• 10A
      7•1 year ago

      I don’t condone murder under any circumstances. But using 56 murders as an excuse to silence anyone online is a disgrace to the principle of free speech.

      • czech
        1•1 year ago

        The principle of free speech, in America, has nothing to do with forcing people to tolerate hateful rhetoric. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_in_the_United_States.

        In the United States, freedom of speech and expression is strongly protected from government restrictions by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, many state constitutions, and state and federal laws. Freedom of speech, also called free speech, means the free and public expression of opinions without censorship, interference and restraint by the government.

        As long as the government isn’t arresting you for your opinions then nothing going on here has to do with “free speech”. Individuals and corporations silencing you online is not a “disgrace to the principle of free speech”.

        • 10A
          4•1 year ago

          You’re conflating the principle of free speech with the US 1st Amendment. The 1st Amendment is predicated on the principle of free speech. The 1st Amendment is completely inapplicable here. The principle of free speech is 100% applicable here, as it is foundational to western civilization.

          • czech
            0•1 year ago

            You’re talking about a “free speech” that only exists in /r/conservative echo chambers. You are free to say what you want but you are not free from the consequences. We do not have to listen. And it’s not a “disgrace” that nobody cares to hear what you have to say.

            • 10A
              3•1 year ago

              Up until a few years ago, it was widely held by people of all political persuasions to be one of the foundations of western civilization. As the far left has moved progressively further leftward, they abandoned it. The only reason you think of it as conservative is because it’s old-fashioned.

              • czech
                0•1 year ago

                Up until a few years ago, it was widely held by people of all political persuasions

                . You can’t just make shit up.This is only exists in your echo chambers.

                • 10A
                  2•1 year ago

                  Wait, do you actually disagree with that? I thought that was common knowledge. If you don’t mind my asking, which age-group are you in? (If you decline to state for anonymity, I understand. I just find this baffling. It’s indisputably true in my personal, anecdotal, life experience.)

                  • czech
                    1•1 year ago

                    So you made it up? You can’t state things as fact based on your personal observations from your echo chamber.

                    It’s indisputably true in my personal, anecdotal, life experience

                    I could have guessed that. Your perspective seems very insular.

    • @[email protected]
      6•1 year ago

      He knows. That’s why he’s desperately trying to hold on to his little platform.

      Pick almost any mass shooter at random and look at their online history and you’ll find the same story over and over again; “progressively radicalised by social media”.

      They’re absolutely aware these domestic terrorists come from their midst. Find a far-right enough chat room and they openly celebrate it.

        • @[email protected]
          1•1 year ago

          Sure thing little reactionary. I guess you’ll just have to hope that if any vulnerable people find this thread, they don’t spend 5 minutes checking before throwing their lives away for your cause.