The very fact that you're free to post said idiotic comparison proves it false.
The amount that these people use Facebook/Twitter would amount to a DDOS anyway. That's half the reason they have their warped views.
Big Tech Authoritarianism
- Thread starter mmj_uk
- Start date
The very fact that you're free to post said idiotic comparison proves it false.
The amount that these people use Facebook/Twitter would amount to a DDOS anyway. That's half the reason they have their warped views.
Western world: "Sorry bud, but this is a private establishment, and I don't want your views to be espoused in here. Please leave. If you want to share your views, you'll have to do so elsewhere."
China: "Sorry, but you can't say that anywhere. You're under arrest."
You really don't see the difference?
"You are probably a racist/sexist/part of socially undesirable group that must be purged".
You're the one pushing for China-like censorship.
Do you have some kind of cognitive dissonance going on?
You have a warped view of the world if you think the press is more free today than it ever as been. How old are you?
That is not what happens in China
Solid evidence for the FBI then?
They're offering $1000 per person identified and have so far arrested quite a few and I don't believe any have been "antifa".
I'm fully expecting it to be the same as the voting videos where some guy/woman is pausing tv footage every few seconds and describing with their full imagination what they believe is happening.
But go on then, lets see the videos.
You are missing the point. I don't necessarily have many opinions I wish to share. In fact I'm a very private person. It's not about specific views, whether they are left, right, or whatever. The point is about control of opinions and speech. If you can't see the stark difference in society between the 1970's and today then I'm not sure what to say to you (I only give the 1970's because that's an era I remember and it was before modern tech). Sadly as more freedoms are eroded, and more controls imposed, we will push back less and less because those of us who not only value freedom, but also remember what it was like, are getting older and dying off.
IIRC there's a photo of some hairy dude who is apparently Antifa. Problem is, the photo from the Capitol is very sharp and clear, while the one from the Antifa event is so blurry that it could be anyone with a similar build, haircut, and beard. And even if it is the same person, it's equally possible that he was a MAGA loon infiltrating an Antifa event, or that he changed political stance during the intervening time period.
Deleted User 298457
Deleted User 298457
What is the biggest freedom you are missing? Aside from your "feelings"?
Did you hear about the morons on Parler sharing exact details of their crimes, because someone said Trump was going to pardon them? The US government had to release a statement to declare it false it gained so much traction.
Where have I pushed for China like censorship? I have no idea how you got that from my posts.
This comparison to China is hilarious. You guys need to find bigger fish to fry and make sure you are looking beyond the quick access buttons on your TV remote if you think Google, Facebook and Twitter is the beginning and end of the internet.
In the 70s it wasn't possible for your opinions to be shared with thousands of people in an instant, so stopping that from happening now hasn't eroded the freedoms you had in the 70s.
A few off the top of my head:
* Everywhere I go I am tracked; filmed on CCTV, phone mast pings recorded and available to the government, ANPR recording everywhere I drive.
* Telephone conversations are scanned; GCHQ regularly scan our phone calls for keywords and also contribute intelligence to the US ECHELON programme.
* Everything I buy is recorded by private companies to build up a profile of my habits and to sell my data.
None of this happened before modern technology. You may not feel they are intrusive but I certainly do.
What is wrong with an ability to share your oipinions with thousands of people? Why should that be restricted in any era, 1970's or today? Those people don't have to listen to your opinions. But why should they be stopped from hearing it if that is what they choose?
Well it isn't, however that reach is due to private platforms, so they are within their rights to control that. You are welcome to set up your own platform, but that will be at your own cost (and won't have the same reach).
Do you disagree with a restaurant making a customer leave due to them constantly and loudly swearing over the course of their meal?
Or with cinemas ejecting people who are making a disturbance during a film?
Because you replied to @Roar87 who is pushing for free speech and you're saying;
Why are you asking him about regulation? You're the one who wants more regulation, and is ok for entire political views to be censored.
You seem to condemn others for using subjects like Trump and now China, then continue to use those in your own arguments.
Society today is far more intolerant than it as ever been in the past, even if we just keep on this subject, then at no point in history as one side of a political debate online sought to outright ban all conversations of the other side. Politics itself wasn't in regular conversation. These days we're bombarded constantly by all media, no matter the side, 24/7.
In the 70s the huge majority of people were restricted from having the ability to share their opinions with a broad audience. Now everyone has easy access to do so, as well as access to infinitely more information almost instantly.
So private companies choosing to remove people who have broken their terms of service still leaves said people with a lot more freedom to share their opinons than they had in the 70s.
I missed this on my previous reply. It is a predictable response that the race and misogyny card is thrown around. You are suggesting that I am to blame for my generations treatment of women and people of colour. You are making a massive assumption that because I value freedom of opinion that I must therefore have opinions that are "outdated" and not acceptable today.
How do you explain that I was the first of my peer group to date interacially? How do you explain that I married a non-white woman and had children with her? How do you explain that I was picked on both verbally and physically by non-white people for daring to marry her and stood my ground believing I was right? How do you explain that I didn't talk to my father for about 10 years and moved out of his house because he did indeed have those opinions of me having a non-white girlfriend? Just like many people nowadays you assume that someone in favour of freedom of speech/opinions must have "wrong" values and can't actually be arguing for the principle itself.
Was my marrying interacially an outdated opinion?
They were not restricted. They had no outlet anywhere as large as technology has afforded today. That is different from restriction.
There were outlets. They just weren't allowed to use them.
Not just anyone could go on telly or the radio and reach thousands/millions of people. In fact it was actively restricted/illegal.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirate_radio_in_the_United_Kingdom
Even if there weren't outlets, the original point was that we're more free today than we've ever been. Whether that's afforded by technology or not is largely irrelevant.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 3,286
- Location
- The South
This the article in the Washington Times, where they mention that XRVision had caught Antifa members in the crowd of the Capitol Hill riot?
The same XRVision who then got their solicitors involved, sent the Washington Times a cease and desist and asked for an apology because they didn't identify Antifa but rather "neo-Nazi organizations and a QAnon supporter" in the crowd?
The same article that later got updated with an apology from the Washington Times noting their original claim was fiction? - https://www.washingtontimes.com/new...-claims-antifa-infiltrated-protesters/?update
That's what you're referring to, isn't it? Just checking....
