Freedom of thought and speech vs morality

[SuperJack]

If they start setting buildings ablaze and possibly kill people, something needs to be done. Live rounds might be overdoing it, but beanbags and tasers would be an appropriate response. I don’t want them to arrest a politician for criticizing the tweet, because I think she actually just completely reframed his tweet. I think the fact that people are using this to further their political agenda is deplorable.

So suggesting to shoot looters was not a good idea then?


So you want the enemy politician to be thrown into jail without being arrested? What other countries have their opposition treated like that? You wish to be like Russia and China?
Isn't the best he whole idea of politics? One part is showing how good your team is and the other part is showing how bad the other team is?

[Ganelon]

Her tweet:

Donald Trump is calling for violence against Black Americans. His advocacy of illegal, state-sponsored killing is horrific. Politicians who refuse to condemn it share responsibility for the consequences.

Its absurd. Trump is not doing that. Not once did he even mention race. He specifically stated he found the video disturbing and that the rioters were tarnishing the memory of George Floyd. If you watch the townhall video of that protest(the reporters name is Julio Rosas), that (what Warren said) was pretty much similar to what the rioters were saying - except it was directed at the police, not at Trump. What effect does that have other than letting the protesters know that she’s basically okay with it? I’m honestly surprised this kind of shit is happening in America. The democrats were once the centre-left in America: concerned with the working class, the gifted (but poor) and so on. Now they’re basically just Marxists lol. I’m not even a democrat, I just think it’s sad. It paints moderate leftists as social justice warriors when this is really not the case.

[Ganelon]

I was surprised they abandoned that police station. Then I found they did so under the mayors orders. Lol.

[BananaCucho]

Her tweet:

Donald Trump is calling for violence against Black Americans. His advocacy of illegal, state-sponsored killing is horrific. Politicians who refuse to condemn it share responsibility for the consequences.

Its absurd. Trump is not doing that. Not once did he even mention race. He specifically stated he found the video disturbing and that the rioters were tarnishing the memory of George Floyd. If you watch the townhall video of that protest(the reporters name is Julio Rosas), that (what Warren said) was pretty much similar to what the rioters were saying - except it was directed at the police, not at Trump. What effect does that have other than letting the protesters know that she’s basically okay with it? I’m honestly surprised this kind of shit is happening in America. The democrats were once the centre-left in America: concerned with the working class, the gifted (but poor) and so on. Now they’re basically just Marxists lol. I’m not even a democrat, I just think it’s sad. It paints moderate leftists as social justice warriors when this is really not the case.

What laws is this breaking? Why does this warrant her being in jail?

[SuperJack]

Didn't he used a quote used by some previous situation involving race?

[Gyrlander]

This is why I shouldn't read these threads. I just can't even right now.

I actually enjoy. Please continue.

Although I don't agree how some of you express your thoughts. Please be nice

[Ganelon]

I’m not aware of it breaking any laws, it’s just completely despicable for someone in her position (or indeed for anyone at all) to be doing that.

[BananaCucho]

I’m not aware of it breaking any laws, it’s just completely despicable for someone in her position (or indeed for anyone at all) to be doing that.

Then why say you think she should be in jail? wtf lmao

[Ganelon]

Then why say you think she should be in jail? wtf lmao

It’s immoral at best, at worst it’s dangerous. You could basically say she’s egging the rioters on.

[SuperJack]

It’s immoral at best, at worst it’s dangerous. You could basically say she’s egging the rioters on.

And not the person wanting to kill them?

[BananaCucho]

It’s immoral at best, at worst it’s dangerous. You could basically say she’s egging the rioters on.

You are expressing a biased, partisan view of the situation and saying that someone should be jailed for expressing her view. This is no different from someone on the left expressing a biased, partisan view of Trumps tweet, saying that he should be jailed for expressing his view.

This isn't fuckin North Korea. It's America. We don't put people in jail for expressing their opinion, no matter how dangerous or immoral it may be. And if it happens, it's an injustice.

[Ganelon]

And not the person wanting to kill them?

