Koo, India’s free-speech Twitter alternative

Would most people who call themselves nationalists actually accept this definition?

Censorship and moderation are only part of the issue. The broader issue is with the nature of these platforms being conducive to vitriol, misinformation, and a kind of image-obsession and addiction to trivial things that takes away from more important pursuits. I see no reason why this would be better than Twitter in that regard.

Also, sovereignty is a noble pursuit but I can't help but feel that "self reliance" in this regard meaning the data for indian users remains on indian data centers misses the point and ultimately doesn't go far enough. A person needs to own his own data, and these platforms need to be not localized or controlled by singular states, but rather go above and beyond and be truly open and global.

These are great questions, and here's my attempt at answering or elaborating on them.

> how do you define hate speech

Ira Glasser explains it precisely: "When people say they want to ban hate speech, what they mean is they want to ban speech that they hate ... But if you allowed something called ‘hate speech’ to be banned, then the only important question would be ‘who decides? ... If the government is going to be the one to decide what hate speech to ban, it’s not going to be the same speech as the speech you hate, it’s going to be the speech they hate, ... It all ends up coming down to who decides and most often, it ain’t you' https://reclaimthenet.org/former-aclu-head-ira-glasser-expla...

> and what counts as inciting violence?

This is better explained by the legal scholar Jonathan Turley,

"The reason is that while the crime is not clear, the case law is. In Brandenburg v. Ohio, the Supreme Court ruled in 1969 that even calling for violence is protected under the First Amendment unless there is a threat of “imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.”

Trump never called for violence and instead told his followers to go to the Capitol peacefully to “cheer” on those challenging the electoral votes. Such protests at capitals are common and, while reckless, Trump’s speech could as easily be interpreted as a call for protest rather than violence."

https://jonathanturley.org/2021/02/19/want-to-prosecute-trum...

Sorry, I just copy pasted from another post of mine where we were talking about MSP.

MSP means minimum support price. Its a guarantee from the government to the farmers that the government will buy the crop at a certain minimum price no matter the market situation is. For example, MSP for 1 kg rice may be rupees 20. If the farmers can get a higher price in the market, they can sell it at that price. But if the market price fell for some reason (over production for example), government will buy it from the farmers for rupees 20. This guarantees that the farmers will not be at a lose.

MSP made sense when India had issues with rice and wheat (the video I linked talks about its origins in India at 5:00). Since MSP is guaranteed for some crops (such as rice and wheat) and not for others (such as pulses which India has to import), farmers would naturally make more of the MSP grains.

Also, do note that the farm bills doesn't remove MSP as far as I understand. One scenario farmers argue is this: Farmers get MSP when they sell in government run markets. Now, with the new system, farmers will get more money since they would be selling directly to the companies without any middlemen. If I understood correctly, the new system removes middle men (whom I have heard makes huge profit while paying very less to the farmers). Once the farmers starts selling directly since direct sale gets them more money, no one would go to the government markets any more. So, after a couple of years, government will close those markets since they are not in use. Now, corporations will start offering lower prices to farmers, and farmers will have no place to go. This is one argument I have heard of what could go wrong. But seeing all these protests, I have been thinking why can't farmers dictate the price if they have this much bargaining power.

If you are an LGBTQ muslim in one of those muslim majority countries you listed above then you will certainly be persecuted. A single factor should not be used to determine the refugee status of a person