☕ David Antoine Well, regarding censorship on social networks, the only speech for me that is not free speech but effective hate speech is the one defending, pushing for and generating violence. In that sense networks should be more censorious, don't you think ? The best example now is Twitter were overtly pushed "free" speech is calling for the murder of various people (included new POTUS) based on their skin color or political orientation and is effectively generating violence, hurting innocent people. Disagreeing by going outside hurting or killing people is pretty unproductive. You can't even start any discussion with those people, frightening.
Martijn While true, networks like Twitter have been essential during the Arab Spring. Would people in those countries have been able to organise and get on the streets against the will of the government and law enforcement if hate speech was censored? Where does hate speech start? Where does rebellion begin? Why is it OK for people in Northern Africa to use Western networks and create dissent but not for the Americana walking the street against Trump? I am not sure where to draw the line either, but after you get rid of actual clear threats of physical harm it gets muddy real quick.
7y, 14w 3 replies
☕ David Antoine There is no problem protesting on the streets against Trump but why riot, doing damages and hurt/kill innocent people when Trump has not yet started as POTUS elect? Now, if the USA were in the situation of some middle-east countries, that's where the lines blur as you say and where rebellion begin. Hate speech, racism, intolerance are starting points for getting on the streets against it, even more if it is the will of the government & law enforcement. Was it under Obama? Is it now? Revolutions start against state violence, dictators, etc. Sometimes they are inevitable but not right if you promote what you want to fight.
7y, 14w 2 replies
Login or register your account to reply
Martijn Maybe they don't protest against Trump. Maybe they stand against the electoral college who will likely vote in a president against the popular vote. Maybe minorities feel that the electoral college is a constitutional power house aimed against them. And thus they call people to dissent from the government and take to the streets in protest. Who am I (or you) to argue when "the USA [is] in the situation of some middle-east countries"? And that's my point. You can't have it both ways. You can't support rebels in one country against their government and not allow rebellions to form in other countries.
7y, 14w 1 reply
☕ David Antoine There are surely people protesting against the electoral college but wasn't the same thing with W. Bush and Al Gore in 2000 I think? Al Gore won the popular vote, W. Bush the electoral vote and I don't remember that kind of "protesting" back then. A lot of people are obviously getting violent specifically against Trump and his family with physical threats. Don't know how that could start a constructive debate on the electoral college no matter what people think of Trump. But I understand your point of view (unless we say Libya was a good job looking at the total mess it is now, following western "support", but that's another story).
7y, 14w reply