- cross-posted to:
- brainworms@lemm.ee
- cross-posted to:
- brainworms@lemm.ee
You must log in or register to comment.
What?! The people who ban books are a threat to free speech?
No fucking shit
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion, please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
Wow. The updoinks… Such quality discourse and amazing insight!
How is this entire sub not considered a giant circle tug?
Because the post articulated what the majority of us already knew. That as always has been, the repression in this country comes from the conservatives. The very definition of a liberal philosophy would be against a threat to free speech. When conservatives complain their rights are being trampled on, it’s normally their “right” to harm some group or person that they do not like. A liberal wouldn’t say you aren’t allowed to have a negative view of such person, but may consider it flawed, but wouldn’t say you have a right to harm that person because you don’t like them. Conservatives want to control what you can say, think, and do, to only what fits in a world that makes them comfortable, and feel better about themselves.
I don’t understand. You’re saying the conclusion is so obvious that the article is worthless and redundant?
Ribbit
Yeah. It’s only the conservatives doing it.
https://crosscut.com/news/2022/01/kill-mockingbird-hot-seat-wa-school-district
How about we let parents choose the schools and literature that their children read. No no no. Can’t do that. That would be fascist!
I took a look at the “conservatives banning books” link and it says thousands of books have been banned and/or removed from libraries.
I took a look at your link, and it describes the process by which one book was removed from the required reading list, but was still allowed to be used in class.
It makes me think of the “we are not the same” meme.
Yes, let’s also let parents decide what medicine they get instead of doctors. And decide when their kids should be able to drive, not the government.
I mean why let educated professionals get in the way?
Yes, let’s also let parents decide what medicine they get instead of doctors.
As a matter of fact, yes. As a parent, I have the responsibility to choose what medicines to allow my children to receive.
And decide when their kids should be able to drive, not the government.
Yep. If my 17 year old is too irresponsible to drive, I can choose to not let him.
Parents have the right to withhold anything they deem to be harmful to their children.
So if you decide you don’t want a medicine for your child because you think it causes cancer, even if it doesn’t, then you should be allowed to prevent him from taking it? Even if it kills him? No. No, that is a horrible idea.
And you think that you should control when your kid should drive too. Great, now irresponsible parents can ask 12 year olds to drive to the store for them? Endangering everyone around them? Another horrible idea.
Yes you can withhold things. But you don’t have absolute say. They are a person. If your choices would cause them harm, such as an improper education or not getting needed medication, then it’s the governments job to step in and protect that child.
“Improper education”. There is the crux of it. Your definition of improper may not be the same as mine. You think that you should be able to force other people’s children to be taught what you want them to be taught, according to your political and/or moral standards, through the force of government.
I want parents to be able to decide for their own children how they are taught. I think parents of a child know better how to raise that child than a government bureaucrat.
Tell me again how I’m the Nazi.
You’re right that it wasn’t a very high quality post, but with this topic, what else is there to say? Conservatives have been pretending they’re free speech warriors while at the same time very publicly banning books. It’s so obvious that there isn’t really anything to discuss.
Thank God you’re here! I was starting to quote Marx and feelyself turning trans, but you woke me up!
Wait, no, come back! You dropped your gender!!
u/Muchtall seems like as good as any to block.
Yes. Block the guy that doesn’t agree with me. Seems reasonable.
Always has been.
If you believe your partisan opponents are the only enemies of freedom, then you’re already in chains.
Freedom and free speech are not the same thing.
Typical bothsideism in the comments of that site as per usual. Would love to see those bothsiders on an article stating the opposite of this one.
I’m a massive bothsider, I tolerate (and don’t tolerate, depends really) either, both, neither, however you wanna say it…
Why exactly would I argue the right hasn’t adopted the cancel culture playbook and cranked it to 11? That is a VERY “both sides” statement… This is arguably a “both sides” article, a “both sides” point.
If anything, id point out that all the pissing and moaning is silly, because the shit the right is doing is coming straight out of the lefts playbook. The fact that they’re feeding you your own shit sandwich doesn’t equate to them not serving shit for lunch… It’s still shit…
Moderate/centrist == the other team…
The hell they are. Where are the “leftists” banning books? Banning speech? Maybe for racial slurs, but what are some other examples? Where are they making it illegal for people to get healthcare?
No.
What liberals are trying get rid of are people being assholes, being openly racist, disallowing a person’s actual right to choose something for themselves that affects no one else, disallowing children knowledge, restricting what teachers are allowed to teach.
There is no both sides here. Period. End of story.
Go comment on a subreddit not approved by a liberal subreddit and see how fast you get bot banned by them. The left is just as keen to censure and shutdown free speech and thought.
Right wing hypocrisy is a feature, not a bug. At the end of the day it’s just a form of entitlement.
Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.
Jean-Paul Sartre
Also, water is wet.
And before someone says water isn’t wet: cohesion
What? No. The authoritarian right and left are all about free speech when out of power and all about clamping down on it when they are in power. Both are the same. Both are nasty and authoritarian.
deleted by creator
You mean saying the people that are championing the banning of books are a threat to free speech?