I’m not sure killing them is the proper response, but it done that makes a hell of a lot more sense than saying trump is a racist who hates black people and wants to kill the rioters because they’re black. Many of the rioters are white.

[Marshmallow Marshall]

this thread is about to get a whole lot spicier

To be more specific, it's about to become (or has already become) a partisan-filled, biased arguing thread instead of a debate on free speech itself. Now to participate to it a bit...

I haven't read much on the topic, but Trump literally made himself the biggest troll of 2020 by being the first president to defend his right to post anything he wants to post on Twitter by sueing them. He's the PRESIDENT. Free speech or not, arguable or not, why is he putting energy on Twitter moderating his posts instead of... idk, trying to solve the coronavirus crisis, the riots because of the crazy cop, or the protests against quarantine? Is hitting on a social media for moderating him (lol, remember that this is the PRESIDENT being moderated like a troll) the best thing he has to do, really? Is putting a significant part of his time on such a thing worthy of a president? I think not.

[SuperJack]

The closest you could get to a republican in the UK is perhaps one of the extreme racist parts we have.
And that's what we see your republican as.

You would see our Conservatives as similar to your Democratic party.

And labour? You will probably shit yourselves and think it's the Messiah of communism.

[Ganelon]

Yeh, the conservatives are a party that’s always confused me. The only thing they really seem to be is conservative - that’s the only thing the Conservative party of the 1970s has in common with today’s Conservatives.

[SuperJack]

I’m not sure killing them is the proper response, but it done that makes a hell of a lot more sense than saying trump is a racist who hates black people and wants to kill the rioters because they’re black. Many of the rioters are white.

Trump isn't a racist?

I can't be a racist. Some of my best friends are black.

I can't be a serial killer. Some of my best friends are still alive

I can't be a pedophile. Some of my best friend are chil.... Huh. Doesn't quite work.

But you get my point.

[Ganelon]

To be more specific, it's about to become (or has already become) a partisan-filled, biased arguing thread instead of a debate on free speech itself. Now to participate to it a bit...

I haven't read much on the topic, but Trump literally made himself the biggest troll of 2020 by being the first president to defend his right to post anything he wants to post on Twitter by sueing them. He's the PRESIDENT. Free speech or not, arguable or not, why is he putting energy on Twitter moderating his posts instead of... idk, trying to solve the coronavirus crisis, the riots because of the crazy cop, or the protests against quarantine? Is hitting on a social media for moderating him (lol, remember that this is the PRESIDENT being moderated like a troll) the best thing he has to do, really? Is putting a significant part of his time on such a thing worthy of a president? I think not.

The issue is that social media shouldn’t mediate what you can say or not n their websites, beyond the usual - like being racist, sexist, overly inflammatory, or saying downright illegal things, such as posting child porn. When you censor such an important public figure, especially on such flimsy grounds, I’d say you’re overstepping your authority. I understand where you’re coming from, but i think Trump is doing his best to be going through this crisis. The Democrats just seek to politicize everything lol.

[oops_ur_dead]

The issue is that social media shouldn’t mediate what you can say or not n their websites, beyond the usual - like being racist, sexist, overly inflammatory, or saying downright illegal things, such as posting child porn. When you censor such an important public figure, especially on such flimsy grounds, I’d say you’re overstepping your authority. I understand where you’re coming from, but i think Trump is doing his best to be going through this crisis. The Democrats just seek to politicize everything lol.

But it's not illegal.

That's the point of the first amendment.

[Ganelon]

Trump isn't a racist?

I can't be a racist. Some of my best friends are black.

I can't be a serial killer. Some of my best friends are still alive

I can't be a pedophile. Some of my best friend are chil.... Huh. Doesn't quite work.

But you get my point.

I mean, fair enough. I guess you have a point but, do you really feel he is being racist here, or trying to incite violence against black people?

[Ganelon]

But it's not illegal.

That's the point of the first amendment.

I honestly don’t know enough about the legal ramifications of trying to regulate Twitter in that fashion so I’ll concede that it may be.

