I really, really dislike when people (like @FediTips, whom I often really appreciate) push for the Fediverse to defederate from unfavored speech.
-
I really, really dislike when people (like @FediTips, whom I often really appreciate) push for the Fediverse to defederate from unfavored speech. “If there be time to expose through discussion, the falsehoods and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.”
Pushing for #Bluesky to use its ill-advised centralization to make it more like regular corporate social media that picks winners and losers is antithetical to what we should desire in the decentralized, open web. It's also the exact sort of thing "regimes" like to do.
Speaking of that term: there is plenty of room to criticize any administration, including Trump's. I've criticized the administration and some of its use of social media on here, in fact. But calling a duly elected administration a "regime"... persuades precisely zero people of anything. I've disliked that flex when the Right used it and I dislike it when the Left uses it, too. It also obscures that it is in the public interest for us to know what the White House says, both when we agree and disagree with it.
#FreeSpeech #Fediverse https://social.growyourown.services/@FediTips/115396451982308613
-
I really, really dislike when people (like @FediTips, whom I often really appreciate) push for the Fediverse to defederate from unfavored speech. “If there be time to expose through discussion, the falsehoods and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.”
Pushing for #Bluesky to use its ill-advised centralization to make it more like regular corporate social media that picks winners and losers is antithetical to what we should desire in the decentralized, open web. It's also the exact sort of thing "regimes" like to do.
Speaking of that term: there is plenty of room to criticize any administration, including Trump's. I've criticized the administration and some of its use of social media on here, in fact. But calling a duly elected administration a "regime"... persuades precisely zero people of anything. I've disliked that flex when the Right used it and I dislike it when the Left uses it, too. It also obscures that it is in the public interest for us to know what the White House says, both when we agree and disagree with it.
#FreeSpeech #Fediverse https://social.growyourown.services/@FediTips/115396451982308613
The one and only reason I run my accounts is to stop fascism and authoritarianism. If you are okay with authoritarians, please unfollow me.
The US is now an authoritarian regime: Trump incited a violent coup against a duly elected president, employs masked gangs to disappear innocent people off the street, uses the army against his own citizens, commits mass murder at sea etc etc.
I don't know how far it has to go before you see what is happening, but by then it will be too late.
-
The one and only reason I run my accounts is to stop fascism and authoritarianism. If you are okay with authoritarians, please unfollow me.
The US is now an authoritarian regime: Trump incited a violent coup against a duly elected president, employs masked gangs to disappear innocent people off the street, uses the army against his own citizens, commits mass murder at sea etc etc.
I don't know how far it has to go before you see what is happening, but by then it will be too late.
@FediTips My point is that authoritarians *love* censoring speech they don't like -- it is the quintessential hallmark of every authoritarian regime. I believe truth wins if given a platform. Becoming authoritarian to stop authoritarianism is to give authoritarians the victory by becoming them.
(To be fair to you and your point, private servers should federate with whomever they wish. But attempting to pressure the fediverse to eager defederation will not accomplish anything good.)
-
@FediTips My point is that authoritarians *love* censoring speech they don't like -- it is the quintessential hallmark of every authoritarian regime. I believe truth wins if given a platform. Becoming authoritarian to stop authoritarianism is to give authoritarians the victory by becoming them.
(To be fair to you and your point, private servers should federate with whomever they wish. But attempting to pressure the fediverse to eager defederation will not accomplish anything good.)
"I believe truth wins if given a platform."
You might believe that, but there's no evidence for it.
Authoritarians thrive on debates because they use them to spread lies and divide the audience against each other. The US Army did a brilliant short documentary warning about these tactics in 1947: https://fedi.video/w/t4sN6wtVxGox9V8MyK1EzX
Authoritarians also use debates to try to normalise their view, to make themselves seem like a legitimate option. Fascism should never be a legitimate option.
-
@FediTips My point is that authoritarians *love* censoring speech they don't like -- it is the quintessential hallmark of every authoritarian regime. I believe truth wins if given a platform. Becoming authoritarian to stop authoritarianism is to give authoritarians the victory by becoming them.
(To be fair to you and your point, private servers should federate with whomever they wish. But attempting to pressure the fediverse to eager defederation will not accomplish anything good.)
