Cont: Musk buys Twitter II

Bogative said:
If you are punishing citizens of your country for viewing a social media app, you are the bad guy.
Click to expand...

Potentially, depending on the larger context. That doesn't mean that you're necessarily the only bad guy, though, even then.

Bogative said:
Pretend otherwise but you are wrong.
Click to expand...

Missed the nuances in your haste to assume, eh? There certainly is a decent argument to be made that the Brazilian judge overstepped. There's also decent arguments to be made that strong action is quite warranted against actual attempts to cause violence and crime and those who aid and abet such, though. There's also a clear point to be made that Musk's X is kowtowing to authoritarian countries and bowing to their authority while also making a ruckus about not bowing to the authority of democracies when they make similar or lesser requests. You can try to pretend that Musk isn't at least also in the wrong, but you would be wrong.
 
Last edited:
Aridas said:
Most of them have at least some pretense to democracy, though. North Korea has elections and engages in some democracy rhetoric, for example, even if they're a mockery of actual elections and democracy.

Bogative is trying to pretend that Brazil's being just like them and just as bad, seemingly in an effort to pretend that Brazil's THE bad guy here and that we need not pay attention to the situation as a whole. A convenient, albeit dishonest tactic when trying to avoid accountability.
Click to expand...

In North Korea you can be sentenced to years of hard labor if you watch South Korean dramas. Any government which tries to limit what its people can read/view/hear is by definition fascist and not democratic.
 
Trausti said:
In North Korea you can be sentenced to years of hard labor if you watch South Korean dramas. Any government which tries to limit what its people can read/view/hear is by definition fascist and not democratic.
Click to expand...

I guess you are talking about States banning books, right?
 
Trausti said:
In North Korea you can be sentenced to years of hard labor if you watch South Korean dramas. Any government which tries to limit what its people can read/view/hear is by definition fascist and not democratic.
Click to expand...

As stated in the post above yours, potentially, depending on the larger context. Also, you seem to be ignoring that there are decent arguments to be made that strong action is quite warranted against actual attempts to cause violence and crime and against those who aid and abet such, which is very much of relevance here. You're further ignoring that X does, in fact, ban massive numbers of accounts for various choices in what's said anyways.

More generally when it comes to your actually stated argument, though, there are lots of laws limiting what people can read/view/hear, quite frankly. Going by your argument, HIPAA makes the US fascist. Not letting everyone know all our nuclear codes makes the US fascist. Revenge porn being banned in almost all states makes the US fascist.

Trausti said:
What book has been banned in the US? What book can't you buy in in the US? Name it. It's probably on Amazon.
Click to expand...

Not for lack of some right-wing groups trying, though. Book banning and burning has been quite on the rise again in the US, as have efforts to defund libraries (including for entire states) and criminalize librarians. The fascists within the Republican party have made it perfectly clear that they're happy to use the government to make it happen.
 
Last edited:
Trausti said:
In North Korea you can be sentenced to years of hard labor if you watch South Korean dramas. Any government which tries to limit what its people can read/view/hear is by definition fascist and not democratic.
Click to expand...
That makes many of the USA's governments fascist, but I think it's rather your unusual definition at fault.
 
Aridas said:
As stated in the post above yours, potentially, depending on the larger context. Also, you seem to be ignoring that there are decent arguments to be made that strong action is quite warranted against actual attempts to cause violence and crime and against those who aid and abet such, which is very much of relevance here. You're further ignoring that X does, in fact, ban massive numbers of accounts for various choices in what's said anyways.

More generally when it comes to your actually stated argument, though, there are lots of laws limiting what people can read/view/hear, quite frankly. Going by your argument, HIPAA makes the US fascist. Not letting everyone know all our nuclear codes makes the US fascist. Revenge porn being banned in almost all states makes the US fascist.



Not for lack of some right-wing groups trying, though. Book banning and burning has been quite on the rise again in the US, as have efforts to defund libraries (including for entire states) and criminalize librarians. The fascists within the Republican party have made it perfectly clear that they're happy to use the government to make it happen.
Click to expand...
Isn't the prefix "cis" now hate speech and bannable on X?
 
Aridas said:
Potentially, depending on the larger context. That doesn't mean that you're necessarily the only bad guy, though, even then.
Click to expand...


