621–630 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no going back. It is because the “winning” side is actively doing their best to demonize everyone who doesn’t fit into their mold. So much for reconciling differences.
You might want to do a little introspection as to why the “winners” want you to be remolded.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They are being deplatformed because their speech is violent and damaging—in many cases it’s literal incitement to violence. "in defense of looting" And while I'm at it - why isn't China being deplatformed? They literally just posted on their embassy twitter account saying they fixed minority women who were "baby-making machines." One can only guess they mean sterilization. It's obvious who's allowed to be inhumane…
> One can only guess they mean sterilization. Only if you read it in the least charitable way possible and in the context of unverified claims from fringe figures like Adrian Zenz. It's a bad tweet, but the literal reading is that due to "emancipation" they are no longer only "baby making machines". Not even CCP propagandists are clumsy enough to admit to forced sterilization in a public forum.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does it tho? The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments. Arguably one of the most consequential amendments, it addresses citizenship rights and equal protection under the law and was proposed in response to issues related to former slaves following the American Civil War. The amendment was bitterly contested, particul…
It's the equal protection amendment. The meaning of it has been "stretched" a bit (at least from the pov of a textualist/originalist) to constitutionally justify civil rights laws applied to individuals/businesses, not just state governments. So it's "true meaning" is often debated, but as I understand it: If civil rights laws can be/ are interpreted to apply to individuals and businesses via the 14th (which they are…
Where does Twitter fit in exactly? As a.. 'state'? As 'the law'? As a 'person' (because it's a corporation)?
Also, we're not talking about political diversity here. Unless the diversity involves inciting violence. Nobody wants to censor conservatives. But I would wager that plotting to execute the vice president crosses a line wrt to political diversity. Apple doesn't want the app down because it's full of non-SJWs but to probably avoid liability if they end up using the app to coordinate an attack.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is “the other route”? They are being deplatformed because their speech is violent and damaging—in many cases it’s literal incitement to violence. Their legal cases are being rejected because they have no legal merit. The mainstream media refuse to take them seriously because they have again and again shown themselves to be bad faith actors, peddlers of unsubstantiated conspiracy, outright liars, and so on. I don…
70 people died because of the BLM riots and they are not getting deplatformed.
Who is the "they" that should be deplatformed for the actions you describe? Were there particular BLM organizers / leaders that were calling for destruction of property, violence against people, and the overthrowing of legally elected governments?
Certainly there were folks that took advantage of the crowds to do nefarious things, and I don't doubt some actual BLM folks committed acts.
There were also documented false flag operations against BLM:
* https://www.wsls.com/news/virginia/2020/07/27/police-richmon...
But were the BLM demonstrations purposefully organized to do these things?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is “the other route”? They are being deplatformed because their speech is violent and damaging—in many cases it’s literal incitement to violence. Their legal cases are being rejected because they have no legal merit. The mainstream media refuse to take them seriously because they have again and again shown themselves to be bad faith actors, peddlers of unsubstantiated conspiracy, outright liars, and so on. I don…
To follow up on caconym's comment, FBI has confirmed that more than a dozen explosive devices were found at the Capitol after the siege, including pipe bombs left in front of the DNC offices.[1] 5 people died. 50 officers were wounded, some seriously enough that they are still in the hospital. Multiple protestors had zip ties and other means of restraint on them, knives, and guns, and on their social media profiles w…
Because right now, people accused of terrorism can be held in Guantanamo without habeas corpus. They are also subject to inclusion on government "kill lists"[1] with no opportunity for judicial review. The executive branch is claiming powers it has not had since the time of absolute monarchy. We should carefully consider any proposal to expand the meaning of the word "terrorism".
I'm outraged too, but I think these criminals should be afforded full due process rights. At both the investigatory stage and the trial stage.
[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/us-invokes...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It can’t possibly work like that, logically. Those being deplatformed are as certain as you are that they are right. I’ve been disillusioned about this e.g. in trying to have conversations about religion with believers. No matter how much better I think my case is, they will think their case is just as much superior to mine. For every time I double check my books, they double check theirs. Philosophically, I don’t th…
What are you checking books for? Run experiments. Don’t go to your books about dropping weights off Pisa, just _drop weights off Pisa_. I don’t care what people are certain of: either those weights fall independently of their mass or don’t. If you are treating it like philosophy instead of science, you’ve already lost the thread.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We already know from history what happens when large groups are disenfranchised from the public sphere. Violence. Lots of it. And once it starts, it's not easily stopped. Some welcome this because they think it can be managed for their own purposes. But once civil order breaks down, things simply accelerate with no possibility of talk being able to stop it anymore. It takes on a life of its own. Those who dream of th…
You should look up the definition of enfranchised. The insurrectionists will definitely be disenfranchised if convicted of felonies.
I don't hear a lot of excuses for those trump fans for their sins because of lack of education, money, opportunities. They get lumped in with privileged white people posting here from Silicon Valley, that's what they obviously feel.
Why didn't the so called paradox of intolerance imply to a case where someone is doing an armed home invasion and why are people surprised when political and protest violence was long normalized and tolerated? It doesn't make any sense looking it over the ocean.
Someone brought an interesting perspective in another thread and I can't shake it off. The other side keeps deplatforming them. Their legal cases are rejected. The mainstream media refuses to take them seriously. We're not even listening to them, because it's science and they're *ists if they disagree. We're not debating anymore. We just assume we're right. We are slowly squeezing a significant segment of the populat…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why does the left have to censor the right? Surely they should be able to beat the right with logical and reasoned arguments? Censorship has always struck me as a tool that a side which isn't confident in its arguments uses.
A significant number of people are threatened by rational critical thinking. They instill these values in their children who then they go off on raving rampages touting false patriotism. You can't make them listen. Taking away their echo chambers is the only way to cool them off.
Wait, has this actually worked before? Ever? Do you have examples? For instance, when they denied "radical Islamist groups" access to popular social media, "radical Islamist groups" just started using less popular social media that is harder to keep tabs on. "Radical Islamist groups" certainly haven't disappeared...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is “the other route”? They are being deplatformed because their speech is violent and damaging—in many cases it’s literal incitement to violence. Their legal cases are being rejected because they have no legal merit. The mainstream media refuse to take them seriously because they have again and again shown themselves to be bad faith actors, peddlers of unsubstantiated conspiracy, outright liars, and so on. I don…
OP writes: > We just assume we're right. And you follow up by proving just how right he is. First you dehumanize your political opponents--"If a rabid cougar gets loose..."--then you tell us what we need to do--"we take whatever measures we have to to get rid of it for the greater good of society." And you claim it's the other side's speech that "is violent and damaging"? P.S. At the time of this reply, it's not the…
I'm sorry if that wasn't clear.
I'm curious, though—would you just let the cougar do its thing? Like, if that literally happened, and you were the guy at animal control who got the call?