"speech they don't like"
It is not about liking speech or not, it's about people being threatened, beaten and murdered. This is speech that kills people.
Did you see Fox News the other week where the host casually suggested "involuntary lethal injections" for the homeless? https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/brian-kilmeade-fox-kill-homeless-mental-health-issues-1235426948/ He was attempting to normalise a policy straight from the Nazis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aktion_T4
This is how it works https://social.chinwag.org/@FediThing/112581263140051643 and this is what it results in https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/stories/2022-02-20/facebook-accused-of-letting-activists-incite-ethnic-massacres-with-hate-and-misinformation-by-survivors-in-ethiopia/
-
I really, really dislike when people (like @FediTips, whom I often really appreciate) push for the Fediverse to defederate from unfavored speech. “If there be time to expose through discussion, the falsehoods and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.”
Pushing for #Bluesky to use its ill-advised centralization to make it more like regular corporate social media that picks winners and losers is antithetical to what we should desire in the decentralized, open web. It's also the exact sort of thing "regimes" like to do.
Speaking of that term: there is plenty of room to criticize any administration, including Trump's. I've criticized the administration and some of its use of social media on here, in fact. But calling a duly elected administration a "regime"... persuades precisely zero people of anything. I've disliked that flex when the Right used it and I dislike it when the Left uses it, too. It also obscures that it is in the public interest for us to know what the White House says, both when we agree and disagree with it.
#FreeSpeech #Fediverse https://social.growyourown.services/@FediTips/115396451982308613
-
@hiphopheaven @FediTips My point is censors will inevitably ratchet up the rhetoric to ensure disfavored speech they wish to stop fits the standard required to stop it. For example, Russia deems anything spoken against their war as "supporting Nazis,” since they label their enemies as Nazis. Well, by the standard you describe, that means that speech should be censored. But those of us outside of Russia know, in fact, the Russian government is far more guilty of such behavior than the people they censor.
"Who will watch the watchmen?"
-
@hiphopheaven @FediTips My point is censors will inevitably ratchet up the rhetoric to ensure disfavored speech they wish to stop fits the standard required to stop it. For example, Russia deems anything spoken against their war as "supporting Nazis,” since they label their enemies as Nazis. Well, by the standard you describe, that means that speech should be censored. But those of us outside of Russia know, in fact, the Russian government is far more guilty of such behavior than the people they censor.
"Who will watch the watchmen?"
@trbutler @FediTips putin has no proof of his claim we know very well that he is just using it as an excuse. If someone say openly on video or social media post etc that jews should all be exterminated do you really believe this should not be censored? Do you think someone saying it is ok to kidnap people by ICe should reallu be allowed? There are things that are not a matter of opinions and can be dangerous to be allowed
-
@trbutler @FediTips putin has no proof of his claim we know very well that he is just using it as an excuse. If someone say openly on video or social media post etc that jews should all be exterminated do you really believe this should not be censored? Do you think someone saying it is ok to kidnap people by ICe should reallu be allowed? There are things that are not a matter of opinions and can be dangerous to be allowed
@hiphopheaven @FediTips How do you get to discussing proof, if you’ve censored the discussion? Notably, the accounts being discussed aren't wishing death on the Jews (in fact, they are pro-Jewish, if anything) and they aren't saying “We should kidnap people" even if the agency behind it is misbehaving (more on that in a moment).
So, no, I do not think people should say all Jews should be exterminated. I'm *vocally* against antisemitism. but I hear people saying chants that are well known to mean just that on here and there isn't pushback. Another problem with censorship: we only apply it to the evils we are passionate about while ignoring other evils that we are apathetic about or guilty of ourselves.
And, to be clear: no, people should not be kidnapped, period. As a law enforcement agency ICE may, of course, arrest people who have violated immigration law, but it needs to do so according to the law and provide due process to guarantee things happen according to the law. But, you don't think censoring the ability of ICE to post will magically make them more strictly apply due process, do you? I sure don't. In fact, them posting shows some of their worst impulses better than critics could ever hope to. Incidentally, ICE's feed *is* often tasteless, but they aren't so stupid as to post "We think we should kidnap people and violate the law." So to censor them, we wouldn't just be censoring particularly heinous statements, but anyone we deem is acting in an unsavory fashion, including all their speech... and doing so without -- wait for it -- due process.