[SuperJack]

The issue is that social media shouldn’t mediate what you can say or not n their websites, beyond the usual - like being racist, sexist, overly inflammatory, or saying downright illegal things, such as posting child porn. When you censor such an important public figure, especially on such flimsy grounds, I’d say you’re overstepping your authority. I understand where you’re coming from, but i think Trump is doing his best to be going through this crisis. The Democrats just seek to politicize everything lol.

"like being racist, sexist, overly inflammatory, or saying downright illegal things, such as posting child porn."

This sums up Trump though.

[oops_ur_dead]

Also this is why I kept bringing up the first tweet lol.

Everyone is so focused on the second tweet when the first tweet was the worse one.

Might I remind you the first tweet was where Trump threatened Twitter with legal action and issued an executive order against them for posting neutral facts about a tweet that he made

[BananaCucho]

The issue is that social media shouldn’t mediate what you can say or not n their websites, beyond the usual - like being racist, sexist, overly inflammatory, or saying downright illegal things, such as posting child porn. When you censor such an important public figure, especially on such flimsy grounds, I’d say you’re overstepping your authority. I understand where you’re coming from, but i think Trump is doing his best to be going through this crisis. The Democrats just seek to politicize everything lol.

A social media platform absolutely should be allowed to have a terms of service and be allowed to censor anything that they deem to have broken said terms of service. Don't like it? Don't use them. Boycott. Find a platform that allows your speech. That's the beauty of CAPITALISM

HOW can you say that a social media platform shouldn't be allowed to censor, but the government should be allowed to put people in JAIL based on what they say?? Thats the most ass backwards thinking I've ever seen. The 1st ammendment protects your speech from government retaliation. It does not dictate what corporations and companies decide to allow on their platforms. I thought conservatives were all about small government? Yet want the government to dictate to social media platforms how to operate?

[Gyrlander]

Trump isn't a racist?

I can't be a racist. Some of my best friends are black.

I can't be a serial killer. Some of my best friends are still alive

I can't be a pedophile. Some of my best friend are chil.... Huh. Doesn't quite work.

But you get my point.

In my life I've found little reasoning behind saying that being friends people which you supposedly hate (according to whoever calls you Xist/ic) doesn't mean anything at all.

I can imagine people that mistreat others and laugh thinking they're friends but they are actually harming the other person, but I'd dare say that most cases saying you have close black/gay/whatever friends DOES mean something. Specially if they're close to you as I've just said.

[SuperJack]

I mean, fair enough. I guess you have a point but, do you really feel he is being racist here, or trying to incite violence against black people?

If he was at all concerned about black people, he would not threatened the rioters using a quote from a previous racial incident and instead try to help reform the blatant abuse and racism of law enforcement and bring justice to the guilty party.

[BananaCucho]

If he was at all concerned about black people, he would not threatened the rioters using a quote from a previous racial incident and instead try to help reform the blatant abuse and racism of law enforcement and bring justice to the guilty party.

Bingo. Why is retaliating against rioters smart instead of addressing the injustice that brought on the rioting in the first place?

[BananaCucho]

If I come to sc2mafia and vote in an ongoing game that I'm not signed up for, I'm gonna get banned

Oh noes muh free speech

[SuperJack]

In my life I've found little reasoning behind saying that being friends people which you supposedly hate (according to whoever calls you Xist/ic) doesn't mean anything at all.

I can imagine people that mistreat others and laugh thinking they're friends but they are actually harming the other person, but I'd dare say that most cases saying you have close black/gay/whatever friends DOES mean something. Specially if they're close to you as I've just said.

My point was that just because there are white rioters involved doesn't mean that the riot isn't seen as racist.

The majority of the comment was just a joke about how stupid the saying sounds.

[Ganelon]

You think the rioters are your good Samaritans rising up for the oppressed? Why are they targeting innocent policemen who had nothing to do with the murder?

They even vandalized stores when the owners had nothing to do with the murder. I don’t think these people care at all about George Floyd. I think these people just wanted to fuck shit up and wanted a reason to do it

[Ganelon]

You think the rioters are your good Samaritans rising up for the oppressed? Why are they targeting innocent policemen who had nothing to do with the murder?

