Trump shouldn't have had his twitter suspended, thats unfair

Post Reply New Topic

You can bet if Treaver Noah or Joy Bayhar were kicked off social media it would be a constitutional crisis for the left.

Free thought is the new counter culture.

Who the hell are they?

Now, if Bill Nye or Neil deGrasse Tyson were kicked off social media, THAT would be a tragedy!

Have they broken the terms of service they agreed to like Donnie T?

I would expect them to be treated the same if they behaved the same.

Trump DID do something that's "not so great."

He incited the mob to storm the Capitol on January 6th.

I don't know why he isn't indicted yet.

This not a matter of Freedom of Speech but of censorship. I think one SHOULD err on the side of not censoring. Despite the ban barring jail, health or death I view Trump as the presumptive 2024 Republican nominee.

He is very unpopular now I can think of a scenario wherein indications of inflation turn into deficit-inspired hyperinflation. Add to that woke over censorship and Critical Race Theory control of people's kid's education and with memories of the Trump presidency fading, Trump wins the lesser of two evils contest. That is not a prediction, I have to hold onto some hope the Dems see it happening and pull back from political suicide. Can not say I am overconfident that either the Dems will pull back or that they will not need to because the country is really becoming that woke.

Oh, wow! I couldn't think of a more conceded, hypocritical thing to say. You have more meltdowns in political conversations than anyone. Perhaps if you expressed yourself better, that could be avoided.

What I can express is that you totally mistake other people's servers for public property.

They've caught themselves in a trap of their own making.

They either decide that these private individuals should not have control over their private property and services, which goes against their bullheaded insistence of corporate freedom and government non-interference in the market.
Or they decide that these private individuals should have control over their private property and services, which goes against their desire to say whatever they want online without any consequences of any kind from any private individuals anywhere ever.

It seems like if the choice is between corporate freedom and spreading misinformation/inciting violence/undermining democracy, they go with the latter.
They're giving up on the free market because the market has realized that enabling the right wing is bad for business and costs them more customers than it gains them.

Its all part of the slow death of the capitalist consensus and it makes leftists like me so, so happy.

Here's the thing.

The right wing is traditionally ME FIRST.

So if they do something bad and get their knuckles wrapped, ah well, no-one really suffers that much. Because if the whole ideology is "screw you and me first" then striking someone out, for whatever reason, harms them and no-one else. Oh dear, bye bye.

That doesn't mean that it should be done purely out of spite, but when you have a delusional and possibly narcisistic ex-President stirring up hatred in order to profit from it by subverting democracy (an extreme case of classic "divide and conquer") and he has no evidence whatsoever to back up most of what he says - as proven in Court time and time again - then I don't see anything wrong in calling him out.

Can't back up your BS? Account suspended.

The GOP in particular repeatedly champion free enterprise as the be-all and end-all of democracy. Now, if we want to suspend reality for a moment and agree that profit is indeed a worthy king, would rival businesses poke up with this amount of libel and slander? Absolutely not. So even by their own standards the Republicans are on a loser here.

There's nothing unfair in being targeted as an opportunistic, lying shit-stirrer if what you are, in fact, is an opportunistic, lying shit-stirrer.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

If everybody played nice and stuck to the facts none of this would have happened in the first place. Despite all the tin-foil hat "that's what they want you to think" bollocks.

Everyone has the right to free speech. That extends as far as opening your mouth, emitting noise, and closing it again. Doesn't mean anyone has to propagate your views, doesn't mean you're immune from questioning, doesn't mean there won't be consequences downstream. There's a few politicians, and Trump is the leading example, who need to grow up and recognise this. Yes you can say what you please, doesn't mean it won't bite you on the arse though. Perhaps there are smarter ways of influencing the electorate?

Twitter has always been politically biased as well as a lot of people on their being drama queens. A lot of people say that twitter was Trump's way of speaking to everyone, but before Twitter was invented, didn't Presidents have a way to get their communications out without being cut off?

Probably because that didn't happen. Thats just the rhetoric used by the media talking heads.

Which is completely wrong.

So ... in order to be able to subvert privately-owned social platforms to spread Fascist propaganda, members of the Reich must support the Socialist idea of uninhibited public access to private property.

I don't think the word "fascist" means what you think it means.

The fusion of right-wing nationalism with socialist ideas of government guidance of private enterprise? The regulation of the economy to uphold inequality and nationalism? Conservative support of capitalism being dependent on capital's active or passive support of conservative and right-wing causes?

Hmmmm... Sot that's....
Nationalism + socialism = ....what's this combination called again?