This kind of bullying (from either side) leads directly to war.
“The First Amendment is first for a reason. Second Amendment is just in case the First one doesn't work out.”
- Chappelle
“The First Amendment is first for a reason. Second Amendment is just in case the First one doesn't work out.”
- Chappelle
I don't see twitter mentioned.
You need to at least learn the history of the period if you are going to try to play this game.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Party
> Hitler saw the party as a revolutionary organisation, whose aim was the overthrow of the Weimar Republic, which he saw as controlled by the socialists, Jews and the "November criminals" who had betrayed the German soldiers in 1918. The SA ("storm troopers", also known as "Brownshirts") were founded as a party militia in 1921 and began violent attacks on other parties.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beer_Hall_Putsch
> Approximately two thousand Nazis were marching to the Feldherrnhalle, in the city centre, when they were confronted by a police cordon, which resulted in the deaths of 16 Nazi party members and four police officers.
Please cut the smug attitude. I’m trying my best not to engage with this kind of low-brow personal attack.
> Over the following years they worked to become a legitimate party, entered government, and did not actually need to engage in direct violence to attain the absolute control that was desired.
This is just flat wrong. You’re ignoring the violent intimidations of the SA during the entire decade from 1920-1930.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturmabteilung
> Throughout the 1920s and into the 1930s, members of the SA were often involved in street fights, called Zusammenstöße (collisions), with members of the Communist Party (KPD).
It's also well known that the Nazis were (at least monetarily) backed by Big Business & the wealthy capitalists at the time who were afraid of the rising popularity of Communism, as well as the threat of Soviet Russia. This included but was not limited to even American companies that happened to have offices in Germany (e.g. IBM). You can bet that money was used for anti-Semitic propaganda (which could deflect unhappiness towards the corporations to be aimed with the Jewish), and bringing this back to Free Speech, you can bet that this was allowed because of unmitigated free speech at the time.
Source: https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/copenhagen-speech-v...
In places where it hasn't resulted in obvious violence, it appears to be pushing people towards polarisation and distress, with violence looking plausible if that continues.
We have a real dilemma around this one. It may be that certain forms of "speech" that have emerged in modern society also push people towards violence.
War has already started… and it's not as simple as pretty lines drawn on maps to demarcate sides… or ballots dropped off for whose favorite candidate.
That right, then, cannot be upheld if half the country believes it's ok to silence the other half.
There's a huge value disconnect here and that's the fundamental problem. What one CAN do and what one SHOULD do are very different things and I think people's pragmatism is blinding them to how this will work out for people 100 years from now.
I don't understand this. Donald Trump can say whatever he wants. Alex Jones can say whatever he wants. Why are you saying that their rights are being trampled? Why paint them as victims? As it happen, the right to speak is not a right to be heard and Trump's supporters can hear him as much as they want. Twitter decided that it would not be through their product.
If I invite a bunch of friends at my place and one of them start spewing hatred and lies, I'll kick him out. He can continue in the street as far as I am concerned. Just not in my house... What right were denied here?
I never heard those arguments a few years back when Fox news used to invite liberals on their show just to cut them in the middle of a sentence because they didn't like what they were saying. It infuriated me alright. But I never went as far as to think it was illegal.
Do you propose that Twitter should be forced by the government not to give context to tweets? It seems that the supreme court disagreed with that idea when they decided that a company cannot be forced to sell a cake to a gay couple.
> What one CAN do and what one SHOULD do are very different things and I think people's pragmatism is blinding them to how this will work out for people 100 years from now.
I completely agree with you. The President of the United States CAN instill doubt into the very heart of democracy using all the cynicism and lies he can muster. But SHOULD he do it? What I am saying is that between the theoretical threats of having a private company exercising its right to manage its products in its own way and the president of a country going for a power grab, the urgency, to me, seems pretty clear.
Let's agree to disagree.
The Wayback Machie is the latest 1984 example: https://www.zerohedge.com/technology/information-war-interne...
(note yc already shadow bands 0h links by not allowing comments on submissions, this (yc) is an awesome place, it's sad really)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24406518
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23495333
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23486135
Stop looking at right now, today, this week. Look forward. Look forward to when you are old; look forward beyond your lifetime; look forward to when this time in history has been forgotten by the cultural memory, to when the transitory arguments of today, this afternoon, or this year, have been forgotten; and ask yourself what kind of world you don't want to see, even if it means you ruefully admit it makes things harder now.
That introspection has been lost and probably, the human race won't survive this period if we don't figure it out.
That is not what the Supreme Court decided. The only decision they made was that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission didn't apply religious neutrality to the case, and reversed the Commission's decision[1].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masterpiece_Cakeshop_v._Colora...