Freedom of Speech online

A lot has been said about Freedom of Speech especially on Social Media and is at the crux of many arguments, let’s look at all the bullshittery going on in the arguments.

This is really an extension to my last post and since Tech news drivel and boring or rather was drowned out and there really wasn’t anything exciting.

I’ve always said that when some people argue for freedom of speech they had a biased view of what Freedom of Speech should be.   Rather than it being for all they tend to feel that if the person or group trying to get a voice has agreeable points to them then they are pro free speech but if it doesn’t they they should be shut down.

Let’s get one thing straight right here, right now, I’m liberal leaning, I grew up in a household that always voted for the Labor party and if we couldn’t bring ourselves to vote for a left leaning candidate we didn’t vote at all, so don’t try the bullshittery claim that because I am demanding that we allow all points of view that I’m Alt-Right.

I’m bringing up the subject again because I witnessed an interaction between two liberals, one a SJW while the other is not and is like myself an advocate of Freedom of Speech, all speech.

The SJW was attacking someone because they were saying that people had the right to speech and we shouldn’t deny them their voice.   The SJW was vehemently against it saying that people that desire Freedom of Speech only desire it so they can attack others.  Ah they irony of the statement.

Scrolling back through the same SJW’s tweets I found that he had complained about a fellow SJW being suspended for attacking and making threats to someone on that I knew to being a Trump supporter and he was busy tweeting to Twitter about Twitter’s bias towards protecting the Alt-Right and that it was shameful yet the suspension was based on threats of physical violence.  Equally do you not see the irony of this.

When the same irony had been pointed out he stuck firmly to his argument that Freedom of Speech should not be there for people that go out and ‘troll’ people.  I dearly wanted to point out the hypocrisy of his argument but instead I’m writing this and I won’t mention the names of the three, or is it four parties if I include the suspended person.

What I am pointing out that we cannot suppress once entities voice online just because we don’t like the message and certainly not because they ‘voted’ differently from the way that we did or the view doesn’t coincide with our politics.

We must be honest with ourselves and learn to accept that others may say things we don’t like or don’t want to hear and then we can choose to block them online or if they are a journalist just not read their articles.

I did this with a shameless tech journalist that would regularly delve into the comment section for the publication they worked at and then copy and paste responses to the author of an article then call it his own even though he pliargarized the commenter’s writing word for word.   I spotted this activity several times and reported it the online publication but they literally responded by saying that it was fair for one of their journalists to utilize the comments to build an article of their own from those opinions, even though I argued back that copy and paste is not really building it’s taking another’s argument or statements and then calling them your own without mentioning it was sourced from the comment section.

There is nothing wrong with you censoring the incoming feed from others but it is wrong to demand or desire that the feeds be censored for all others.

Facebook are bowing to pressure to make it possible for the Chinese Government to censor  the people of China and to censor what they can see, how long before they start allowing every government the ability to censor news and feeds or have they already been doing this as many have suggested.  We know Facebook has always had the ability to re-order the posts you see and I have a friend that has complained that something he said was not responded to,  I pointed out that nobody has probably seen it because of how Facebook defaults their post ordering.   I’ve heard of people complaining that tweets are silenced or hidden from others and it seems that the only theme is that it is not of an opinion that matches that of the CEO of Twitter.    When will they admit it is purely censoring of dissenting opinions and punishing the person that wrote them.

I myself have been ‘carpeted’ for 12 hour periods, the reason, for telling someone something they didn’t like and then the person that received that critique had her friends and followers mass report me for daring to have an opinion that differs.  In fact she chose to escalate the the statements by making threats until I told her to ‘bleep off, die and make the world a better place’. Which I then deleted though she chose to use a photoshop when she posted the copy that added the words, badly, in the photoshop that embellished the statement.   After the 12 hours in which a friend on twitter watched her gloat that they had eradicated me, I was allowed back on.  Another person asked why I had not responded to their tweets and I explained without mentioning the person that I had been mass reported and then carpeted by Twitter only to be then carpeted again and put on another 12 hour lock out by Twitter for mentioning that I had been stopped from using Twitter.

How did I know that it was this tweet?  They made me delete it even though it never mentioned any person and I didn’t mention why.  So I was being observed and then was immediately censored to hide that they were denying people the right to say they were being censored.

How many posts are being hidden and how many people are being punished in this manner by Twitter?  I don’t know but I know that if my non-rule breaking tweets were targeted for this type of punishment and censoring then we can be assured that there are far more than we, and certainly I myself, care to imagine.

As a result of this action by twitter I ended up being less active on Twitter, refused to take anything other stand than middle of the road.  It means that I may get attacked from both sides but, and I’ll put it right out there, I may just mute you and leave you to get angry while I get on with life.  At some point I may just delete my twitter account alongside my facebook account and go my own way,  I’m an anti-social person, well maybe that’s wrong, I’m social but not in a continual hanging out friend fashion.  I do what I do and I don’t care if anyone else joins in or comes along for the ride.

Just remember though when you are asked to participate in an attempt to have someone removed from a social media platform purely because you don’t agree with what they say that you can no longer say you are all for freedom of speech, you can no longer complain when your freedom of speech is denied and you can no longer expect sympathy or empathy from me!

Whether your politics are to the extreme left or to the extreme right you have the right to your voice and nobody should be allowed to remove that voice whether others think so or not,  if you try and deny others you don’t deserve to have that voice either. Remember that!