Freedom of speech should only extend to criticism of the government and apolitical creativity.
All transphobes and racists are degenerates who destroy society, so they should be killed or sent to concentration camps.
if we are going to base freedom of speech based on political merit then LLMs like Chatgpt and Claude who are much smarter than us should be the only one given free speech
>>766469Porkies and their useful idiots should be shot and thrown into mass graves. The problem is how do you transition back from that kind of state of affairs into a society that has freedom of speech.
>i think blacks are bad and gays should die
<im going to kill you
>NOO YOU CANT BE HATEFUL TO ME ONLY I CAN, ITS JUST MY OPINION! FREEDUMB AND SHEEIT!!
yes, burgergolems really
If you are to be restrictive of speech you are no better than the Church officials of the days before the Enlightenment, and thus ultimately.. Reactionary.
But you all want to be progressive do you not? Therefore, freedom of speech, all speech, is your goal here..
but thats le bad because slippery slope
imagine you have two cows
now the government takes them away because DEI
see why socialism is bad?
>>766527this is the same midwit tier cope conservatives bring to attack trans peole
>you let someone change their gender and soon you will have le drag queens molest your childwe need to remove midwits from society
>>766527Unfortunately for you, cancel culture will always be reactionary, you are harkening back to the uncivilized times
>>766527The slope begins with the declaration of belief, it can only be ended by killing religgers a la Xavier Renegade Angel scene style worldwide.
Equally redistributed speech amongst the populace
If you can't refute them that's your problem.
>>766527>Le Paradox of Le ToleranceKill yourself Reddit uyghur.
>>766506>you are no better thanmoralism
>>766532it's literally an edit of a /pol/ slippery slope meme retard
that's literally the point
>>766742if you can't refute that there's a teacup in orbit around the sun then you're btfo'd
>>766469The whole "we can't kill the bad guy or we'll be just as bad as him" is high key classist in almost every case too, because nobody gives a shit about smoking a hundred of the bad guy's mooks, only worry about sparing the mastermind.
>>767067holy atheist upvote gold bacon narwall moment
>>767073hey buddy there's an invisible unicorn in my garage and it tells me that transhumanists and uyghurs are demons, trust me on this
>>766527That slippery slope looks like a water park slide of fun weeeee fuck you lol
>>766897Its a valid point.
>>766527>tolerance paradoxDo you now Popper made it about communism? Don't post anticommunist propaganda pleasr
Lol people supporting Popper's nonsense here.
Open Society and it's Enemies is perhaps the most unintelligent "respected" philosophical work I've read.
It's not a good idea to make "bigoted speech" illegal because it can easely be twisted. Speech restriction is also not good for culture, freedom of speech is objectively superior and more leftist.
"Bigoted speech" to JK Rowling is when you say trans women are women. To zionists it's when you're not zionist enough etc.
On the contrary we should encourage fedposting then keep a list of the relevant people who partake in it and then routinely "purge" these people on a case by case basis. It could be anything from blacklisting them off the job market, to assigned residency, to prison, to mental asylum based on the person and the type of fedpost.
The judgement on who get to be punished and how will be decided by a comitee of wise stoic progressives (aka not le firing squad meme larper).
>>767535"What if your enemies restrict your speech instead"
They already do moron
That's why you build your own state apparatus that oppresses enemy classes on behalf of your class, dumbass
There is no "abstract state that upholds abstract free speech". All states have class character.
I know libs and nazis are two sides of the same coin but cmon
>>767553This is true
But there are people who do genuinely value dialogue and perspective. That's the only way things grow. Freedom is adjacent to concepts such as diversity and equality.
>>767679Tbis changes "freedom" from an abstract ideal into a concrete constraint for development, good (you need multiple perspectives, etc). This is insight into necesdity, as freedom.
But it follows then that non-useful pr harmful speech can be suppressed without ill effect, or even to good effects.
The liberal idea is that freedom is an abstract thing (freedom of speech), and its con rete effects (idea sharing) ade emanations of this abstract quality
For marxists, it is the opposite: freedom is the concrete benefit a society gets whe. It forces people who speak harmful nonsense to stfu
READ LENIN
There can be NO freedom of speech for reactionaries and anti-party elements, they cannot be allowed to criticise the government or socialism. Freedom of speech can only exist for socialists, except for of course bigotry which must lead to disciplinary measures for party members or shaming for non-party members. The bourgeois didn't understand this during the 100 flowers campaign and then they whined that they were being censored.
>>767735Again this should lead to a world where either only AI speaks or only people with a PhD is allowed to do speech and participate in knowledge production. The structuralists and pomos do a good job in pointing out that such positivist rhetorics of "useful to society" is already an abstract mechanism of control rather than an organic human activity
>>767751Like everybody recognize that libtards saying "hey you need to the experts buddy' is gay (derogatory) and retarded, but Marxoids seem to believe that the problem is solely in the fact that the experts are bourgs, not that expertise-based and quantifiable knowledge production is alienating in the first place
>>767752Of course, most people here have a degree or fashion themselves as intellectuals, and like any intellectual they support statist movements where they rule as supreme redditors telling us what to do and what not to do. I excuse Marx believing in this because he existed in peak enlightenment and everyone thinks there is a correct, optimal, soyentific way of doing things and we can discover that by soyencing hard enough, but you modern day leftists live in wiser age
>>766469Transphobia and racism aint real.
