1451
submitted 1 year ago by mvmike@lemmy.ml to c/greentext@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] muddi@hexbear.net 14 points 1 year ago

Freedom of speech is about not being censored by the government, not private citizens hosting a platform for a spectrum of opinions.

Compare it to something like freedom of religion: should private citizens engage in a spectrum of religious rituals, including violent rituals of extreme cults?

The issue isn't how enthusiastic individual private citizens are about the freedoms granted to them from the government. Someone may truly enjoy yelling "fire" in public buildings, but the effect on the public is what causes concern.

Should you censor a person for this? That's another debate, but I'm just explaining where the concern, assuming you have concern, should be placed.

[-] thefatone@startrek.website 2 points 1 year ago

True, there are limits to freedom of speech. But aren't you disturbed by the control that people in society are exerting on the narratives that we are allowed to question? With or without government involvement. I'm talking about big techmedia here, and the power they have to set the narrative entirely with or without the government involved. I mean the tools that they put into play to stop right wing misinformation (not saying most of it isn't misinformation) can be just flipped over on the left when the left starts threatening institutions down the road.

[-] muddi@hexbear.net 13 points 1 year ago

Then the left should continue to build decentralized alternatives. Dual power is the only practical solution for when institutions are captured by reactionaries to suppress the left.

[-] thefatone@startrek.website 6 points 1 year ago
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2023
1451 points (95.8% liked)

> Greentext

7517 readers
1 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS