NYT: Trump Says He Will Sign Free Speech Order for College Campuses

You are the one dancing around with poor examples. Hopefully your bad ideas die sooner rather than later.

 

Is this a bobbythegreat impression? If so, you're nailing it.

First, you claim that if a country has free speech, then bad ideas won't win...yet you completely ignored my Weimar Republic example time and time again because it proves you were wrong about that so instead of owning up to this you've just ignored it and insulted my intelligence over and over again because I'm starting to see that's really all you have when you feel you can't counter a point.

Then you wanted an example for America, I've provided it, and you've defeated it by taking a stance of "It will die eventually" knowing that's not even my argument. My argument is that bad ideas can take hold of a populace, whether free speech exists or not, because that can be taken away, just like anything else.

Unlike you, I don't ignore points completely and then throw out insults all while claiming some kind of victory. I really think that to take the stance you have taken on free speech is callous and naive. Especially with all the historical examples in this country and the world over that bad ideas can be taken by a nation and that a nation can regress when it comes to human rights. Your argument that free speech is some cure all when it comes to human rights just doesn't stand up before any kind of historical scrutiny.

 

Yes, but by then we will all have moved onto some other outrage to argue about.

My guess is student loans or guns or maybe China..... we will find something.

 

Ok, so when you get called out you act like a baby

 

I really don't think they die, I think they lie sleeping waiting for the right person to repackage them.

Look at Race Realism, for example. This old race science was buried some time ago and now it has been repackaged and even people will use the very same arguments as before to promote it. I've given the KKK example too, that group that died a few times and resurged again thanks to propaganda.

That's the danger of free speech. You can always say sunlight is the best disinfectant but propagandists hide their ideas in dark shadowy rooms with no windows.

The point being is that free speech can be used to openly lie and subvert the truth enough that no one has any idea what the truth is.

Is this me saying that we should then limit free speech? No.

But Twitter, private universities, etc etc have a right IMO to tell people that they won't stand for that on their platform and that they don't have to support these people get their message out there. I don't get what the alternative is here really when we start telling private institutions that they have to accept speakers in the name of free speech. I think this is a rabbit hole the right things they want to go down until they get Sam Harris speaking at Catholic universities.

 

Read your post again.

 

Funny how the group claiming to be "liberals" want to "de-platform" their opposition these days. The excuses are endless, but the one truth remains:

 

Who's for deplatforming?

Who really is scared here? You're the one that ignored several points that directly contradicted your point then tagged me then edited out the tag?

 

I didn't ignore your points. They are all counterintuitive to yours and I explained why. Really you just keeping dancing around with the same trash examples.

And who is for deplatforming? Obviously you are for one but I untagged you because I wanted to put the message out in a more open manner for all to respond to. I am not really interested in your opinion because you keep going in circles with the same BS.

 

Yes, more Ad Hom because you could never counter the point about the Weimar Republic having free speech. I have plenty more examples my dude but you haven't even touched one of them only to say "That's other countries! No other country has had free speech!" not realizing that isn't true at all...because guess what...The Weimar Republic had free speech. Want me to list others? I wonder if you'll ever confront this point that other countries have had free speech and that it didn't protect them from human rights abuses. Nevermind the other point of the KKK having more members now than a few decades ago and the KKKs history of dying and being reborn a few times now...

Obviously, your 'critical thinking' is lacking, how you took that from my point I'll never know, but you don't have a right to any platform you so desire. That is not free speech and it never has been free speech. I can't demand to go on a college tour and then whine at the colleges that deny me going "MY FREE SPEECH THOUGH!" this is not de-platforming for them to deny me

This is like that lady that whined about Netflix banning her movie from their platform and going on about Free Speech as if she has a right to air her political movie wherever she deems.

 

Lol you really are detached from reality. You deserve all the ad hom attacks you get. The Weimer Republic had free speech. Yeah I am sure that the Nazis who came in didn't try to degrade that at all. Did they?

Also... Deplatforming is a tactic being used as a political weapon under the guise of common decency. Very church lady like... please think of the children type stuff.

