Fresh off of his outrage that it happened to one on his side, Mark once more cheers Tech giants for doing to others what he was outraged about when it happened to him and his.
Now, there is a an added factor we need to consider. As we see here, Mark immediately assumed that Sam was the victim of MAGA types doing it to Sam since Sam is Mexican? So it wasn't because of the Tech corporations at all. Likewise, some time ago I remember people saying Mark had been banned by either Facebook or Twitter, but he was apparently sure it was some algorithm glitch and nobody's fault.
That is the stuff that tyrant's dreams are made of. Beyond the all important 'do unto others as long as you don't do unto me' morality, you have an added layer of protection for those who would crush liberty and equality for all.
When the companies do ban him, or one of his own, he simply blames - anyone else, preferably his favorite boogiemen, the white MAGA conservative Republican racist with white skin. Doesn't have to be true. There can be no facts or evidence at all. It's simply important for the oligarchs who would rule over us to know that Mark will fully support them as they crush the rights of 'those types' over there, and when they finally turn their attention to crushing Mark's rights, he will still blame 'those types' over there.
Such slavish devotion to a movement by so many who have seen that movement turn on its own on any given day, makes me think of nothing so much as the girl in this scene from the 1982 movie Conan the Barbarian:
Somehow I get the feeling there are some dictators from the last century rolling over in their graves wondering why they couldn't have lived today. For a bonus, next time we'll delve into the Left's longstanding defense of private businesses in the free market who wish not to be compelled to violate their religious beliefs regarding gay marriage. Since apparently it's all about the freedom of the free market. I'm sure the consistency will astound us.
First they came for the
socialists MAGA types, and I did not speak out - because I was not a socialist MAGA type. Then they came for the trade unionists conservatives, and I did not speak out - because I was not a trade unionist conservative. Then they came for the Jews Christians and I did not speak out - even though I was a Christian. Then they logically came for me because I was a Christian - and I still blamed MAGA types and conservatives.
I emailed it to you but I'll post it here too. Not only the article, but the video on "How One Tweet Can Ruin Your Life" in the middle of it too.ReplyDelete
I often wonder how the media turned things around. Was a time, barely a decade ago, when many felt social media had all but put the final touches on the media's death. Now, the media wields more power than I think it ever has. It can actually change its story mid story and millions follow. I sometimes think it had something to do with weaponizing twitter. The ability to use twitter to attack, finding one obscure tweet to suggest it represents some global movement. No more relying on the AP or insisting we find the credential of Deep Throat. Just a tweet then a story. So it shouldn't be a surprise that the industry used to bolster the assault should then become first players in the new censorship.Delete
Not all speech is protected. The multiple times married, admitted serial adulterer who twice lost the popular vote incited rioting at the US Capitol. If that isn't a treasonous offense, I'm not sure what else is. Calling for violence is not protected speech.ReplyDelete
Of course not all speech is protected speech. And it can always be argued if someone has crossed that line. Though traditionally we want that line to be very high, and not open to interpretation. Did Trump or Maxine Waters really incite violence, or do we have to interpret it that way?Delete
But that isn't what's happening here. Almost every day I see some new site or outlet - almost always conservative - being banned, and that shouldn't be good for any sane person. That's the point here. Each time some conservative gets banned or removed, Mark or company he cheers and rejoices. But when it happens to him, he simply dismisses it as a glitch or a vast right wing conspiracy.
As I said, that's the stuff tyrants dream of: those who will support the tyranny even if it turns on those who are supporting. That's when, as a tyrant, you know you've won.
The problem began when Reagan ditched the Fairness Doctrine. If you think it’s bad that Twitter bans Trump then you should also support requiring Fox News to give one of Tucker Carlson’s weekday slots to a liberal. I agree it’s complicated, but since conservatives only ever care about ‘censorship’ when one of their own gets pinched, it’s hard for me to avoid laughing at you.Delete
Not really. Reagan ditching the fairness doctrine made sense. By the time he ditched it, we saw that it was possible to uphold the letter of the law without abiding the heart of it. So for example, the daytime talk shows (which predated the rise of Limbaugh and talk radio) had mastered the ability to 'technically' show both sides fairly, if you consider kangaroo courts fair. Oh sure, they presented both side. With Billy Bubba of Billy Bubba's bar and taxidermy store representing a traditional view, and seven academics and professors from Harvard and MIT and Johns Hopkins representing the progressive view. But they did show both sides. It was apparent by then that the doctrine had little worth and was being easily circumvented.Delete
Always hilarious to see the party of Bill Clinton (who also lost the popular vote) rant on the personal flaws of Trump. Especially after they then elected ANOTHER rapist who is this time a plagiarist also and has a crackhead serial-adulterer son.Delete
Tell you what, let's grant for a moment that's treasonous. So I remember the riots of January 2017. How many people from that can we lock up? Calling for violence is not protected speech? Ok, let's make a deal: We'll lock up Trump if you all will lock up Pelosi, Maxine Waters... hang on, I had a list somewhere...
john,you know we live on planet earth, not planet johnDelete
I assume that you support the FTC reinstating the Fairness Doctrine? Requiring Fox News to give Nancy Pelosi a prime-time slot?ReplyDelete
I support fairness and equality and oppose censorship As I said above, the FD was easily ignored while technically not doing so when it was ended. So giving someone a prime time slot. That usually doesn't matter. After all, FOX may have someone, or CNN, or someday maybe MSBNC, but most realize those 'balancing' individuals are not always the most gung-ho for the other side. Technically it's balanced, but not really.Delete
Karen, appropriate, people listen to Carlson. Very few people, left and right, want to listen to the logic of Pelosi, Waters, Cuomo, Schumer . . .Delete