What happened to believing private businesses have the right to decide who they do business with?
That used to be a widely accepted belief among the right.
A mom and pop bakery owned by Christians not wanting to bake "gay" cakes because it goes against their beliefs when there's about a million other bakeries to choose from that will is a lot different IMO than every single major internet service provider banding together to actively cancel out and ban websites because of the political opinions voiced on them. YMMV
This is where the conversation is being continued here in America. It would be short sighted to end the conversation at "child porn bad, everything else good or not so bad".Maybe in some cases like child porn sure.
That's another case where I think we should look at curtailing speech. I didn't mention all situations I think we need to curtail speech or at least look at doing so.This is where the conversation is being continued here in America. It would be short sighted to end the conversation at "child porn bad, everything else good or not so bad".
Specifically, the conversation today is mostly about inciting violence. It's not something to just make a joke about and move on. It doesn't work like that. The FBI has their hands full in researching these types of violent intents and threats and for good reasons.
Not only does this subject require a decent amount of critical thinking but it deserves it. We deserve it. Oversimplifying the issue only hurts us. Let's talk about it.
Well yes, it is different, but does it make a difference?
I absolutely 100% do not believe that if these private companies were doing this to left wing interests that the right wouldn't still be backing the rights of private companies. I think this difference only came into existence to justify the hypocrisy of allowing the homophobic discrimination but not right wing discrimination.
I think they're hypocrites.
Yes, I agree it's very difficult and dangerous as well to go too far in either direction.That's another case where I think we should look at curtailing speech. I didn't mention all situations I think we need to curtail speech or at least look at doing so.
It's not easy bc you want there to be a free exchange of ideas. But you also don't want people to get hurt as a result of other's speech.
It's not a simple issue by ANY means.
Uh, Idk... That they all deplatformed Parler at the same time? lulz
All of these only exist in Theory , or for a Ruling Class!! BLM has shown me as a Very Privileged white person the uneven distribution of (LAW & ORDER)The insidious part of cancel culture is the way it seems to be the thin end of the wedge of a larger move to do away the the fundamentals of justice in the Anglosphere that took 1000 years to properly evolve into the fairest (but not infallible) system in human history.
1. Presumption of innocence until proven guilty
2. The right to face your accusers
3. The importance of precedent, judgement by one’s peers, and the judicial notion of a ‘reasonable person’
4. No retrospective criminisation of individuals through new laws
5. Due process
6. The right of appeal
7. The right to redress after a miscarriage of justice
8. The standard of reasonable doubt
9. The compounding factor of intent or malice aforethought
10. Habeus Corpus
Losing any one of these increases the risk of tyranny but it seems they are all targets for activists these days.