this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2023
42 points (97.7% liked)

Canada

7113 readers
351 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


๐Ÿ Meta


๐Ÿ—บ๏ธ Provinces / Territories


๐Ÿ™๏ธ Cities / Regions


๐Ÿ’ SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


๐Ÿ’ป Universities


๐Ÿ’ต Finance / Shopping


๐Ÿ—ฃ๏ธ Politics


๐Ÿ Social & Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

Guh. I really wish conservatives - and Jordan Peterson - would learn the actual meaning of censorship.

Facebook, twitter, the Ontario College of Psychology... a Lemmy instance is a private body. They can make whatever rules they like. If their rules say you can't say homophobic/hateful/racist things and you do so, they can do whatever they like. Don't like it? tuff beans, go make your own Facebook for racists and phobes.

All our freedom of speech, freedom of expression means in this country is the government can't persecute you for your (dumb or critical) opinions. But you only have limited ability to spew your opinions in public where others can't opt-out, you can't espouse your opinions where they incite hatred and violence against others (in a fashion/context where actual persecution and violence as a result is credible) and you do not have a god-given right to spew your opinions in a private forum that chooses not to tolerate them.

[โ€“] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

The fact that private bodies can make their own rules doesn't mean it's not censorship. Things like the first amendment, and the right to freedom of expression aren't the embodiment of free speech, the concept of free speech exists beyond them.

You're using a no true scottsman fallacy by the way. I'm not sure if it's intentional, but it's bad logic.

[โ€“] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Youโ€™re using a no true scottsman fallacy by the way

Today I learned.

I suppose what I meant is the pundits frequently hold up having their Facebook posts removed as state censorship, that this is somehow in violation of their constitutionally protected right to expression - and its not. It IS censorship by a private body in a forum completely of that private entity's control, yet they wave the word censorship around to convince others that somehow its a shadowy conspiracy by the deep state or whatever to clamp down on freedom of expression.

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Given the amount of involvement corporations have in US government, I'd say that's not a bad theory.

Remember, lobbying is simply legalized bribery that everybody just accepts like morons.

load more comments (2 replies)