The depersoning of inidividuals is also taking place in tandem. Taking a book off Amazon. A person off social media. Banning from using a bank. Modern day book burning actually. Done by tricking people like you Jay who are too self-righteous to see reality.

 

You should re-read yours.

First you attack colleges saying that they should not restrict free speech because they receive federal benefits. When I point out that corporations receive federal benefits you change your argument to say no one should get federal benefits.

You conveniently dodge the question on whether corporations that receive federal benefit not be allowed to restrict speech. That shows that you are debating disingenuously and I am calling you out for it. I will not let you run and hide.

 

That's not the point, the point is that the people ALLOWED them to do so, the point is that the bad idea won out in the free marketplace of ideas.

This is my only point that bad ideas CAN win. That people can knowingly support bad ideas for selfish reasons.

No. Deplatforming happens on Amazon or Twitter because it helps the companies bottom line. People don't log on twitter to get racist death threats, insults, and to get bullied. So Twitter removes those people. You want to see a platform that lets people say anything they want? It's called Gab...and it's not doing very well because who wants to join a social network to get insulted all day? People get on the internet to share cat videos with their grandma.

Corporations don't want to be associated with these people because they want to be global and sell their products to as many people as possible. Corporations are severing business relations with these people, which they have a right to do. Amazing that we tell corporations that they can have a say in our politics BUT CANNOT under any circumstance, tell 1488soldierxx to stop harassing its other customers.

As for reality, the reality is that bad ideas CAN win out. Even today, as I mentioned, white supremacists groups have seen a surge of activity, maybe they aren't reading enough Frederick Douglass hmm? They are using college campuses as recruitment grounds even online games and basically anything they can exploit to do so. Part of their tactic is this whole 'Free Speech' debate so that they can sneak onto more platforms and spread their message with the long term goal of course winning public opinion through lies and tricks so that they can then turn around and take away free speech, sounds familiar?

This idea that bad ideas can't win out seems to ignore the reality that people pick and choose what they listen to and guess what, if you hand someone nothing but racist literature guess what they will become?

 

If college football players were to kneel during the anthem on the sidelines of their on campus stadium, Trump's head would explode.

 

You are a lunatic who doesn't know when to quit. Saying I would prefer no one get benefits is not the same as changing an argument, and I didn't dodge a question (trying to converse with you ends up with baseless accusations, so really you should be thanking me for putting up with you). I still think they should have to allow free speech, including the private ones if the money they get has such a string attached. Personally I am largely indifferent to it though, as I would rather see private industry pay for itself. Also I don't have to respond to everyone's questions in the manner they like, especially posters I really don't see as having much intellectually going on. What difference does it make if a corporate group receives money with strings attached to open up more free speech? Yeah if that is attached to it OK they have to. I personally would again rather them pay for their own private enterprise in the first place. Having an expanded position, and largely one of indifference, is not the same as changing a position. Most of my argument in the first place was about public state schools in the first place, so I think you got mixed up on what was going on. Fair enough.

 

You got owned by your own examples and at this point you're just trying to spin it to save face. Keep going Jay, I really am amused.

 

According to who? You? Save face with who exactly? What are you talking about here? I think you are projecting here, you never once attempted to counter my examples because you know they contradicted your idea, so instead of talking through it in a civil manner (which I offered) you ran behind insults and "I WIN I WIN I WIN!" tactics as if I care about that. I don't. That's why I ignore it and continue on. I feel like anyone that goes on about "You are embarassing yourself...no one agrees...you're trying to save face..." really dude? Is there an audience polling our discussion? Can you keep on track here without reverting to this? I'm sincerely challenging you...

Now, I'm really curious as to WHY you think I got owned by my own examples.

Remember, you said that bad ideas can't flourish when a country has free speech. The Weimar Republic had it, many countries had/have it, more than I bet you know do...

You claimed that bad ideas die yet you are going to have to explain the rise of membership in the KKK and other White Supremacists groups.

I think you really just don't get that a lot of people live in echo chambers. The whole idea that a bad idea like racism can be defeated assumes that every person is sitting around reading books that oppose racism.