Association of Flight Attendants calls for all those involved in yesterdays events of breaching the Capital Building to be banned from flying

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
8,598
5,962
118
Why do you think that? The question asked was whether "offensive online content is taken seriously" or not.
The question clearly does not ask questions such as "should you ban this kind of speech". It should not be assumed as a proxy for it.

Not quite. I mean, it's all there in black and white.
It exists within the context of a Republican / conservative narrative that social media companies silence them, so it cannot help but reflect the extent to which different groups trust social media, and thus again does not clearly address free speech.

The third shows that democrats are more likely than Republicans in all cases to censor speakers.
Firstly, you should be well aware of the concept of margins of errors in polls. A difference between (for instance) 79% and 84% in a single poll is not significant.

Secondly, virtually all these topics are ideologically-biased topics which typically press Democrat buttons more than Republican. It renders the poll unfit for the aim you want to claim it for, because the methodology is biased.

* * *

Finally, and relevant to the anecdote I brought up about the UK student societies, what actually is free speech?

One might consider things like academic freedom, or freedom from financial influence (e.g. advertisers), or editorial control, or intimidation, etc. When the right wants to discuss freedom of speech, they deliberately restrict the meaning to only a narrow consideration that suits them. The debate is fundamentally dishonest where a side decides it has sole right to set the parameters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Seanchaidh

MrCalavera

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 30, 2020
906
980
98
Country
Poland
Aligning with the side that didn't start the war might be better than the side that started the war, and now wants to bury the hatchet.
If one side always wanted peace, and if the other only now wants peace after they won, I could see why one might not "fall for it".

To wit:
"B-but, but they started it!"

Okay, fine, enjoy next four years then.
I've said before I was happy Biden suggested healing. Problem being he now needs to actually show he's serious about it and it's not healing and unifying in the same way as Hillary supporters trying to heal and unify with Bernie supporters in 2016. As in "fuck you kneel and do what you're told you stupid ignorant worm and be glad we still allow you to live by our good graces as even that is more than you deserve" kind of way that some were approaching things.
And pray tell, how should he show he's serious about it? What should he have to say, or do to make you, or more importantly, american conservatives be okay with him?

Just to be clear here. I'm skeptical of Joe Biden. I think his simple "Can't we all just get along?" platform, based on what happened in last year alone, is bordering on elderly dementia. Coming back to pre-Trump America isn't nearly enough.

But most that i've seen from you, or Houseman here was kvetching about the rhetoric. How rude, mean, and uncomprosing "the Left" is. How no one wants to discuss, or "debate", how smug the liberals act, how wrong the tone is.
Well, if all you want is a polite discussion, with no significant change that the Left is calling for, then, like it or not, Joe Biden is your president.
(...figuratively ofc, iirc you're not an american citizen either)

 

Houseman

Mad Hatter Meme Machine.
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
3,910
760
118
The question clearly does not ask questions such as "should you ban this kind of speech". It should not be assumed as a proxy for it...

How would you word a poll designed to gather data on how various groups feel about "free speech"? Would you just ask them: "Do you support free speech" and hope that people answer honestly? I'm sure you can see the problem with that, right?

So it seems, in order to get the real answers out of people, you have to ask other questions that reveal the truth. It seems like you object to the wording of the questions because they're not explicitly about free speech.

I would still like to know your answer as to how you would design such a poll.

For example:

Finally, and relevant to the anecdote I brought up about the UK student societies, what actually is free speech?
I could tell you "the ideal of people being able to say whatever they want without censure or suppression" but does that tell the whole story? Does that get into the nitty gritty of whether someone should be free to use hate speech or yell 'fire' in a crowded theater? Does it distinguish between a person's house, a bar, a public space, Facebook, etc?
 
Last edited:

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
8,598
5,962
118
How would you word a poll designed to gather data on how various groups feel about "free speech"? Would you just ask them: "Do you support free speech" and hope that people answer honestly? I'm sure you can see the problem with that, right?
You're right, it's a surprisingly difficult thing to do.

For instance, if you ask people if they oppose fascism, virtually everyone says yes. If you break up facsism into components like authoritarianism, strong leadership, etc. it turns out a slightly alarming quarter to third of the population believe in a basket of concepts consistent with fascism. If you ask people whether they believe in free speech, pretty much everyone does. Except a lot of people won't see banning certain things as inconsistent with free speech (for instance they think they're minor, pragmatic "exceptions"), or they mistakenly claim to be for free speech because they believe that free speech is a virtue, or they simply don't have the same idea about what free speech is.