They even vandalized stores when the owners had nothing to do with the murder. I don’t think these people care at all about George Floyd. I think these people just wanted to fuck shit up and wanted a reason to do it

this was addressed to Banana btw.

[BananaCucho]

You think the rioters are your good Samaritans rising up for the oppressed? Why are they targeting innocent policemen who had nothing to do with the murder?

They even vandalized stores when the owners had nothing to do with the murder. I don’t think these people care at all about George Floyd. I think these people just wanted to fuck shit up and wanted a reason to do it

There are always going to be people that take advantage of a situation

But if George Floyd isn't murdered, the riots never happen in the first place. Address the injustice, you prevent future riots.

You shoot them down? You just escalate the situation. When has escalation ever been the smart way to go?

[Gyrlander]

My point was that just because there are white rioters involved doesn't mean that the riot isn't seen as racist.

The majority of the comment was just a joke about how stupid the saying sounds.

You mean "being against the riot" instead of the "riot" being fascist, I presume?

[SuperJack]

You think the rioters are your good Samaritans rising up for the oppressed? Why are they targeting innocent policemen who had nothing to do with the murder?

They even vandalized stores when the owners had nothing to do with the murder. I don’t think these people care at all about George Floyd. I think these people just wanted to fuck shit up and wanted a reason to do it

I can still reply though.

Unfortunately in riots there are a select few who will take advantage of the chaos who then loot and vandalise.

Yet should you consider the rest of the protest invalid and wrong because of select few who ruin it?

What else are the supposed to do? Call the police because the police murdered someone? Who do you turn too when the police are killing the innocent and silencing the media?

[SuperJack]

You mean "being against the riot" instead of the "riot" being fascist, I presume?

Idk I'm just saying just because there are white peole rioting doesn't mean that the riot is occuring due to the mistreatment of black people.

Trump doesn't have to be against black rioters. But the fact that this riot is basic for the mistreatment of black people.

[BananaCucho]

To be more specific, it's about to become (or has already become) a partisan-filled, biased arguing thread instead of a debate on free speech itself. Now to participate to it a bit...

You had to have known this would happen. In fact, you should be in jail for inciting this conflict ;)

[rumox]

I just want to say that the EO was tried a few years ago and failed. Zuckerberg has even written his own academic journal about how to properly regulate social media. It's been an on going discussion for awhile. While I do think Trump is petty as fuck I don't think he wrote an EO up in retaliation. They have probably been sitting on it for awhile and Trump is just being opportunistic.

[rumox]

Still shocked people are surprised about violent riots being met with force to disperse them. What do you think the government should do? Let the city burn? It needs to be stopped and based on footage I have seen I wouldn't be surprised if lethal and non lethal rounds are required. You reap what you sow.

[rumox]

"Looting leads to shooting, and that’s why a man was shot and killed in Minneapolis on Wednesday night - or look at what just happened in Louisville with 7 people shot. I don’t want this to happen, and that’s what the expression put out last night means. It was spoken as a fact, not as a statement. It’s very simple, nobody should have any problem with this other than the haters, and those looking to cause trouble on social media. Honor the memory of George Floyd!"

There we go. Now Trump should have been a lot more concise with his wording originally, but this is an example of presumption of guilt culture I loathe. It's now got a social media giant playing god on what is acceptable speech. Now that it's been clarified that he wasn't "glorifying violence" will Twitter remove the quarantine measure on the post? This entire process can be avoided by doing the sane thing, questioning the individual to clarify what they meant like bloody adults.

[Marshmallow Marshall]

You had to have known this would happen. In fact, you should be in jail for inciting this conflict ;)

Right ;-; how naive was I...

[Exeter350]

"Looting leads to shooting, and that’s why a man was shot and killed in Minneapolis on Wednesday night - or look at what just happened in Louisville with 7 people shot. I don’t want this to happen, and that’s what the expression put out last night means. It was spoken as a fact, not as a statement. It’s very simple, nobody should have any problem with this other than the haters, and those looking to cause trouble on social media. Honor the memory of George Floyd!"