Should all Russian government accounts be censored? All Chinese? All Iranian? All Hamas? Or are we better for being able to see what they are saying and recognizing the problems in it? I'm actually thankful I can read what the Russians are saying, because it shows their willful evil more clearly each time they issue statements about their war with Ukraine, for example.
-
@hiphopheaven @FediTips How do you get to discussing proof, if you’ve censored the discussion? Notably, the accounts being discussed aren't wishing death on the Jews (in fact, they are pro-Jewish, if anything) and they aren't saying “We should kidnap people" even if the agency behind it is misbehaving (more on that in a moment).
So, no, I do not think people should say all Jews should be exterminated. I'm *vocally* against antisemitism. but I hear people saying chants that are well known to mean just that on here and there isn't pushback. Another problem with censorship: we only apply it to the evils we are passionate about while ignoring other evils that we are apathetic about or guilty of ourselves.
And, to be clear: no, people should not be kidnapped, period. As a law enforcement agency ICE may, of course, arrest people who have violated immigration law, but it needs to do so according to the law and provide due process to guarantee things happen according to the law. But, you don't think censoring the ability of ICE to post will magically make them more strictly apply due process, do you? I sure don't. In fact, them posting shows some of their worst impulses better than critics could ever hope to. Incidentally, ICE's feed *is* often tasteless, but they aren't so stupid as to post "We think we should kidnap people and violate the law." So to censor them, we wouldn't just be censoring particularly heinous statements, but anyone we deem is acting in an unsavory fashion, including all their speech... and doing so without -- wait for it -- due process.
Should all Russian government accounts be censored? All Chinese? All Iranian? All Hamas? Or are we better for being able to see what they are saying and recognizing the problems in it? I'm actually thankful I can read what the Russians are saying, because it shows their willful evil more clearly each time they issue statements about their war with Ukraine, for example.
"But, you don't think censoring the ability of ICE to post will magically make them more strictly apply due process, do you?"
They're not doing this in a vacuum, they're doing it in the context of anti-immigrant lies whipped up by Trump etc.
Trump has been, for years now, saying that immigrants are rapists, drug dealers, people who eat dogs etc. It's 1930s level rhetoric designed to provoke blanket hatred of foreigners, and laying the foundation for things like ICE.
-
@hiphopheaven @FediTips How do you get to discussing proof, if you’ve censored the discussion? Notably, the accounts being discussed aren't wishing death on the Jews (in fact, they are pro-Jewish, if anything) and they aren't saying “We should kidnap people" even if the agency behind it is misbehaving (more on that in a moment).
So, no, I do not think people should say all Jews should be exterminated. I'm *vocally* against antisemitism. but I hear people saying chants that are well known to mean just that on here and there isn't pushback. Another problem with censorship: we only apply it to the evils we are passionate about while ignoring other evils that we are apathetic about or guilty of ourselves.
And, to be clear: no, people should not be kidnapped, period. As a law enforcement agency ICE may, of course, arrest people who have violated immigration law, but it needs to do so according to the law and provide due process to guarantee things happen according to the law. But, you don't think censoring the ability of ICE to post will magically make them more strictly apply due process, do you? I sure don't. In fact, them posting shows some of their worst impulses better than critics could ever hope to. Incidentally, ICE's feed *is* often tasteless, but they aren't so stupid as to post "We think we should kidnap people and violate the law." So to censor them, we wouldn't just be censoring particularly heinous statements, but anyone we deem is acting in an unsavory fashion, including all their speech... and doing so without -- wait for it -- due process.
Should all Russian government accounts be censored? All Chinese? All Iranian? All Hamas? Or are we better for being able to see what they are saying and recognizing the problems in it? I'm actually thankful I can read what the Russians are saying, because it shows their willful evil more clearly each time they issue statements about their war with Ukraine, for example.
"Should all Russian government accounts be censored? All Chinese? All Iranian? All Hamas?"
They're not being censored, it's impossible to censor a government. They will always have their own websites, news agencies, television stations etc.
That doesn't mean you have to help authoritarians spread their message on your network. The idea of the Fediverse is to give grassroots people control over what is permitted on their part of the network.
