but fantasies of this kind are protected speech.

Death threats are not protected speech. Incitement to violence is not protected speech.

But clearly, the way that the election system is biased towards Democrats is a huge issue.

This is clearly not true. Trump lost the popular vote in 2016...and yet still won the election.

[Endus]

But for free speech purposes, there is plenty of reasons to allow raw emotion on their platform such as the expressions of the desire to kill

Here's the problem with your position.

Nobody has any reason to allow anything abusive like that within the servicing offered by their business.

You technically have the legal right to yell at a toddler and call him a "fucking cunt" for laughing too loudly, but the restaurant owner is still going to kick you out for being a colossal dickbag when you do so. Which is entirely within his rights.

Arguing against that is an argument against the owner's freedoms, not a defense or support of your own, because you never had the freedom you're trying to invent. You never had any right to speak your mind without consequence from the business owner you're a client of (or employee of, or whatever). It's a ridiculous idea in the first place, and it's honestly baffling that you folks have invented this nonsense seemingly out of nowhere and still manage to convince yourselves there's any merit to the idea in any way whatsoever.

You're not advocating for freedom of speech. In any way whatsoever. This isn't a free speech issue in the first place. That's the lie you use to conceal the real motive, which is attacking and subjugating the speech and actions of those you politically oppose. Nothing more.


Nobody shut Parler down, here. Amazon Web Services decided they no longer wanted to partner with Parler, because Parler wasn't abiding by their contractual obligations for that business relationship. That's it. If Parler wants to go it their own way, they've always been free to do so. That they can't afford it or can't figure out how to do it isn't anyone's fault but their own.

[Egomaniac]

You technically have the legal right to yell at a toddler and call him a "fucking cunt" for laughing too loudly, but the restaurant owner is still going to kick you out for being a colossal dickbag when you do so. Which is entirely within his rights.

And just to add on...while you have the right to call the kid a "fucking cunt"...you do not have the right to say "I'm going to kill that fucking cunt"...that goes beyond the boundaries of protected speech.

[Machismo]

Venting about a corrupt political process is different than expression of a desire to harm children dude. Parler never permits content which normalizes child sexual abuse and never will. There is no benefit for permitting that crap on their platforms. Whether it actually gets enforced or not is hard to say considering the numerous problems with the platform. But clearly, the way that the election system is biased towards Democrats is a huge issue. It might not be completely rational to talk about how they want certain individuals dead, but these statements at least have some usefulness in them in the sense of expressing outrage and anger. Definitely they shouldn't actually carry these fantasies out, but fantasies of this kind are protected speech.


Would be overbroad.

How exactly is it biased towards Democrats?

Republicans push the majority of gerrymandering. If it were equal, then Dems would control far more seats. the fact that Dems have to get millions more votes to get the same number of representatives... shows you to be wrong.

As for deplatforming fascists, are you going on the record stating you don't think they should be allowed to do it? I want you to be very clear. Any dodge will be taken as you admitting you want the government to prevent them from deplatforming those people and companies.

- - - Updated - - -

It's difficult to tell the difference between trolling and actual threats. It's relatively easy for Parler to install PhotoDNA or some similar system to screen out known child pornography to keep that off their platforms. There is no reason to permit CP on their platforms. But for free speech purposes, there is plenty of reasons to allow raw emotion on their platform such as the expressions of the desire to kill. It's healthy and good to express rage and anger. Venting is healthy. There is, however no excuse for Parler to ignore the CP issues on their platform.

Parler is free to allow those people on their site. Other companies are free to refuse to do business with Parler as a result.

You are opposing the First Amendment.

[postman1782]

It's difficult to tell the difference between trolling and actual threats. It's relatively easy for Parler to install PhotoDNA or some similar system to screen out known child pornography to keep that off their platforms. There is no reason to permit CP on their platforms. But for free speech purposes, there is plenty of reasons to allow raw emotion on their platform such as the expressions of the desire to kill. It's healthy and good to express rage and anger. Venting is healthy. There is, however no excuse for Parler to ignore the CP issues on their platform.

If your "raw emotion" is pushing threats of violence and insurrections, you deserve to be in jail.

[Zan15]

strange that with a stranglehold on the talk radio market, conservatives were not worried about liberals being "deplatformed" from radio monopolies in the last decade or two.

So does this mean clear channel and cumlus/et all have to allow my radio show on their conservative talk radio station????


Nice who needs a podcast when i can go on the biggest market with my forced radio show!!!!

[Sole-Warrior]

strange that with a stranglehold on the talk radio market, conservatives were not worried about liberals being "deplatformed" from radio monopolies in the last decade or two.

So does this mean clear channel and cumlus/et all have to allow my radio show on their conservative talk radio station????


Nice who needs a podcast when i can go on the biggest market with my forced radio show!!!!

The left already has a strangle hold on twitter and various other social media. You can't post authentic opinions without dipshits accusing you of being racist or bigoted in some way. And we see facebook and various other social media fucking censoring right wing channels. It's absolutely insanity. So it shouldn't be a surprise when right wingers pull the same stuff on the left when it comes to radio talk.

I want to see a decentralized internet where no one can be censored for posting one's own personal opinion. On twitter, you can be banned for calling someone a retard. It's THAT bad on twitter. Reddit already abandoned their commitment to freedom of speech. They have cracked down on "racist" and "bigoted" channels. I don't particularly like subs like r/gendercritical, or r/<insert racist subreddit>, but don't they have the right to exist? The internet is being controlled and being used to silence dissenting views. Trump has been deplatformed. It's no longer a neutral platform, they are ironically going after people they disagree with! This is an attack on Trump supporting libertarians and conservatives.

I don't know what the solution is. I'm a libertarian so I DON'T want to get the federal government involved, but there is a huge problem with political correctness becoming policy. Let bigots be bigots on the platform. The best way to end bigotry is through debate, reason and evidence.

[s_bushido]

You can't post authentic opinions

The hell does that even mean? If your "authentic opinion" is racist or bigoted, people are going to call you a racist or a bigot. Deal with it.

And we see facebook and various other social media fucking censoring right wing channels. It's absolutely insanity.

Facebook has been a breeding ground for right-wing propaganda for years now. Ben Shapiro's Daily Wire literally pays for engagement. It was admitted by Facebook and the punishment they handed down was a stern finger waggle. "Absolute insanity" my ass.

censored

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think that it means. Someone saying "no, fuck you and get out if you're going to keep saying shit like that" is not censorship. Sorry

This is an attack on Trump supporting libertarians and conservatives.

roflmao

"Libertarians" should have no problem with companies like Twitter telling you to get bent if you use their website in a way that they don't like. But of course, "libertarians" only care about liberty when it comes to the freedom to be an asshole.

[postman1782]

The hell does that even mean? If your "authentic opinion" is racist or bigoted, people are going to call you a racist or a bigot. Deal with it.



Facebook has been a breeding ground for right-wing propaganda for years now. Ben Shapiro's Daily Wire literally pays for engagement. It was admitted by Facebook and the punishment they handed down was a stern finger waggle. "Absolute insanity" my ass.




You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think that it means. Someone saying "no, fuck you and get out if you're going to keep saying shit like that" is not censorship. Sorry




roflmao

"Libertarians" should have no problem with companies like Twitter telling you to get bent if you use their website in a way that they don't like. But of course, "libertarians" only care about liberty when it comes to the freedom to be an asshole.

He wants to be racist with his racist buddies without repercussions.

[Egomaniac]

The left already has a strangle hold on twitter and various other social media. You can't post authentic opinions without dipshits accusing you of being racist or bigoted in some way. And we see facebook and various other social media fucking censoring right wing channels. It's absolutely insanity. So it shouldn't be a surprise when right wingers pull the same stuff on the left when it comes to radio talk.

The Right wing has controlled radio talk for longer than Facebook and Twitter have existed.

I want to see a decentralized internet where no one can be censored for posting one's own personal opinion. On twitter, you can be banned for calling someone a retard. It's THAT bad on twitter.

At McDonalds you can be banned for yelling at a customer.

At the theater you can be kicked out for talking on your cellphone.

Reddit already abandoned their commitment to freedom of speech. They have cracked down on "racist" and "bigoted" channels. I don't particularly like subs like r/gendercritical, or r/<insert racist subreddit>, but don't they have the right to exist?

They have a right to exist...and Reddit has the right to tell them to go elsewhere.

