Sure, VPNs help. But social media platforms are in agreement and not actually competing, at least the big ones. And they set the narrative, allowing whatever speech they deem acceptable, while dissenting opinions are squashed. And public opinions are what elects governments. But they control what opinions are available, thus influencing decisions.
Now you can say that partaking in social media is voluntary, but these days, if you're not on the major websites, you don't exist. You can attempt to create your own, but domain registrars are also owned by the same companies. Look at that neo-nazi site; it got taken down and is now on the dark web. While I vehemently disagree with much of their ideology, I think they should be allowed to speak (and make fools of themselves).
And no, I have no analysis of 9/11. I don't think it was US backed, if that's what you're asking. But I do think that possibly they let it happen. And linking to the conspiracy in question in this article, Youtube squashed videos claiming a false flag, thus controlling the narrative. I don't think it was, but people discussing that topic should be allowed to do so.
I agree with most of your criticism but I think that this is the price of freedom. This to me falls under the property rights of the owner of whatever plateform to ban whoevers speech he wants to even if I disagree with doing that.
It's up to us to patronize plateforms that allow free speech and it's up to us to take control of enough of that market to have our views aired out.
Back in the 1990s Bill Cooper tried to launch an initiative to buy up shares in a major news network 15% would have been enough to control it.
Not enough people joined in the effort and so it failed.
If the monetary system was sound, low taxes, few regulations etc... people would have more purchasing power but in the end they would still need to make the right decisions, there is no way arround that.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Except social media is a public forum. And they are directly involved in government decisions. This should make them directly responsible and open to all the citizens.
So no, fuck Facebook, YouTube and the like. That's why I'm on Steemit, in the first place.
I agree that you have sole responsibility on your actions and decisions, but thought and speech are not crimes, no matter what thoughts and speech you have. The only limits on speech I can approve is direct calls to violence and plagiarism. But there are laws against that. Unfortunately, now there's push for hate speech and the censorship against conspiracies because they supposedly promote hate speech. So?
I'm 100% against that. The only way to combat bad ideas it with your own ideas, not by shutting them up. The only thing censorship proves is that you're afraid of what those people have to say.
So while I disagree with alot with this whole Las Vegas conspiracies, I support the right for these people to speak their mind.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I m for freedom of speech aswell, but its the freedom of the owner...
I am afraid of laws like the UK just passed, that says that people can be imprisoned for 15 years for reading radical materials, but who decides what is radical and what not ? As long as it's corporations doing the censorship we still have the option to go to competitors like steemit. I gather from your comment that you would want the platforms to be ''forced'' to allow free speech, but you give that power to the goveernment and it usually falls into the hands of corrupt people who then use it for the oppposite, like maybe to try and control alternatives that do allow free speech like steemit...
We agree on some of the problems but we dont have the same solution for them.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Are you kidding me? Social media is forced right now to curb "hate speech" all over the EU, or in muslim countries to enforce blasphemy laws. And hate to tell you, but Google is also a domain registrar that already censored websites. Not only that, but they seized their domain.
And yes, they should be forced to allow free speech. What does it matter if censorship comes from the government or corporations? I don't give a shit who's the asshole, I'll oppose them either way.
And the UK is fucking retarded regarding this. The guy in the vid below is facing jail.
Tell me how that's ok?And who's shutting down all the conspiracy videos regarding Las Vegas because it's supposedly fake news? I'll give you a hint, it's not the US government. While I do disagree with alot of the points, there is something off about the whole thing.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
In my opinion you oppose a government by taking away it's power and a corporation by stopping to use their serices (which also takes away their power). Use Duckduckgo if you don't like google, and oppose laws that prevent free speech, that's I the way I feel is best to deal with the concerns that you write about and that I share with you. The corporation OWNS their plateform, if you interfere with that by giving the government power to impose on that you go against property rights, and the property rights guarantee free speech, for the OWNER of that medium.
If the owner choses to allow free speech on his plateform people should support that owner and use his plateform, like you are doing with steemit.
