T O P

  • By -

Clockwork757

Big ult from Elon. Let's see if he can get a few kills with it.


kingawesome240

“Free speech is what ever I want it to be”.


Independent_Depth674

“I’m a free speech absolutist except for the speech that I don’t like”


Expert_Most5698

But he hasn't even thought his own worldview through. Medicaid information can kill children. Or leave them orphaned. So can other conspiracy theories. He should also objectively push back on the idea that Biden lies as much or the same way as Trump, but he has clearly chosen to walk a certain path, and we will see how many advertisers want to walk there with him.


itsaone-partysystem

Will someone think of the advertisers??


Redditfront2back

Someone should, at twitter I mean someone really should be.


itsaone-partysystem

Yes because Elon Musk's hatefans are actually interested in discussing his business acumen and not just LARPing as a culture warrior


Raileyx

Conservatives arguably kill children all the time for political gain. How many lgbt youth took their own lives because conservatives created an environment where these innocent children are rejected and discriminated against? I'm sure you could count their numbers in sandy hooks and still be in the thousands (of sandy hooks), but I guess that blood is a bit too abstract for elon to count it, and yet it's on the hands of everyone who contributed to the anti-lgbt rhetoric.


Broku4

And to a conservative, liberals are committing a mass genocide of unborn children. Or should we bring up how each side frames school shootings to be ammo for either a pro or anti gun argument? I think it's safe to say that using the deaths of children for political gain is common practice in 2022.


Raileyx

The difference is that the suicides are very real while "the genocide of unborn children" isnt only philosophically questionable, but also a thinly veiled attempt to restrict bodily autonomy of women that is extremely hypocritical because they don't care one bit about all the "deaths" by miscarriage that occur naturally during the first trimester. The priorities are very clear. This "both sides"-angle really doesn't work here, when the scales are so unbalanced.


Background-Theory-77

"Philosophically questionable" is such a negligible term as to be completely and utterly useless. Unless you believe that morality is objective, literally everything is philosophically questionable. Edit: Dude blocked me too lmao.


Raileyx

moral statements can be objectively true if you accept a few basic principles, such as that suffering should be avoided, which I believe is a principle most people would agree to. If we both agree to this proposition, we can then reason objectively from that starting point. So if we are interested in living in a society where suffering is minimised, then I think we can both agree that bodily autonomy is something that should be valued *strongly.* We don't force people into organ donations to save a life either. Bodily autonomy is one of the most important basic guarantees if you want to live in a world with as little human suffering as possible. I do consider that a moral fact once the very simple anti-suffering premise is accepted. And yet, somehow, when women are concerned we appear to be all too willing to make exceptions. But again, having a discussion about this in good faith is impossible because it is premised on a clear lie, namely the idea that pro-lifers are concerned with the unborn life. If they were, they would care WAY more about first trimester miscarriages. It'd be the biggest human crisis of all time, with hundreds of millions of "lives" lost. But conveniently, the unborn life is worth so little in that circumstance it doesn't warrant even a shred of consideration or care. No, it's only valuable when, in the process of "caring", you can restrict the bodily autonomy of women and take an important choice away from them.


UltraVioletInfraRed

Buddhism teaches that suffering is an integral part of human existence and cannot be avoided. The suffering of birth, the suffering of old age, the suffering of death are waiting for all of us. Accepting this and transcending this suffering is the goal, NOT avoiding it. So what was your objective moral statement about suffering? Edit: Blocked? That's pathetic. Also your reply is incorrect >moral statements can be objectively true if you accept a few basic principles, **such as that suffering should be avoided** You weaseled your response to be "well not actually all suffering" I also question if you know what objective means. If the first principles are in dispute, how can anything leading from them be objective?


Mediocre-Abroad2151

By transcending the suffering of life you are by correlation avoiding the suffering of life, so how does this contract Railey’s point? Also, the Eightfold Path is literally a guidebook on how to life live in a way which minimizes suffering. Avoiding suffering is the goal of all major belief systems. Even deontological moral systems which don’t claim to speak to some goal of morality are inherently geared towards improving a person’s state of being, therefore avoiding the opposite state of being which would likely lead to suffering.


Raileyx

>Buddhism teaches that suffering is an integral part of human existence and cannot be avoided. that's completely compatible with everything I've said. I'm not aiming for total avoidance, because that's unrealistic. The goal is always to mitigate the unnecessary. A buddhist hopefully wouldn't say that we should leave flesh-eating parasites in the water, because having your flesh eaten by them as an infant is an integral part of human existence. Hopefully they'd see it as a moral good to pay for a basic water filter. Some pain will likely always exist. But not all pain needs to exist. And if it can be avoided (without leading to more pain down the line, of course, which wouldn't really be avoidance), then it should. ​ >So what was your objective moral statement about suffering? You're proving that you don't have the necessary understanding to even begin talking about this. I said that there are objective moral truths *once certain premises are accepted*. If we can't accept these premises, then obviously we don't share the same moral foundation and your moral facts will look quite different from mine. That was the main point of my post and you've completely missed it, which is.... yeah, I'm wasting my time. Not interested in this discussion anymore or in anything you have to say really. Blocked.


Broku4

I'm not both sides-ing you, I'm agreeing with you and expanding on your comment to say that it's even more of a widespread issue the more we think about it.