[szechuan]

The left already has a strangle hold on twitter and various other social media.

Twitter is not Left Wing

Let bigots be bigots on the platform. The best way to end bigotry is through debate, reason and evidence.

LMAO.

[kail]

Twitch suspends Trump indefinitely.

Trump (or likely his team) had a Twitch account? Was it just streaming their rallies or did I miss the one entertaining Among Us stream?

[Breccia]

Trump (or likely his team) had a Twitch account? Was it just streaming their rallies or did I miss the one entertaining Among Us stream?

I...don't know. The account is scrubbed, and the articles I saw didn't say much on the topic. I suspect you're right, but also, I suspect Twitch just wanted to get out in front of Trump using their platform to incite violence -- against their terms of service, immoral, and illegal.

[Forogil]

Expressing the desire to kill someone is not covered by free speech and never has been.

Sometimes it is free speech in the US (other countries have other laws).

The 1st amendment restrictions only apply if it calls for imminent lawless action so if your desire to kill isn't imminent or people don't believe that it will be acted on it is actually legal; https://www.freedomforuminstitute.or...ocating-force/

Clearly the 1st amendment could be changed or reinterpreted.

And don't blame me: I'm not the ones who made the laws and neither have I nominated the ones interpreting them.

[Machismo]

The left already has a strangle hold on twitter and various other social media. You can't post authentic opinions without dipshits accusing you of being racist or bigoted in some way. And we see facebook and various other social media fucking censoring right wing channels. It's absolutely insanity. So it shouldn't be a surprise when right wingers pull the same stuff on the left when it comes to radio talk.

I want to see a decentralized internet where no one can be censored for posting one's own personal opinion. On twitter, you can be banned for calling someone a retard. It's THAT bad on twitter. Reddit already abandoned their commitment to freedom of speech. They have cracked down on "racist" and "bigoted" channels. I don't particularly like subs like r/gendercritical, or r/<insert racist subreddit>, but don't they have the right to exist? The internet is being controlled and being used to silence dissenting views. Trump has been deplatformed. It's no longer a neutral platform, they are ironically going after people they disagree with! This is an attack on Trump supporting libertarians and conservatives.

Ummm, what you are calling for is a VERY CENTRALIZED internet.

You are not a libertarian, because you want to have strong control over what private entities do on their own property. So, does that mean I should be able to come onto your property, yell racist shit at your family, and you not be able to tell me to leave? If so, PM me your address, and we'll test your consistency.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't know what the solution is. I'm a libertarian so I DON'T want to get the federal government involved, but there is a huge problem with political correctness becoming policy. Let bigots be bigots on the platform. The best way to end bigotry is through debate, reason and evidence.

Are you saying that the KKK and neo-Nazis exist, because they had the best reasoning and evidence?

[postman1782]

Ummm, what you are calling for is a VERY CENTRALIZED internet.

You are not a libertarian, because you want to have strong control over what private entities do on their own property. So, does that mean I should be able to come onto your property, yell racist shit at your family, and you not be able to tell me to leave? If so, PM me your address, and we'll test your consistency.

- - - Updated - - -



Are you saying that the KKK and neo-Nazis exist, because they had the best reasoning and evidence?

What is really ironic is, that in the gun control thread, he doesn't want anyone to tell him what he can do with guns, but he wants to tell other people what they can do with their own property like their servers and platforms. Not surprising though.

[Shalcker]

What is really ironic is, that in the gun control thread, he doesn't want anyone to tell him what he can do with guns, but he wants to tell other people what they can do with their own property like their servers and platforms. Not surprising though.

Both First and Second amendment are primarily about ability of citizens to resist/check government power in case it turns to tyranny - with words and with force of arms.

And resisting Twitter is like resisting modern Army - technically allowed, but not very practical.
At the same time Army cannot interfere in politics; but Twitter can.

[postman1782]

Both First and Second amendment are primarily about ability of citizens to resist/check government power in case it turns to tyranny - with words and with force of arms.

And resisting Twitter is like resisting modern Army - technically allowed, but not very practical.
At the same time Army cannot interfere in politics; but Twitter can.

Holy shit, how fucking wrong are you? You should probably worry about your own problems in your dictatorship country that kills dissidents in your country, before you start wrongly commenting on our constitution/laws.