There we go. Now Trump should have been a lot more concise with his wording originally, but this is an example of presumption of guilt culture I loathe. It's now got a social media giant playing god on what is acceptable speech. Now that it's been clarified that he wasn't "glorifying violence" will Twitter remove the quarantine measure on the post? This entire process can be avoided by doing the sane thing, questioning the individual to clarify what they meant like bloody adults.

Yeah when I read that Tweet that was one possible interpretation that came to my mind.

"Looters will be shot" If you are not a troublemaker, you have nothing to fear.

But yeah, really should've been phrased better.

[Ganelon]

"Looting leads to shooting, and that’s why a man was shot and killed in Minneapolis on Wednesday night - or look at what just happened in Louisville with 7 people shot. I don’t want this to happen, and that’s what the expression put out last night means. It was spoken as a fact, not as a statement. It’s very simple, nobody should have any problem with this other than the haters, and those looking to cause trouble on social media. Honor the memory of George Floyd!"

There we go. Now Trump should have been a lot more concise with his wording originally, but this is an example of presumption of guilt culture I loathe. It's now got a social media giant playing god on what is acceptable speech. Now that it's been clarified that he wasn't "glorifying violence" will Twitter remove the quarantine measure on the post? This entire process can be avoided by doing the sane thing, questioning the individual to clarify what they meant like bloody adults.

+1

[SuperJack]

Yeah when I read that Tweet that was one possible interpretation that came to my mind.

"Looters will be shot" If you are not a troublemaker, you have nothing to fear.

But yeah, really should've been phrased better.

You honestly trust that the law enforcement will be able to shoot the correct people? After killing one man and arresting a news team?

[SuperJack]

I beat my wife.
I punch her multiple times in the face.
Then I laugh at her beaten and broken knocked out body.

[SuperJack]

I beat my wife.
I punch her multiple times in the face.
Then I laugh at her beaten and broken knocked out body.

Now lets use the Trump get out of jail free card.

Option 1) It was a joke.

Option 2) Its not what I really mean, all I really ment was that I beat her in Tekken 3. Only my clever cult people really knew what I meant. Those stupid socialist communist democrats are too stupid and are trying to rigg the election.

[Ganelon]

There are always going to be people that take advantage of a situation

But if George Floyd isn't murdered, the riots never happen in the first place. Address the injustice, you prevent future riots.

You shoot them down? You just escalate the situation. When has escalation ever been the smart way to go?

The problem is that nobody really knows what injustice means in this context. Is there a police conspiracy to oppress black people in America? Are most policemen racist? Besides, it’s not at all given that race was a factor here. It could be, it could also just be gross negligence or a non-racially motivated murder. Let’s face it: policemen aren’t exactly known for their stellar IQ. He could easily have made a dumb mistake that escalated to monumental proportions. I’m of course not finding excuses for him, he killed a man and should probably go to jail. But let’s not jump to race here. Floyd wasn’t exactly a law-abiding citizen who was just brutally seized by the police for no reason.

i find the identity politics the democrats are playing completely detestable and they’ve been proven to be dangerous. The democrats are basically putting people against one another based on race... how Trump is the racist one here is beyond me.

[Ganelon]

FWIW, they’ve sent the national guard in in Georgia and they prevented this kind of absurd rioting from happening. So it’s pretty clear to me that it would not ‘have the opposite effect’.

[Ganelon]

Also based on gender BTW. I don’t even understand that one. Why would you pit men against women? How can a society even function when identity politics centered on gender exist? It baffles me that gender identity politics have become mainstream. Women aren’t even oppressed in the West. They are in Arabia and most Muslim countries, but of course most radical left feminists don’t care about the actually oppressed women in the Mideast.

[Ganelon]

In fact I would not be surprised if feminists were in favour of the burka :d

[rumox]

SuperJack I think everyone has said he could have worded it better. How people interpret the message is besides the point. Twitter took his message and framed it to mean specifically something.

[Ganelon]

Yeah, and I’m honestly kind of surprised Zuckerberg declared that Facebook would
not be going down the same path. Actually increased my respect for him lol.