I mean, I disagree.
deleted by creator
No they don’t have a right to choose what their children are taught, and I’m sick of people acting like they do. You choosing not to teach your child crucial life skills or fundamental truths because you don’t want to, because it’s not what you believe, harms your child. It’s child abuse and should be treated as such.
No, choosing how to raise your child, even if it deviates from the dominant positions, is a fundamental human right. Child abuse is an extreme situation and does not remotely apply to this.
I disagree with your claim that it’s a right. And would you look at that? So does the UN.
I would agree that gaiting information from a child isn’t abusive, but like many things it’s not without nuance.
- Santa? Sure, whatever.
- Went out for drinks, but act like you were working late? Not great, but that’s your perogative.
- Refuse to let the school teach about traffic lights, because you don’t like cars, and don’t drive? Uh. That’s gunna cause some issues down the road. (Pun very much intended)
Generally I think it just comes down to under preparing them for life. It’s not abusive, but intense cases of it could start approaching neglect. The Wikipedia page for child neglect does mention this:
Educational/developmental neglect is the failure to provide a child with experiences for necessary growth and development, such as not sending a child to school or educating them.
deleted by creator
Unless your child ends up struggling with it gender identity. Then your child is at risk of suicide, like many before then, because they have to hide who they are every day and feel hated.
People are so scared and ignorant about the topic of gender identity. You can’t read a book and turn gay. What you can do is let your child know you accept and love them no matter what, and if they happen to be trans you should realize that they’re still your child. Nothing changes. You’re just telling your child that trans is bad and if you feel that way you’re wrong.
Cold abuse directly applies to this. You can raise your child in a way that is abusive, and that protection from abuse is more important than your “fundamental human right”.
I mean if I decide the way I raise my kid is by locking him in a box for 24 hours as my form of discipline, that would be my right? I mean that’s how I chose to raise him. But according to you, that wouldn’t have anything to do with child abuse…
Yes, child abuse does exist and to some extent the state has a say in how parents raise their children. But parents get to choose what ideologies, religions, and morals they teach their children, among other things. The state should have very little say other than extreme cases of abuse. Same way you don’t tell a random man in Russia how to raise his child, you don’t tell your neighbor how to raise his child. Just mind your own business and stop pretending to have the moral high ground.
So let parents fuck up their children and possibly destroy their lives all because “they’re my children, I can do what I want”, really? They’re not toys you can do whatever you like with, it’s a life.
Enlighten us, then?
deleted by creator
Posts like this show what a lame circlejerk lemmy is. It’s much more aggressively tribal garbage than reddit was, which was already pretty lame. How lame of a person you must be to go on a forum and agree with a bunch of other losers about the same things endlessly? Go outside and talk with people who disagree with you. You might learn something.
The politics group is just left-wing talking points and circle jerking. They’re just as nasty as a lot of religious fundamentalists.
Be warned.
It’s nice to see that /c/politics and it’s denizens are just an exact clone of /r/politics and is still full of circlejerking
As a centrist, let me tell you the truth - a threat to free speech is coming from both far ends of political spectrum.
As a centrist
Hahahaha, good one.
I know, right! You can’t be a centrist if you adopt any right wing politics, that’s just a disguised MAGA nutjob.
lol
Who was it that suppressed Hunter Biden story or asked for “antivaxxer” doctors to be shut down on FB/Twitter?
Sure, you will find some kind of excuses for the above, but the unbiased fact is that both sides engage in silencing of free speech according to their political agenda.
Who’s literally burning books that were removed from schools?
Post got duplicated… Right wingers do. And who was deplatforming people during covid on social networks?
As a centrist
suppressed Hunter Biden story
“antivaxxer”
lmao
I know, it’s ridiculous for people to simultaneously agree and disagree with things said on both sides of political spectrum. I should work on one party unanimity, my bad.
By the way… While you’re laughing your ass of, Hunter Biden story (no matter what you think of it) wasn’t supressed on all social media?
While you’re laughing your ass of, Hunter Biden story (no matter what you think of it) wasn’t supressed on all social media?
That must be why nobody’s heard of it!
Yes, story broke out eventually, but it was silenced on social media when it broke because of political orders - a fact. I don’t know why saying that automatically makes people wince in horror. Both sides of political spectrum engage in silencing free speech when needed.
You do realize that most people here are on some kind of social media?
You can keep saying that the story was silenced, but I’ve heard about it non-stop for years because the right has been pushing the story hard.
So… definitely not a fact. Your echo chamber is not reality.
Would love to see these left wing examples of it
Deplatforming during covid is one.
Is the freedom of association counted under your definition of free speech?
If a private entity doesn’t want to host your content they are exercising their right to choose who they associate with…
Yes, a private company can choose what content they allow. But to add to my argument, social media companies didn’t ban that story on their own decision, it was after intelligence agencies acted towards them. (Sorry, English is my second language)
No, I completely agree. I’m center left and see a lot of this coming from the left too. I was surprised to see all the agreement that it’s only from the ‘right’, it is totally both, without question.
More people should adopt deeper models of politics, like six or nine axis models because that’s how you really get at the features that drive censorship and limiting free speech.
Completely agree. Thank you.
This just in: the sky is blue and grass is green.
