well thats a really dumb point you made there lol what about muh family if it means no more murdochs or soroses then f*** your family there will be ten other families all for it
Kill yourself lmfao f*** my family?
Kill yourself lmfao f*** my family?
You don’t support government sanctioned thought police?
Kill yourself lmfao f*** my family?
dont bring your family into conversations your cant handle hoe. not as big a hoe as your grandma of course
dont bring your family into conversations your cant handle hoe. not as big a hoe as your grandma of course
I pray u go out like ur daddy Stalin did, truthfully
And like your real dad too, since you’re obviously fatherless
You don’t support government sanctioned thought police?
"i think the rich should have their free speech curtailed if they want to continue to possess huge amounts of productive power"

"i think the rich should have their free speech curtailed if they want to continue to possess huge amounts of productive power"

Don’t blame me, I voted for the email lady
Don’t blame me, I voted for the email lady
email lady paid to have trumps press boosted in 2016 because she thought he'd be easier to beat
funny how that works, maybe we should curtail the rights of the rich!
guys please dont derail thread this is about CHINA
take that s*** to Amerikkka thread smh
Freedom of speech for everybody, that's the whole point. You can't silence people Soros or Murdoch without silencing yourself and your family first lmao why are you all so okay with that?
Yeah but that doesn’t mean anything without material incentives to protect it, nor does that mean what speech is allowed is genuinely accepted by society. You keep reducing it to a simple individual to individual a***ogy and it doesn’t work like that.
In the 1800s Americans had the free speech to openly sell slaves and it was their individual right. The incentive was the production and reproduction of slavery which many Americans benefitted from. And if you weren’t white back then you probably had little to no “free speech” in the eye of the law
You think because you can send out a tweet or make a blog post about a politician you don’t like is “free speech” but the alternative is having people with 100x more money and power to drown out your voice, fund the education and media programs that help to facilitate what politics are even discussed within a society.
It’s not some black and white, “free speech is over” because I got fired for saying mean things about Trump or Charlie Kirk
Your “speech” is worth infinitely less than someone like Musk, who has openly bragged about spending billions in elections to influence politicians, literally owns some of the wealthiest corporations on earth, including one of the largest social media platforms, which he uses to frequently churn out reactionary propaganda.
Both him and I and you are all protected under the first amendment right, clearly one of us has much more weight in their speech.
But sure, all of us can send out a blog post about Trump being mean and we probably won’t get thrown in a black site just yet. That doesn’t mean free speech is treated equally among everyone
Your “speech” is worth infinitely less than someone like Musk, who has openly bragged about spending billions in elections to influence politicians, literally owns some of the wealthiest corporations on earth, including one of the largest social media platforms, which he uses to frequently churn out reactionary propaganda.
Both him and I and you are all protected under the first amendment right, clearly one of us has much more weight in their speech.
But sure, all of us can send out a blog post about Trump being mean and we probably won’t get thrown in a black site just yet. That doesn’t mean free speech is treated equally among everyone
I guess I just don’t see how reducing the concept of “freedom of speech” is going to help ANY of the very valid points you made.
You mention people in the 1800s having the freedom to sell and buy slaves, but at the same time people also had the freedom to speak out against it and get the practice abolished.
This whole argument started when someone argued that government vetted influencers would be a way to “save social media” in the U.S.
If the idea is to turn the power and weight of speech away from mega corporations and oligarchs to the people, obviously that’s an ideal solution to the propaganda machine America has been forever; but it’s also unrealistic lol.
People have an intrinsic need for power and a government, and all that would create is a different hierarchy that dictates what is and isn’t acceptable speech, which is my point. That’s been proven time and time and time and time again.
I don’t think power imbalance goes away with government mandated speech is all lol
I pray u go out like ur daddy Stalin did, truthfully
having lived a long and eventful life? thanks
I guess I just don’t see how reducing the concept of “freedom of speech” is going to help ANY of the very valid points you made.
You mention people in the 1800s having the freedom to sell and buy slaves, but at the same time people also had the freedom to speak out against it and get the practice abolished.
This whole argument started when someone argued that government vetted influencers would be a way to “save social media” in the U.S.
If the idea is to turn the power and weight of speech away from mega corporations and oligarchs to the people, obviously that’s an ideal solution to the propaganda machine America has been forever; but it’s also unrealistic lol.
People have an intrinsic need for power and a government, and all that would create is a different hierarchy that dictates what is and isn’t acceptable speech, which is my point. That’s been proven time and time and time and time again.
idk whats been proven or not unless you wanna put some names on that s*** but heres a little tidbit for you. soviet people had infinitely more freedom of speech than you or i ever did. their right for protest and access to protest materials was guaranteed by the constitution. aside from obvious bumshit such as calls to overthrow the government (which was actually harmful and against the vast majority of population's interest, plus you can just as well get spooked for it in america today) you could criticize your officials, your bosses, your colleagues, your local grocery shop, and it wasnt uncommon that your concerns would be meaningfully addressed. Magnetic Mountain has a lot of episodes describing this process
I guess I just don’t see how reducing the concept of “freedom of speech” is going to help ANY of the very valid points you made.
You mention people in the 1800s having the freedom to sell and buy slaves, but at the same time people also had the freedom to speak out against it and get the practice abolished.
This whole argument started when someone argued that government vetted influencers would be a way to “save social media” in the U.S.
If the idea is to turn the power and weight of speech away from mega corporations and oligarchs to the people, obviously that’s an ideal solution to the propaganda machine America has been forever; but it’s also unrealistic lol.
People have an intrinsic need for power and a government, and all that would create is a different hierarchy that dictates what is and isn’t acceptable speech, which is my point. That’s been proven time and time and time and time again.
Slavery was abolished through a brutal and violent civil war perpetrated by the irreconcilable differences amongst the American ruling classes (industrial capital in the north, a mix of slavery/capitalism in the south) and was not people “speaking up” against alavery, even if that was naturally a major discourse in political circles back then. Words dont move forward history, actions do.
“Government-mandated” implies all governments are the same. No, the class composition of the government, who it represents and works for will entail what is mandated safe or not.
The US is a party of landowners and capitalists so the rules and regulations are structured to uplift and allow opportunities to uplift their voices. The fact other citizens got nominally included into the first amendment or the bill of rights writ large isn’t some testament to any type of virtue the founding fathers were upholding when establishing these that is now being broken suddenly by Trump admin
guys please dont derail thread this is about CHINA
take that s*** to Amerikkka thread smh
I do want to be equally critical as well. There's a viral case of a celebrity actor who got killed at a party, and people suspect it is murder involving executives/politicians. Their social media is curbing any mention of the case really hard
I do want to be equally critical as well. There's a viral case of a celebrity actor who got killed at a party, and people suspect it is murder involving executives/politicians. Their social media is curbing any mention of the case really hard
Fr it's not all peaches and cream either. They censor Maoists and labour unrest on Chinese social media. I can't cosign that!