- Joined
- Dec 23, 2022
- Messages
- 4,154
- Reaction score
- 7,346
Me? Maybe you have me confused with someone else? And no, I'm pointing out how you don't seem to support freedom of speech as a principle--you just don't want anyone criticizing rightists. That's understandable of course, but it's not a pro-freedom-of-speech position.
Again, "Russiagate" is undefined as a term, but you're saying they shouldn't allow false information here, but you're good with them allowing false information on subjects where you think it benefits Republicans. I think A) freedom of speech means people should be allowed to express false beliefs and B) it also means that no particular website has to host their beliefs. Goes both ways. And I'm not mad that Musk is trying to use the gov't to silence critics; I'm pointing out that that is a real attack on freedom of speech that his supporters seem to be supportive of, which indicates that they don't support the principle of freedom of speech.
"Radical left wingers" is kind of silly, but this is my point. You think that if you deem someone to be a radical left-winger, they shouldn't be allowed to speak freely.
This is projection. I think Musk should have the right to do what he wants with his own site. That's a consistent application of a principle. I don't think he should use gov't and financial power to silence critics. Your view is that left-wing views should be suppressed, but that sites should be forced to promote rightist content. That's not consistent.
That might be the biggest strawman in sherdog history. Literally none of that applies to me at all. It's as if you created a fictitious boogeyman right winger and got mad at your own made up bad guy.
Literally nothing you said applies to me, nor my beliefs. What a waste of time on your part.