@obi Seems leaning a bit in one direction. I do not see Ye, Jordan Peterson, or Taylor Greene as people involved in discussions. They seem mainly involved in inciting violence and various forms of racism/misogyny.

@rrb a requirement for the inciting of violence is it's explicit requirement, not implicit. If they had been explicitly inciting violence, I would be in agreement, however I have not seen it, maybe you can provide it. I agree it is leaning one way, just because that way was the most affected. There are plenty of not so famous progressive accounts that have been banned that I would also hope he applies to this too. Unfortunately, I don't remember them all. One was DDosSecrets.

@rrb Also, racism and misogyny are largely subjective, and legal speech. I think they should be judged here in the court of public opinion.

@obi

I don't here outrage about left wing voices not being present on Fox News. The debate seems to be what Germans would call "blind in the right eye." But as far as ther

Taylor Greene:
https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/26/politics/marjorie-taylor-greene-democrats-violence/index.html

Not to mention Jewish space lasers

Jordan Peterson:

"Violent attacks are what happens when men do not have partners, Mr. Peterson says, and society needs to work to make sure those men are married.

“He was angry at God because women were rejecting him,” Mr. Peterson says of the Toronto killer. “The cure for that is enforced monogamy. That’s actually why monogamy emerges.”"

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/18/style/jordan-peterson-12-rules-for-life.html

Forcing women into marriage sounds pretty sick to me.

Ye:

Death Con 3 for Jews?

@rrb I will have to read those quotes in full context to get a better idea. Fox news is a biased news source, as with most. Not sure what any of these examples has to do with free speech, or the inciting of violence. Just because u or I don't like someones speech, doesn't mean its not legal. If we didn't have the freedom of thought, or the freedom of expression, we would all still think the earth was the CE term of the universe.

@obi Marjorie Taylor Greene saying that Dem. politicians should "get a bullet to the head." Seems clear. Peterson's wanting "enforced monogamy" for all women seems a tad anti-women. Ye has issues.

@rrb seems the opposite for Peterson. Seems like he's forcing monogamy on men. But I have to read more into quotes context. If that Taylor Greene is absolutely accurate, I might agree on that with you. But again, quotes out context, or quotes only acknowledged from one political party show bias. Biden is still on Twitter. He has spread misinformation many of times. Things like "I went to (Syracuse) law school on a full academic scholarship. Ended up in the top half of my class. I won the international moot-court competition. . . . I was the outstanding student in the political science department (as an undergraduate). . . . I graduated with three degrees from college" were all misinformation/lies. Journalists fact check it, he gets called out and drops out race. But he should be allowed to say what he want with no legal action, its free speech, just like when he said "the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy." When talking about Obama. I think we both agree this is a very poor statement, but I think he should be allowed to say it.

@obi Would agree with 90% of what you are saying and I would want to let everyone run their mouth.

Am getting annoyed about the right wing feeling aggrieved and somehow thinking that they have no right to speech, just because some people call out racism.

Also, some of the current rhetoric is fueling violence against Jews, protesters, women. Shutting them up won't help, but people should pay more attention.

The new ACLU is silly.

@rrb I actually agree 100% with this statement.

@obi

Musk does not seem very forgiving of speech that counters him.

Frankly, he seems to be more of a bully.

@rrb like what?

@rrb too be clear, I don't believe he is a free speech "absolutist" like claims. More so than the last Twitter admin but, definitely has his faults in the free speech regard

@obi

My own view would be aligned with the old ACLU protecting the rights of Nazi's to march.

But, I do see connections between the Rep. campaigns demonizing gays and trans with the latest mass shootings.

The way the rhetoric is going now is seeming more like anti-semitism in Germany in the 1930s.

I do not see this as a free speech issue. And the right wing adoption of "free speech" seems hypocritical to me.

I do not think Musk is going to draw more advertisers by promoting these voices.

@rrb I am aligned with the old ACLU as well, but the old one wouldn't be aligned with the new one, or current thoughts. That's fine, we all have opinions.

I agree on one layer with you about musk on advertising, but the next layer of the onion I wouldn't. While public ally advertisers will show concern, they will go where the money is, and userbase.

@rrb I talked with a few people the other day about the shooting. 2 f us disagreed with the one that said that Boeberts tweet "children should go to church, not drag shows" directly resulted in the CO shooting. I obviously thought this w as a ridiculous stretch, guessing you may agree with him.

@obi Not directly resulted. But, I think the year long anti-trans campaign by Republicans definitely added to it. Part of it is triggering people on the edge.

@rrb I've still to see only speculation on the shooters motives, but find it plausible its a hate crime. I just like to wait on all evidence and disregard conjecture before I make a hard stance.

@obi OK. But, lots of right wing violence happening lately. Worries me. Hope this starts to calm down. Some of this rhetoric does not help.

@rrb your not going to like this, but I think you might think there is a lot of right wing violence, because that's all the news shoves in your face. Same goes for Fox news watchers. One type of violence shoved in there face. I think violence is typically distributed thru all political persuasions. Personally I think the whole point of both of these narratives is to further divide people. If you split the country in 2, the people will look to there peer opponents, instead of looking to all the wrong doing of the people that govern them, and the elites in the oligarchy. But that's just me.

@obi

There is the polarization, but a lot of that is having only 2 parties. Two parties is a product of the "first past the post" electoral system. And, both sides wanting to whip up their sides. I do not really like either side.

But, the leftist rhetoric is too whiny, boring and detached to trigger violence. It is just totally boring and ineffective. There is also the reflexive immediate offense to any statement no matter how well intended. Where the right side is getting pretty close to directly telling people to go out and kill people.

This BBC documentary has some examples:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQ3WuRDYO2A

@rrb I will watch that when I get home, but I have about a hundred examples in my head already.

I actually think we are nearly identically aligned on the situation, surprisingly, as this perspective isn't popular, at least not openly.

@rrb see, this was a good discussion, and I bet you thought it may turn out poorly.

@obi

I am fine with conflict and arguments. I actually have trouble getting people to disagree with me enough. I get more annoyed by people agreeing with me too much.

Name calling, etc. annoys me.

I am finding the fediverse more pleasant and people more informed/open than the bird site.

Maybe the lack of algorithmic incitement to hate has something to do with it.

@rrb that's one of the best statements I have heard on this platform. Well said.