I'm sure the countries that I listed considered the greater context and nuance when they banned VPNs to protect their citizenry from content the authoritarian governments considered harmful. No doubt they can think of decent arguments as to why political dissent is harmful, opposition to the party is harmful, and unIslamic imagery and thoughts are harmful.
 
Last edited:
Bogative said:
I'm sure the countries that I listed considered the greater context and
nuance when they banned VPNs to protect their citizenry from content the authoritarian governments considered harmful. No doubt they can think of decent arguments as to why political dissent is harmful, opposition to the party is harmful, and unIslamic imagery and thoughts are harmful.
Click to expand...

Still running away from addressing what was actually said, eh?
 
Bogative said:
I'm sure the countries that I listed considered the greater context and
nuance when they banned VPNs to protect their citizenry from content the authoritarian governments considered harmful. No doubt they can think of decent arguments as to why political dissent is harmful, opposition to the party is harmful, and unIslamic imagery and thoughts are harmful.
Click to expand...

I'm sure Musk considered the greater context when he suppressed content at the request of the Turkish and Indian governments but won't even register a legal contact to operate legally in Brazil.
 
Agreed. If all they'd done was remove Mein Kampf from school libraries, I would have had less problems finding a copy to read.

Incidentally, illustrating another completely point, though. I was just an amateur history geek. I was just interested in how that happened. I wasn't going to turn into a goose-stepping clown and oppress my cute jewish girlfriend just because some book said so. (On the other hand, her going ultra-jealous and thinking I'm having some kind of daily orgies if I didn't write her every day, while I was in the frikken army and in an all-male unit... yeah, we parted ways soon afterwards:p)

But this is neither here nor there. In Brazil's case it's about what can you do to a company who's refusing to cooperate when it comes to a COUP ATTEMPT, and being openly and proudly in contempt of the court, like Musk calling the judge "the Darth Vader of Brazil". I have NO problem with hitting them where it hurts, to make the case. There are a lot of ways to present a case, calling a judge names on social media is not it.
 
Last edited:
Ron Obvious said:
Don't agree. Books e.g. removed from a school library are not the same as books being illegal to buy, sell, and possess, like Germany have banned Mein Kampf. for example. There's a massive difference.
Click to expand...

The word used in the post I replied to was "tries".
 
I got tired of trying to untangle it, since the trail of messages responded to goes into a whole different direction and none seem to go to one where you said "tried", so I'm not sure why wold you expect any answer along that line to know it had to fit into that hole :p
 
HansMustermann said:
In Brazil's case it's about what can you do to a company who's refusing to cooperate when it comes to a COUP ATTEMPT,
Click to expand...

As a something related to that - I'm not sure how much sway that point would have to those invested in alternately defending and trying to avoid accountability for Trump's auto-coup attempt in the US and preparing the way for the next attempt. It's understandable when those fighting for the right to engage in unchecked and unpunished lies and treason in the US would fight for it elsewhere, too.
 
Last edited:
Kinda, sorta, but I'm still unsure why those who were actually thinking they had a stolen election in the US (which, mind you, is very stupid, but some seemed to believe it) would be invested in a coup thousands of miles away.

The thing about fascism -- which I have a different thread about -- is that it's not an internationalist movement. Socialism was all about internationalism, and helping the proletariat in other countries also liberate themselves. Fascism not only had none of that, and in fact it would have been nonsense for their core myth, but it rose IN OPPOSITION to that.

So I'm not sure who Musk even thinks his audience is.

I mean, other than his being a Tinkerbellend, who seems to think he'll literally be erased from existence if people stop talking about him. That's really the only connecting thing about his PR stunts.

And don't get me wrong, it would fit some Kremlin sponsor's goal to sow discord and chaos, but it still doesn't point towards any coherent ideology on his part.
 
why do a bunch of white nationalists care about musk at all? he’s thrown in with the right in pursuit of his stock deal, in exchange he amplifies their fascist views and supports their political agenda, and brazil crossed him so now the right must concern itself with brazil. free speech is all just a pretense to it.

they’ll lie right to your face.
 
dirtywick said:
why do a bunch of white nationalists care about musk at all? he’s thrown in with the right in pursuit of his stock deal, in exchange he amplifies their fascist views and supports their political agenda, and brazil crossed him so now the right must concern itself with brazil. free speech is all just a pretense to it.

they’ll lie right to your face.
Click to expand...

Because he's always been one of them. He's from the section of South Africa that never accepted the end of apartheid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom