941–950 of 994 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Families are also private institutions. Have you ever corrected your kids in a shouting match?
I have no clue what you are trying to say.
There are no free speech absolutists. Only realists and hypocrites.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely ridiculous slander. I challenge you to find good evidence against any assertion I make, because I only state things after I have researched them (and not only that, I ask an LLM to counterargue me). I don't hate anyone, I despise ideologies (one of which you are possibly unwittingly representing, without even realizing it, perhaps), groupthink, and baseless assertions or beliefs. And most certainly, basele…
>However, the government will have to prove to the immigration judge that Khalil willfully failed to disclose that information, and whether that disclosure would have impacted his eligibility for permanent residency. >Baher Azmy, an attorney for Khalil, told NBC News: "These late-breaking, after-the-fact allegations, silly as they are, primarily show that the government must know the supposed 'foreign policy' grounds…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would be better if your goal was not to make "the left's point of view" more well-known (which is just pushing an ideology), but to call out unsubstantiated rightwing BS using evidence and reason.
They're the same picture meme goes here. Left wing positions, while they control no branches of the government and have no power is literally to raise alarms about what the fascists are doing, and how silly their propagandized reasoning is. That is exactly what I'm doing. pushing ideology of anti fascists == calling out right wing bs using evidence (climate change, vaccine science, hell, any scientific research at th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lots of this is incredible: > Non-Interventionist Foreign Policy Mexico, Greenland, Canada, ... there's never been a more interventionist US president. > DOGE and Fiscal Discipline: The goal of cutting $1 trillion from the federal budget, a major libertarian priority. That doesn't make it align with classical liberal principles - especially when they discard the rule of law and do it as a dictator. Cutting government…
> Mexico, Greenland, Canada Nice try. We are not at war with these countries and not even close to it either. Trump is the most non-interventionist president of the last few decades. This is an empirical and historical fact. > That doesn't make it align with classical liberal principles - especially when they discard the rule of law and do it as a dictator. Cutting government is an act of Congress, not the executive.…
This is... not an empirical or historical fact! Trump was not the anti-war president, he presided over US involvement in multiple conflicts with less transparency than any prior president. As of this writing is preparing an EO to increase weapons exports.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lots of this is incredible: > Non-Interventionist Foreign Policy Mexico, Greenland, Canada, ... there's never been a more interventionist US president. > DOGE and Fiscal Discipline: The goal of cutting $1 trillion from the federal budget, a major libertarian priority. That doesn't make it align with classical liberal principles - especially when they discard the rule of law and do it as a dictator. Cutting government…
> Mexico, Greenland, Canada Nice try. We are not at war with these countries and not even close to it either. Trump is the most non-interventionist president of the last few decades. This is an empirical and historical fact. > That doesn't make it align with classical liberal principles - especially when they discard the rule of law and do it as a dictator. Cutting government is an act of Congress, not the executive.…
This is... not an empirical or historical fact! Trump was not the anti-war president, he presided over US involvement in multiple conflicts with less transparency than any prior president. As of this writing is preparing an EO to increase weapons exports.
> There is a literally an EO on preventing online censorship. I'm not sure if you were in a Coma during Covid, but social media companies were censoring voices that have now shown to be entirely true.
That EO might be what you say it is - but social media companies were hardly censoring voices and that has not been "shown to be entirely true".
I don't see how a someone so clearly deep down the rabbit hole on trumpism could call themselves a classical liberal in good faith!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And what is spam? I can acknowledge fraud not being free speech (although it's a stretch as well), i.e. it's intended to harm (again one could argue about a lot of other speech as well), but how can they make the same argument for spam?
Spam is literally commerce. But almost every platform acknowledges it needs to be removed because its unwanted.
We are in a discussion about free speech absolutism. Somebody who says they are a free speech absolutist who supports spam filtering, needs to either justify why spam is not speech (which is my question, why would it not be speech), or acknowledge that they agree there are limits to free speech.
Or is your argument that if it is commerce it's not free speech? That would allow all commerce to be censored (and we just kick the can down the road, what is commerce).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hot take: it's a failure of democratic competition. The US doesn't have proportional representation, and it's long maintained a duopoly of two electable parties, and a first-past-the-post system that makes any vote for a 3rd party a waste. This, coupled with the Democrats not fronting up a reformist candidate when they could have (Sanders shot down twice), permitted the only anti-establishment candidate to win, and t…
Makes sense to me. I've been thinking: The US was doomed from the start? Because of the laws that makes it a two party country? It was just a matter of time, and for mass manipulation tools to appear? Are there any more doomed two party countries waiting to go authoritarian / fascist?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-past-the-post_voting#Cou...
I think, though, that the US won't go full top-down authoritarian, because a large enough portion of the population is armed. Should some kind of coup ever be attempted, it could well spark a civil war – which is still doom, but not a subjugating kind of doom.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> anti-Israeli campus posters as idiots The problem with free speech absolutism is that it leads to the 'paradox of tolerance'. We are now seeing the fruits of that line of thinking. > The paradox of tolerance is a philosophical concept suggesting that if a society extends tolerance to those who are intolerant, it risks enabling the eventual dominance of intolerance; thereby undermining the very principle of toleranc…
I don't see the paradox. You can consider some people idiots and find it condemnable for idiots to be kidnapped in vans or have their visas revoked. If anything it's a slipperly slope logic. These people are idiots -> these people deserve bad things happening. Unfortuntaely, the admin is proving all those fallacies before us.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Spam is literally commerce. But almost every platform acknowledges it needs to be removed because its unwanted.
I'm not asking what spam is, I'm well aware. We are in a discussion about free speech absolutism. Somebody who says they are a free speech absolutist who supports spam filtering, needs to either justify why spam is not speech (which is my question, why would it not be speech), or acknowledge that they agree there are limits to free speech. Or is your argument that if it is commerce it's not free speech? That would al…