So it seems, in order to get the real answers out of people, you have to ask other questions that reveal the truth. It seems like you object to the wording of the questions because they're not explicitly about free speech.

I would still like to know your answer as to how you would design such a poll.
I think one tactic might be like the Cato Institute poll, but with a more balanced set of scenarios. For instance do you think people should be stopped from burning the Stars and Stripes, or NFL footballers stopped kneeling for the anthem, or making sure children are not taught about homosexuality in schools. Potentially a two step process, where approval/disapproval of something is graded, and then also willingness to ban or restrict it. Because it's my guess that views on banning primarily correlates to disapproval irrespective of political leaning.

I actually think this is a question of people's belief in social freedom and tolerance of difference. Typically, libertarians (in the common US sense of classical liberal types who lean right wing) score very highly on this, but conservatives do not. Likewise on the left there are the left-leaning equivalents of libertarians, whereas the average US liberal can be more restrictive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Houseman

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
5,912
646
118
One of the difficulties in debates about free speech, is that some are arguing for free speech, while others are arguing for consequence free speech.
To quote an African Warlord once interviewed in regards to claims of brutal crackdowns against opposition groups.

Reporter: "So when you're giving a speech what would happen if some opposition members started shouting to express their views"

Warlord: "Oh they are entirely free to express their views for the duration of my speech"

Reporter: "So you'd not punish them nor would they face repercussion?"

Warlord: "I would do nothing to them, my men however, they are very loyal and what they might do once I have walked away I cannot say"

The consequences people should face for legal free expression should be legal free expression. What we're seeing is a push for more than merely speech in return.

We're seeing almost people support the idea of what could become police raids on gatherings opposing certain groups or ruling classes at the time.


We're seeing a push from people for private companies to drop services etc from people not just people who they're paying and deciding not to pay now but dropping access to services.

We're seeing basically Sesame Credit but without any kind of score to it, it's just will of the mob and whoever can make people believe their claims.

 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
5,912
646
118
"B-but, but they started it!"

Okay, fine, enjoy next four years then.

And pray tell, how should he show he's serious about it? What should he have to say, or do to make you, or more importantly, american conservatives be okay with him?

Just to be clear here. I'm skeptical of Joe Biden. I think his simple "Can't we all just get along?" platform, based on what happened in last year alone, is bordering on elderly dementia. Coming back to pre-Trump America isn't nearly enough.

But most that i've seen from you, or Houseman here was kvetching about the rhetoric. How rude, mean, and uncomprosing "the Left" is. How no one wants to discuss, or "debate", how smug the liberals act, how wrong the tone is.
Well, if all you want is a polite discussion, with no significant change that the Left is calling for, then, like it or not, Joe Biden is your president.
(...figuratively ofc, iirc you're not an american citizen either)

Well a simple start for Biden

"Some people in our country believe our electoral system is not secure. Our election system is rated rather poorly it must be said in world rankings and as such there is an understandable concern. As such I will order the creation of a Bi-partisan committee to look into claims of fraud occurring from either side and present recommendations to make our election more secure."

Should it not prove my point about issues on the left that the tweet you posted wasn't from a republican saying those things by a left winger straw manning them?

You know why I keep posting the Stargirl ending clip?

This one?


Because the things mentioned I agree with, Are those not left wing policies now? Is the left wing Policy now just to own the republicans.
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
5,912
646
118
This wasn't a random place were violence occurred. This was the capitol which got stormed because the president wanted it to be stormed. If the ''good mothers'' join people punching their way past the police to storm a state building and forcefully try to cancel democracy them yeah, same thing applies.
No the Good Mothers however did happily stand and cover those who had been trying to torch the courthouse. Which again is a symbol of of the government in said state.
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Jun 21, 2012
8,684
2,879
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
To quote an African Warlord once interviewed in regards to claims of brutal crackdowns against opposition groups.

Reporter: "So when you're giving a speech what would happen if some opposition members started shouting to express their views"

Warlord: "Oh they are entirely free to express their views for the duration of my speech"

Reporter: "So you'd not punish them nor would they face repercussion?"

Warlord: "I would do nothing to them, my men however, they are very loyal and what they might do once I have walked away I cannot say"

The consequences people should face for legal free expression should be legal free expression. What we're seeing is a push for more than merely speech in return.

We're seeing almost people support the idea of what could become police raids on gatherings opposing certain groups or ruling classes at the time.
Did you legitimately just describe Trump's actual actions this week to attack the Left. You get that Trump has been acting like this Warlord, right? He told them to go to the Capital and threaten people because he didn't like what they said.

No, you aren't wrong. PHYSICAL consequences to Free Speech is incredibly bad. That should be banned. Pretending that being banned is the same is ridiculous.

