10 comments

[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 30.7 ms ] thread
No.

Free speech means the government can't prosecute Trump for being Trump. It means the Postal Service can't refuse to deliver his letters. In fact, Trump can - and should - be prosecuted for inciting an attempted coup d'etat. He should be, because, had the coup been successful, he wouldn't, and the US would be under a new form of government that could no longer be called a democracy (and don't even start saying it's not because "it's a Republic").

Twitter is a private company. As are Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest and others and they have every right do deny service to users they deem undesirable, for whatever terms of service those users agreed to respect when signing up. In fact, as a user, I think they have the obligation of removing such users from the platform and to enforce equally the terms of service, regardless of said user's popularity and/or profitability.

He's saying it's "censorship", not that it's illegal.
Well truth be told his opinion has no more validity than than opinion of you or I on this matter. The world is dealing with a new problem and it’s incredibly annoying to be listening to with the “holier than thou” attitude of people who believe that they’re are completely right and censorship is 100% universally bad.

Companies are trying this out. It can’t be any worse than taking no action at all.

> It can’t be any worse than taking no action at all.

Oh yes it can.

I'm not personally a big navalny fan but many people do take his opinions more seriously than mine, especially when it comes to censorship. Just like people hang on to every word that comes out of Greta.
Greta is just a symbol of the children all over the world who are going to inherit an Earth that’s been ravaged by their elders while they could do nothing but watch it become gradually worse.

Navalny comes from a pseudo dictatorship and I don’t expect his thoughts regarding censorship to apply to a democracy.

Isn't that exactly the point he's making, that since he's the victim of censorship, he knows a thing or two.

If anything it seems to me that a "democracy" should have less censorship than a "dictatorship", so we should be extra worried.

It's a Constitutional Republic, and the Federalist Papers go to great length as to explain why.

Just because you want to conflate the form of government with your favorite party that participates in it (the usual motivation behind the slip besides just laziness), it is not anyone else's fault but your own.

The rest, my inner pedant can live with.

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2018/04/24/ink/

Branigin, active for years in Democratic politics and an aspirant for the nomination for governor in 1955, said in referring to newspaper publishers, “I never argue with a man who buys ink by the barrel.”

Political power grows out of the barrel

(Mao ended the phrase with "of a gun", but that was just a red herring)