erowind wrote: ↑Sun Oct 30, 2022 12:59 am
For the third time, since the buyout climate scientists and, especially people posting about mastadon are being censored. I don't care about the politics of the corporation, the change came after the buyout that's all I need to know.
You “don’t care” about the politics of the corporation? Okay, that tells me everything I need to know about how informed you’re likely to be on the matter. What I don’t know, however, is why you’re bothering to argue with me about it if you don’t even care.
As for censored climate scientists, what proportion of them are being actively censored? 1%? 10%? 100%? How many accounts of climate scientists have been suspended? How many climate websites are blocked? How many tweets about climate science have been deleted for violating Twitter’s terms of service? How many climate scientists have been locked out of their accounts for a certain period of time? Is there evidence this is an official policy decided by Elon and his team?
erowind wrote: ↑Sun Oct 30, 2022 12:59 amThis is an open admission that censorship is acceptable then? It was never about "free speech?" It was about owning the "libs." Both of the parties involved are liberals (though some have proto-fascist tendencies) and they've both been censoring people of my political positions for generations. I am utterly apathetic to infighting between them, it has no bearing on me. I don't care about some nonsense sensationalist "news" story from an election cycle being censored on a corporate platform. I do care about censorship of climate science though, because that actually matters and isn't a sensationalist circle jerk about selectively honing in on certain corrupt politicians for purposes of realpolitik.
It’s an open admission that it’s acceptable to stop artificially boosting liberals with Twitter’s algorithms, sure. If you want to call that “owning the libs”, be my guest, but I do think they ought to be treated how they’ve treated everyone else for decades – and especially the last few years. It would only be fair. I suppose in leftist terms we could call that “deconstructing liberal privilege”. It's very telling that there's such a panic about finally being forced onto a level playing field.
It’s true that the mainstream of both Democrats and Republicans are both variations on some form of liberalism, but is “proto-fascist” now just the catch-all word for dissident? It’s almost like you’ve already conceded defeat to “fascism” as the only possible alternative to the current regime, and so despite this having “no bearing” on you, you still side with the dying liberal regime because apparently there’s no alternative between that and Literal Fascism™.
In your view, they both censor you, so you just decide to lay down and support that censorship against any potential loosening of restrictions, just because you automatically assume it’s a one-way ticket to “fascist cultural dominance”. With an attitude like that, it’s no wonder that hardly any constructive solutions seem to come from left-wing "dissidents" (if they can even be called dissidents). It’s all hand-wringing about how we can’t possibly tear down today’s managerial authoritarianism because otherwise, Hitler will surely rise from his grave. It’s such a destructive mindset.
Oh, and what’s more, you also “don’t care” about political censorship on Twitter anyway (despite apparently suffering from it yourself - which is it? You do or you don't?). You don’t even have to look into a story at all either, you can just dismiss it as “nonsense sensationalism” when it’s inconvenient to the government! You could get a job at the White House.
erowind wrote: ↑Sun Oct 30, 2022 12:59 amIn terms of expressing hatred, no, it's not a panic response. Despite what reactionaries think this stupid, impotent, unconstructive sort of "speech" that amounts to spamming the N word 50x over and doxing and harassing people has always been taboo on the internet, it wouldn't have been tolerated on most of usenet either. I don't actually think that speech in its absolute form, meaning free discourse in the form of literature and free philosophical discourse should ever be repressed. Nor do I trust the state or a given corporation to create conditions for freedom of press or speech. However, we already don't have free speech, and what's on display that's being defended here doesn't constitute speech so much as it does a war cry.
Irony and comedy are poor disguises too. I already consider myself in a state of war culturally. I do belong to a group of people that would be thrown in a concentration camp should fascist cultural tendencies become dominant. Thus, I don't have any sympathies when these people are censored, and I don't think them being uncensored will make anything better or contribute to society either. Censored speech and press would continue to proliferate regardless.
In other words, in a world where people can't spam the N word 50x on large public platforms my political ideas get censored. In a world where people can spam the N word 50x on large public platforms my political ideas still get censored. Given those two conditions I'm going to side with the one where people can't spam the N word 50x because if those people gain ground it could literally be the death of me.
It’s absolutely a panic response precisely because of this weird fixation you have on people “spamming the N word 50x over” as if that’s the only thing that could ever possibly change now that there’s a chance of Twitter loosening its censorship – and as if that will be allowed forever and ever. I wouldn’t bet on it. And as for “doxing and harassing”, that’s the left’s favourite sport; by and large they got away with doing those things under the old Twitter regime. No doubt you’ll find some way to defend that too, because the alternative is literal concentration camps or something.
