zlacker

[return to "Facebook employees stage virtual walkout in protest of company’s stance"]
1. mc32+28[view] [source] 2020-06-01 20:03:52
>>pseudo+(OP)
Activists want to eat their cake and have it too.

On the one hand they say platforms may exercise “their” free speech by moderating posts or banning people and that’s okay because it’s a private co. and not obliged to be platform for everyone.

Then on the other hand a different company also exercises its free speech (under their own argument) by not moderating posts and now that’s bad because some speech should be moderated and they disagree with those voices.

So like basically they’re for corporate free speech when they agree with the controls but are against it when they disagree with the results.

Just say it. We only want to allow our approved views — we don’t want free speech.

And not only that but they protest free speech but totally don’t walk out when they unscrupulously slurp up data on everyone.

◧◩
2. metalg+mh[view] [source] 2020-06-01 20:50:55
>>mc32+28
Do you not understand that these non-approved views, for the most part, come from actual nazis? Like, real life nazis. People that will kill you because of your skin colour.

I've read a lot of bootlicking comments on this website lately from people who want to talk in upper abstractions about free speech and discuss moral theory. You are all completely missing the point. That black people are needlessly DYING because real life white supremacists are having their voices promoted and platformed on the internet.

When it comes to activists eating their cake and having it too, yea, those are the privileged facebook employees taking a paid day off as a way of making a statement. What a joke.

You know who needs their voices heard? Who needs free speech? Black people. And our society silences them through gruesome MURDER. Murders with no justice. God forbid someone get their tweet "fact-checked".

◧◩◪
3. brigan+Rk[view] [source] 2020-06-01 21:11:14
>>metalg+mh
It took 2000 years of anti-Jewish hatred and even then it required violence for Nazis to "win" that argument. The anti-Jewish hatred was protected by blasphemy laws, and the Nazis were banned in the 1920s and several of them prosecuted under hate speech laws. And then there was no freedom of speech in Nazi Germany.

Hardly a glowing recommendation for limits on speech. It's easy to argue against National Socialism and it's easy to argue against anti-Semitism as long as free speech is allowed. Allow people to argue instead of fight violently and the better argument will win.

If you don't think you have a better argument than a Nazi then I'm really worried for you.

◧◩◪◨
4. metalg+Dn1[view] [source] 2020-06-02 05:43:21
>>brigan+Rk
Was I making an argument?
[go to top]