US Presidential Election, Nov 5th 2024

Dax777 said:
A society with restricted speech. Racism free society is like a crime free society. A myth in our current expression.


I want to talk to the people who hate me to know why they do. I don't want them hidden from me. We will reduce racism by breaking the yolk of mistrust amongst each other. Not by sone treating me like an agency free toddler that needs a savior's protection from 'mean words'.

Most people who are racist are often pathetic already anyway.

Given the choice between Free Speech and the censorship of 'hate speech.' I'll choose Free Speech every time.
Click to expand...

Do you think Elon Muks pro Trump Twitter is a platform for free speech ?
 
Aphex said:
As opposed to Facebook controlling the narrative in 2020?

What would you say if Trump did that?

On racism, why is there so many false flags. Could it be be something like keeping race front and centre..
Click to expand...
There’s lots of smoke and mirrors that deflect away from the actual stuff that is changing the world into a cesspit.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
There’s lots of smoke and mirrors that deflect away from the actual stuff that is changing the world into a cesspit.
Click to expand...
A president elect that supported defund the police. No smoke there, in the literal sense of course. Trump did his job whilst everyone else was fiddling with their pronoun pins.
 
Aphex said:
A president elect that supported defund the police. No smoke there, in the literal sense of course. Trump did his job whilst everyone else was fiddling with their pronoun pins.
Click to expand...
I’m not going to get into a debate about the previous election, but the funding debate was centred around whether police should be central with dealing with mental health issues etc.

2020 culture wars are dead.
 
Frank the Yank said:
Not according to the 1st Amendment of our Constitution it’s not. In these cases, sunlight is the best disinfectant.
Click to expand...
The issue nowadays though is that on social media, there is no sunlight. People are able to post whatever they want anonymously, which means without any accountability either to their views or to their wider reputation in society. That's if they aren't bots, who have no reputation to worry about in the first place.

And we know that there are plenty of bots who are specifically programmed to sow divides in society. Russian bots (and it's hard to imagine the west aren't doing the same) have been discovered posting both far left and far right stuff. And people act like 'if you have good enough arguments, then you won't need to worry about it.' But let's be honest, we all know that's not how beliefs and values work in reality, otherwise no-one would believe in a magic man who came back from crucifiction (sorry Christians). Beliefs and values are primarily socially made, hence why before social media (and still now for the most part) people tend to believe similar things to the people they are geographically closest to. It's why even the rightest wing of people in the UK would be considered an absolute nutjob for suggesting we get rid of the NHS, but a left-wing person would be labelled Mao himself for suggesting that the government should deliver all the healthcare in America. It's got nothing to do with the relative merits of both arguments, and everything to do with socialisation. And that's why being able to express views without any social consequences can be both a great thing and an awful thing. It convinces people that their racist views are widespread, particularly when combined with the algorithm that surrounds you exclusively with people who agree with you, to the point that they begin expressing them in real life and find themselves fired, or recently in the UK, in prison. It also means that people are free to discuss things that would never fly in the community they grew up in, like the atheist in a Mormon town, or the gay person in a conservative Muslim family, or someone living under an authoritarian regime. But what it doesn't offer is a chance to honestly debate the issues out in the open. Hell, its main feature is the fact that it does the opposite of that. It's social media's main strength, but also its biggest threat, if you accept that a modicum of social cohesion is necessary for society to function.
 
I'm With Stupid said:
The issue nowadays though is that on social media, there is no sunlight. People are able to post whatever they want anonymously, which means without any accountability either to their views or to their wider reputation in society. That's if they aren't bots, who have no reputation to worry about in the first place.

And we know that there are plenty of bots who are specifically programmed to sow divides in society. Russian bots (and it's hard to imagine the west aren't doing the same) have been discovered posting both far left and far right stuff. And people act like 'if you have good enough arguments, then you won't need to worry about it.' But let's be honest, we all know that's not how beliefs and values work in reality, otherwise no-one would believe in a magic man who came back from crucifiction (sorry Christians). Beliefs and values are primarily socially made, hence why before social media (and still now for the most part) people tend to believe similar things to the people they are geographically closest to. It's why even the rightest wing of people in the UK would be considered an absolute nutjob for suggesting we get rid of the NHS, but a left-wing person would be labelled Mao himself for suggesting that the government should deliver all the healthcare in America. It's got nothing to do with the relative merits of both arguments, and everything to do with socialisation. And that's why being able to express views without any social consequences can be both a great thing and an awful thing. It convinces people that their racist views are widespread, particularly when combined with the algorithm that surrounds you exclusively with people who agree with you, to the point that they begin expressing them in real life and find themselves fired, or recently in the UK, in prison. It also means that people are free to discuss things that would never fly in the community they grew up in, like the atheist in a Mormon town, or the gay person in a conservative Muslim family, or someone living under an authoritarian regime. But what it doesn't offer is a chance to honestly debate the issues out in the open. Hell, its main feature is the fact that it does the opposite of that. It's social media's main strength, but also its biggest threat, if you accept that a modicum of social cohesion is necessary for society to function.
Click to expand...
Paragraphs man, paragraphs.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.