Banning can bbe effectove but does need restrictions. Eg. I'm not going to defend Salune over what she did. She broke the TOS. If Im going to ask for changes, it's going to be for a better TOS. I'm going to hold them to their TOS or go elsewhere
 

MrCalavera

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 30, 2020
906
980
98
Country
Poland
Well a simple start for Biden

"Some people in our country believe our electoral system is not secure. Our election system is rated rather poorly it must be said in world rankings and as such there is an understandable concern. As such I will order the creation of a Bi-partisan committee to look into claims of fraud occurring from either side and present recommendations to make our election more secure."
Bi-partisan? Which parties are we talking here? Democrats and Republicans? The same democrats that are considered "The Deep State", and Republicans that are now traitors, by those who believe in the victory being "stolen" from Trump?

Why would those people believe in a bi-partisan commision composed from cronies they hate?

Should it not prove my point about issues on the left that the tweet you posted wasn't from a republican saying those things by a left winger straw manning them?
More like a left-winger exaggerating real concerns on the right. Such as a milquetoast, centrist Joe Biden being far left.
 

Hades

Elite Member
Mar 8, 2013
1,966
1,430
118
Country
The Netherlands
He told them to go the capital, and peacefully protest, not "threaten people".
Just like a mob boss doesn't tell his goons to kill someone. He just says he needs to go sleep with the fishes.
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
5,912
646
118
Bi-partisan? Which parties are we talking here? Democrats and Republicans? The same democrats that are considered "The Deep State", and Republicans that are now traitors, by those who believe in the victory being "stolen" from Trump?

Why would those people believe in a bi-partisan commision composed from cronies they hate?
You have to start from somewhere. Honestly it would have been better to announce it before recent events and maybe they wouldn't have happened.

More like a left-winger exaggerating real concerns on the right. Such as a milquetoast, centrist Joe Biden being far left.
And also a strawman. Unless you can show people saying that about Biden. Hell if you want to claim it's true then doesn't it serve once again as an example of those equating all the right with the most extreme elements.......
 

Houseman

Mad Hatter Meme Machine.
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
3,910
760
118
Just like a mob boss doesn't tell his goons to kill someone. He just says he needs to go sleep with the fishes.
"He didn't directly say it, but I KNOW that's what he meant!" is very weak reasoning and doesn't deserve to be taken seriously.
 

Seanchaidh

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 21, 2009
5,241
3,062
118
Country
United States of America
One of the difficulties in debates about free speech, is that some are arguing for free speech, while others are arguing for consequence free speech.
Perhaps the fragile and oppressed conservatives would join me in calling for the nationalization of Twitter and other privately owned common virtual spaces (Youtube, Facebook, Twitch, Instagram, Pinterest, hell, even the Amazon marketplace and most especially its self-publishing features). That way there is no private entity whose free speech and association rights would be offended by having to allow the free expression of all members.
 

Hades

Elite Member
Mar 8, 2013
1,966
1,430
118
Country
The Netherlands
"He didn't directly say it, but I KNOW that's what he meant!" is very weak reasoning and doesn't deserve to be taken seriously.
''He didn't directly say it but he's been stoking the fire for months, demonized every single entity that didn't fall in line', and then gave them a target'' is good enough as far as reasoning goes. If someone does everything in his power to rile up the mob and the mob then proceeds to be violent its simply not likely that its all an unfortunate accident. Doesn't help that Trump was gloating about the attack as it occurred.

Besides this is a losing argument for you no matter how it goes. Trump having an angry mob storm the capitol should be a political death sentence no matter if its due to malice or incompetence.
 

Kwak

Elite Member
Sep 11, 2014
2,203
1,706
118
Country
4
You have to start from somewhere. Honestly it would have been better to announce it before recent events and maybe they wouldn't have happened.


And also a strawman. Unless you can show people saying that about Biden. Hell if you want to claim it's true then doesn't it serve once again as an example of those equating all the right with the most extreme elements.......
Trump regularly used phrases like radical extreme left to scare his idiots off of Biden's policies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrCalavera

Hades

Elite Member
Mar 8, 2013
1,966
1,430
118
Country
The Netherlands
No we're not playing the dogwhistles game here.
Indeed we don't. Trump talks like a mob boss because he's the political equivalent of one. No dog whistles required, its just an unambiguous statement of fact.
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
5,912
646
118
Indeed we don't. Trump talks like a mob boss because he's the political equivalent of one. No dog whistles required, its just an unambiguous statement of fact.
So you'll be able to point to the part of the speech Trump called for direct action then?