>>767751Well AI isn't real and yes, only experts should be able to speak on topics of expertise. "Speech" here defined not as the flapping of gums, but as propagation of ideas.
>The structuralists and pomos Those should be forbidden from speech in general.
>an abstract mechanism of control rather than an organic human activityYes, we are trying to build mechanisms of control so that we can be in control of our own societies (instead of capital being in control), to stop capitalists exploiting us, and make everyone follow traffic laws. Try to keep up
And there's no such thing as "organic human activity", you stupid fukin moron. Blatant nietzschean naturalistic drivel
>>767789B-but Marx was materialist naturalist?
>>767791He was also a humanist.
More accurately he thought the human-nature distinction was a spook
>>767735But not once. Not one single time, have I ever seen a moderator aka an enforcer of normalcy and narratives who wasn't ten times worse than the ignoramus he was enforcing upon.
Whatever his claims are, are baseless. "He was breaking duh rules,and I'm just doing to him what I'd do to my own mother" which in real life no, jannies are not equal enforcement and to assume they are is dangerously naive. More dangerous than the dumb-dumb Nazi saying dumb-dumb things.
We know FOR A FACT they slander people. Literally every post enforced on my end has something to do with violence. Inciting, violent rhetoric. Do I sound angry right now? I'm not. I mean you have no way of knowing that over text, but if I say I'm not why should mods word precede over mine if I'm the one being affected by his nonsense? NOW I have reason to incite violence… against him. I want to car bomb every single moderator. I want their kids and dogs in the car as it happens so they cry and kill themselves harder.
Speaking of bombs, we do exist under capitalism right now, today…hence they love saying "well it's a private website sweaty" well than it's also private liability. People claim they see child porn. I never have (unless you count cartoon slop) but even if I did, I'm not gonna help a janny do his job. Why would I when I could just report it to authorities directly to hold the website accountable? Which they won't. They'll pretend to "look into it" they won't. The mods get to pretend they're doing their duty to uphold section 230 meanwhile are wasting time on me instead of the child porn in fact by banning anyone else ever, they actively contribute to its presence.
No faggot mod gets to speak to me about violence when their entire existence revolves around lying about me, pissing me off, and retroactively retaliating against me. They should be strapped to a chair clockwork orange style forced to watch their own kids get molested. Maybe than they'll learn to use the word violence when it's actually done against them and only when. Pic very related as we should all be fedposting more to hold the moderator chicken blood libel legally.
New nickname for the janny I'm dropping: Chicken Jockey.
>>767795>But not once. Not one single time, have I ever seen a moderator aka an enforcer of normalcy and narratives who wasn't ten times worse than the ignoramus he was enforcing upon.I have.
You have a petty bourgeois "don't tread on meh" mentality
>>767798Average moderator and average speech restrictionist arent courageous promethean revolutionaries such as depicted.
Much like this histrionic golem
>>767737 have nothing in common with Hitler (thought he wishes).
>>767799I'm banned here on 4 different IPs for making fun of the lib who runs the leftypol xitter account, that still didn't turn me into a "free speech absolutist"
>umm we need an alienated priestly class who controls speech and ideas so people dont get hurt in their feefees
For how much you people bring up Engels you guys really do not understand the libertarian thrust of Origins of Family
>>767807Dumb petty bourg fear of "officials"
Did you know that the red terror was a result of enthusiastic, zealous participation by the masses, not just some rogue apparatchiks? Same as the cultural revolution
Only petty bourgs are afraid of "le officials abusing powee" bogeyman, masses have no fear of such things because officials are powerless without them
Being anti-free speech is only generative when you are doing a legit paradigm change (revolution) or when the nation is directly threatened on an existential level ie when stability must be attained at all coast. Otherwise it's just overkill and cause the culture to ossify or, worse, will cause a backlash in the opposite direction out of transgressive impulse and desire to revolt.
>>767843We haven't had a non-besieged revolutionary state yet so the jury's still out
No control samples exist
>>766506the peasants are afraid of "curse words" because they invoke the evil spirits. the enlightened are not so superstitious.
>>766527popper's "paradox of tolerance" only applies to the failure of a parliamentary model to be reciprocal of public reason in debate (the third reich filibustering can be seen as an example).
>>767826>masses have no fear of such things because nobody has ever expected someone will come from them,even if they're part of the group being repressed,they're always biased into thinking they're enough of a good boy that didn't do anything warranting a response THAT hard,until someone close to them get smashed,then they have less than a week to stop shitting themselves and move
>>767903This actually does bring up something that really pisses me off about normies but especially Christian normies who fail to use their frontal lobe and distinguish words of discomfort and contempt vs actually implanting negative forces
I say it all the time and every fucking time the posts get taken down on TikTok or whatever where a curse word isn't a particular word in itself. Cunt or even uyghur or fuck are not curse words. I suppose cunt and uyghur might be to a degree, but wholly have become associated more with anger therein than how they define a person
"You're going to die alone" or "your mother is right about you" hurts a lot more and invokes far more qualities of a curse than words we just say are bad and that's why some people should be cursed at. Because they don't actually care about good and evil, only what has been called such and parroting it over and over without any foundation as to why. They don't even know why it's bad and don't want to know. That's what makes them goyim.
Unique IPs: 34