you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Ian 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

How is saidit any different? Does not the admins here have an indisputable right to remove anything without question?

We're allowed to post, it's not a right.

Also, quoting human rights when it comes to your right to say what you want on others people properties is a gross misunderstanding, would you argue that banks stifle your freedom of expression when you can't access their vaults to express whatever you want?

[–]raven9[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I did not suggest saidit is different.

I think you are the one who misunderstands. That article 19 represents one of the reasons 80 million people died in the war. That war (WW2) was fought, according to the allies, for 4 freedoms. The first freedom being, freedom of speech. It is in respect of that fight for freedom from fascism, that article 19 was drafted. I think you should read it again and read it slowly and realise that just because that is not how things are today, does not mean that is not how it was supposed to have been and the reason it is not, is because fascists who prefer authoritarian control and censorship and have no respect for freedom of speech or those who fought for it, have taken control of social media.

[–]Ian 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I did not suggest saidit is different.

That's true. I assumed you'd taken a stand against authoritarian fascists by refusing to support that type of social media site due to your disdain of fascism. My bad. Do I understand you correctly; reddit is fascist and saidit is no different?

That war (WW2) was fought, according to the allies, for 4 freedoms.

The Soviet Union was part of the alliance, liberty and independence was part of the freedoms and a few countries that ended up on the wrong side of the iron curtain might disagree with the honesty of the Declaration of the United Nations.

"Freedom, but not for the British colonies, US territories and new Soviet states"...

I think you should read it again and read it slowly

I've found out my retention is highest with quick repetitions, but thanks for the reading tip.

you think that the right to say what you want when you want regardess of which media, is not how things are today does not mean that is not how it is supposed to be

No, I think that it's not supposed to be the way you present it because its contrary to the generally accepted concept of ownership.

the reason it is not is because fascists who prefer authoritarian control and censorship have taken control of social media.

I'll agree that there's been a massive increase in editorial control on corporation-run and private sites, often as a result of a sellout by the original creators, either morally or monetary...

I don't think refusal to display certain content on a website is censorship unless it's a public service by the government.

I don't believe capitalistic greed is fascist, though it's easy to mistake the two since they share a lot of methods.

And I don't believe the ones making the decisions prefer authoritarian control, it's just a very noticable way to influence people - one of many ways that's employed in parallel.

[–]raven9[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

"No, I think that it's not supposed to be the way you present it because its contrary to the generally accepted concept of ownership."

When you have the neoliberal capitalist agenda that ensures these media will always be in corporate ownership, and those corporations use their wealth to control government to ensure they are excused from any laws, legislations, constitutional restrictions, or charters that were intended to apply to that kind of thing, what you have is a fascist regime that usurps government and a society relying on and revolving around social media that is under the control of ignorant fascists and unelected self appointed dictators that have no respect for individual freedoms of speech or expression and act in direct contradiction to not only the UDHR but also the intent of the 1st Amendment and I believe it was Thomas Jefferson warned that this kind of thing would happen if we did not act to prevent it.

[–]fred_red_beans 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

But anyone is free to start their own social media site.

With members of the NATO think tank Atlantic Council as directors, I think social media can be considered fascist.

Question is: Why do people continue to participate?

[–]Key_Resource 0 insightful - 1 fun0 insightful - 0 fun1 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

they only died to benefit the jew

[–]Theo_Fridall 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Saidit isn't that far gone yet.