Ironicly, I can not watch the video because it is unavailable in the country I'm currently residing in ^_^
So yes, I think that plateforms like google that censor free speech are morally wrong but I don't think that it s by giving government more power over them that you solve this problem.
You say that social media is forced in Europe and in theocratic countries to follow their guidelines but that is their governments doing that and you would give them even more power over those plateforms ?
They say you can argue most with people that you almost agree with and we both agree on the problem just not on the solution.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Except giant corporations such as Google are no longer just private property. They are too big and directly influence governments. And if they are to govern, they should be responsible to the people using that platform. In effect, I am suggesting they are a public utility, not a private company, thus should be directly be affected by any laws governing public space.
Also, I disagree that the platform itself is private property. The intellectual property - the code, and their servers are, but whatever is hosted using that code, is the property of the user. For example, this comment is not the property of Steemit, but mine. Otherwise, anything I say here would be Steemit's responsibility, not mine, which is stupid imo. I alone am the owner of my words, not you or anybody else.
And no, I don't want more government control, but the laws already in place applied equally. In fact, I want less government and corporate control. A platform is like a street or park, maintenance is assured by paying the people that keep it working, but there is no control over the content. But I can see why you think I'd want more control.
And no, in my country at least, we have no hate-speech laws, yet I am affected by that. Luckily, I'm not in Germany or the UK, or I'd possibly get arrested or something for not agreeing with them.
Meanwhile
If you don't mind me asking, what country is that?
And well, at least we can agree what the problem is :)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I currently reside in Germany :)
The content is private property but the platform also is. The content can be reposted to another platform that allows it. That whole hate speech thing in the UK is very scary indeed. However I would not get too hyped up by the infowars crowd, all this radical islam fear is being used to bring more laws to enslave us all. Living in Germany and having grown up in France in a high muslim concentration area, I have followed all those terrorist events pretty closely and most of them are suspicious to say the least. Infowars posted an article a few month ago :
https://www.infowars.com/1000-migrants-attack-festival-goers-police-in-german-town-sexually-assault-women/
The truth is that there was a festival with 1000 people in attendance in total where there was an incident with 2 migrants.
All this hyping the ''islamic threat'' is straight up bullshit. And believe me, I am no fantasy filled liberal on the issue. There are tremendous problems with immigration in the west, mostly crime and dependancy on government.
In these immigrant communities Islam has rather been the thing holding it together to an extent. In my opinion it's all about dividing conservative muslims whose views are very similar to conservative christians and are both the groups being the most targeted by this secular humanist power structure that in the end wants to abolish all currently existing religions to impose their own which is the deification of man.
However these are really different topics ^^
I intend to post my views on these on steemit soon, maybe we can discuss them then.
Have a nice day !
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I'm sorry, but Islam is a major problem, not only in the west. Ever since the open borders shit, millions of muslims flooded in, rapes rose, violent attacks rose, murder rose. And most terrorist attacks are done in the name of Allah. Fuck Islam.
And no, conservative christians don't hold the same views. They don't like gays, but they don't want to kill them. They think women should be humble, but not a slave. They think they should convince you to join their religion, not threaten you into it.
While I think all religions bring more harm than good to the world, there is no comparison between the two.
And regarding Islam keeping immigrant communities together is the whole problem. Immigrants should not band together and form enclaves but integrate. But these people came here to leech on welfare, provided by us. And what do we get for it? Rapes, murders, and accusation of racism. Well, fuck 'em! We give them food, shelter, money, a free pass into our countries where they're not hounded for their beliefs, and they bite the hand that feeds them. Fuck 'em! Either comply to our laws, or get the fuck out. Simple as that.
And my condolences to you for living there then. Germany has the same censorship problem, if not worse than the UK.
http://fortune.com/2017/06/30/germany-law-social-media-hate/
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/20/world/europe/germany-36-accused-of-hateful-postings-over-social-media.html
If baffles me how germans keep giving that Mekel cunt mandats. She single-handedly destroyed the EU.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit