Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
A private entity ceases to be private when they gain significant and durable market power. The long term ability to raise price or exclude competitors. Legally that is called a monopoly. Microsoft is a good example. They limited their platform by making it difficult to run other browsers. Now we have social media like Twitter banning words from certain people they don't like and censoring content based on political views or their on interpretation of 'hate speech.'How can a private entity be unjust in regards to what it wants/permits on its platform? Have the laws of private property been held in abeyance?
Parler (alternative to Twitter) was supported when Google, Apple and Amazon refused to have Parler use their servers. Seems like an illegal monopoly to me.
Neither of which would be offering the same opinions if it were their own views being silenced into oblivion as systematically as they are.Yeah him and Clayton both.A link where one must register to open it is as useless as a précis which gives no sources for the article's accusations.
Either way, you SUPPORT suppression of speech and truth.
Blind partisanship like this dangerous to our way of life. One party rule never ends well.
Here's my rationale: There are types of unprotected speech, such as assault, inciting a riot, or threatening the life of the President. Lying by itself isn't unprotected, but lying is the basis for unprotected speech such as fraud, slander, or causing a panic that gets someone hurt. These things are illegal because they damage someone else's finances, reputation, or health.
There's no doubt that there have always been people out there who tell lies in order to damage the health of our republic or our democratic ideals themselves. In the days of Huey Long or Joseph McCarthy, for example, their harmful speech was limited by technology, but these days I can type something here that can be read instantly by millions across the world. This greatly increases the amount of damage the lies can do, in the same way that fraud, slander, or panic can be a lot more damaging.
So at what point do we start talking about passing laws against provable lies that can damage the health or even existence of our republic?
Disagree with all people who think they know peoples hearts or minds, or think that only people like them know the truth about everything. That defies reason or logic. Most all the people I have ever known agree on things, disagree on other things, and have little or no interest in the parts of other's life's that do not concern them.
.
Blind partisanship like this dangerous to our way of life. One party rule never ends well.
Historically speaking, the political left ALWAYS goes down this path. They never learn from history.
Did I just read a post that said" (only two types of people God people and Satan people! & Democrats are Satan's People!
And this poster being a mere mortal knows the hearts & minds of ALL people. How amazing, If you get to heaven
Absolutely! That's why the wannabe authoritarians stoke up the fear; they know it will drive otherwise rational people toward their banners.Here's my rationale: There are types of unprotected speech, such as assault, inciting a riot, or threatening the life of the President. Lying by itself isn't unprotected, but lying is the basis for unprotected speech such as fraud, slander, or causing a panic that gets someone hurt. These things are illegal because they damage someone else's finances, reputation, or health.
There's no doubt that there have always been people out there who tell lies in order to damage the health of our republic or our democratic ideals themselves. In the days of Huey Long or Joseph McCarthy, for example, their harmful speech was limited by technology, but these days I can type something here that can be read instantly by millions across the world. This greatly increases the amount of damage the lies can do, in the same way that fraud, slander, or panic can be a lot more damaging.
So at what point do we start talking about passing laws against provable lies that can damage the health or even existence of our republic?
The issue is this- when people are scared, they tend to trust authority figures. Now, if those authority figures are lying, and then those authority figures say that the -truth- is the lies and is damaging and must be banned, well, I think you can see where this is going. If not, I recommend taking a look at a book called Nineteen Eighty-Four.
By contrast, Hitler offered an alliance between labour and capital in the form of corporatism
Sort of like the alliance between major American corporations and the Democratic Party, as exemplified by the MLB acquiescing to President Biden's demands to move the all star game in order to punish those that oppose the party.
phoenyx
The problem with a national gun registry is that the corrupt federal government will use it to target and disarm law-abiding citizens.
The issue is this- when people are scared, they tend to trust authority figures.
The doctrine of free speech concerns solely the relationship between government and those governed...
A point not in dispute. Try to stick to the topic.
The issue is this- when people are scared, they tend to trust authority figures.
Some of us are wise enough to see that it is the “authority figures” who are responsible for creating and promoting the fear, to increase their own power over us.
phoenyx
The problem with a national gun registry is that the corrupt federal government will use it to target and disarm law-abiding citizens.
You're off your nut. Republicans and Democrats are gun owners.
www.ammoland.com
The issue is this- when people are scared, they tend to trust authority figures.
Some of us are wise enough to see that it is the “authority figures” who are responsible for creating and promoting the fear, to increase their own power over us.
The issue is this- when people are scared, they tend to trust authority figures.
Some of us are wise enough to see that it is the “authority figures” who are responsible for creating and promoting the fear, to increase their own power over us.
Right. That's the whole premise of MAGA.