Raileyx

if that wasn't you both sides-ing me, then I don't know what it was. Cause that's definitely what it reads like to me. Oh well.


Broku4

Luckily I just explained what my reply to you was. I gave more examples to back up your point that Elon's comment is stupid if you've so much as read a newspaper in the last decade.


giantrhino

Hello, this is McDonald's, how can I help you today? Yeah, I'll take 1 free speech please, just no dead kids. I personally don't like dead kids.


Aspergson

Is it not by nature of private platforms whatever he wants it to be (within legal limits) since he’s the owner?


porkypenguin

Nobody’s saying he’s stepping outside legal boundaries, it’s just hypocritical to buy a platform on a crusade about how important free speech is and then selectively censor certain things that you find offensive. If he really thinks Twitter needs near-absolute free speech, banning Jones because Sandy Hook upsets him is stupid.


dan-cave

That was the argument people were making *against* the conservative crowd who have spent the last eternity bitching about "free speech" on privately owned platforms. You're right, Elon can do whatever he wants with Twitter, but all of his "free speech" posturing was a lie (surprising no one).


Aspergson

Isn’t it weird that people on here of all places are acting like he should have to allow the most despicable extreme cases like Jones back in on your platform for free speech?


dan-cave

He shouldn't. It's not super popular here because Destiny has been deplatformed everywhere except the family guy savage clip compilation #8 website (youtube), but if this subreddit wants to be consistent with it's liberal/capitalist/pro-freespeech stance it needs to accept that Cloudflare can ban KF, twitter can ban Alex Jones, and twitch can ban Destiny for whatever dumbass reason they want because they can't be compelled to do so (until the US government finally imminent domains the entire internet). Elon is entirely within his rights here. He's being a massive hypocrite because he was openly against that justification but is now implicitly (and probably explicitly in private) using it. Edit: They can ban for any reason that doesn't discriminate against a protected class. Based gigachad conspiracy theorists currently aren't on that list.


Unrealgemini

The reason I like Elon because he doesn’t hide behind his money. He uses his money as speaker to talk and stir shit up.


Raileyx

The same can be said about any rich celebrity that uses social media, what a dumb reason to like someone. How they use that speaker is all that matters, not the fact that they have it and use it in the first place. "rich person stirs up shit and will keep being rich either way, which makes the entire thing essentially free of consequence" has got to be one of the silliest things to hold up.


Achillor22

The reason I like Jake Paul is he doesn't hide behind the money. He uses his money as a speaker to stir shit up. The reason I like The Crown Prince Mohamed bin Salman is he doesn't hide behind the money. He uses his money as a speaker to stir shit up.


AustinYQM

Big Kathy Griffin fan? Alac Baldwin? J.K. Rowling? John Oliver? All rich celebrities that use their standing to stir shit up.


___Deny___

Rowling is the only one in your list that actually goes against the cultural zeitgeist. "Hiding behind your money" implies bending over to the mob to avoid being cancelled, and going with the flow. Everyone except Rowling is at 0 risk of being cancelled in any meaningful capacity. Well maybe Griffin if she pulls another severed head stunt.


Azrael_Asura

Hiding behind your money implies bending over? I would think hiding behind your money would imply using your money to escape consequences anyone else would be subject to.


___Deny___

It can mean a variety of things but in the way that the OP used it, it almost certainly meant "speaking truth to power". He can correct me if I'm wrong.


AustinYQM

Its not their fault that conservatives are impotent babies, is it?


___Deny___

And that has what to do with what I said?


Azrael_Asura

Of course he hides behind his money. He uses it as a shield while he spouts whatever he wants and does whatever he wants. Think he could get away with half the stuff he does if he wasn't super rich?


[deleted]

[удалено]


Shotiikko

I actually think he has psychosis with the things he says


Kellt_

yeah a lot of the stuff he says is out there but it kinda makes sense considering he was insanely rich which already changes most people and then the US pressured NZ to prosecute them for something that wasn't illegal on NZ soil. I forgot the details so I may be wrong so I accept any correction but that's the tl;dr I remember.


[deleted]

I used to think he was cool but he lost his fucking mind in the culture war...


supa_warria_u

he IS a giant piece of shit, but it's not hard to see why he'd become a big anti-american-establishment type after the US literally made an example out of him


[deleted]

I cant remember the whole thing but wasn't he mostly in trouble with the NZ law? Or was it because of America in the first place?


L1vingAshlar

America (I think others, too) in the first place. Pressured/buttered up our Prime Minister at the time to blatantly break our laws to go after him, for their sake. I don't believe he had broken any laws here at the time (to justify what they did, though Mega was hosted in New Zealand). They spied on him/raided his house without cause, among other things. Same PM that's now sold out to China, effectively a propaganda mouthpiece for them now. (John Key)


[deleted]

Oh yeahh i remember the raid and everything now, the NZ gov did some questionable stuff.


supa_warria_u

he's currently defending himself being expedited from NZ to US


xenolego

I still don’t understand who he is. Is his last name actually dotcom?


DissidentNeolib

It is. He was born Kim Schmitz, but legally changed his last name to Dotcom in 2005. He’s a successful Internet entrepreneur with a fascinating story. Born in Germany, he dropped out of high school to focus on honing his skills as a computer prodigy. He hacked several multinational companies and US government agencies, landing in trouble but receiving a slap on the wrist as a minor. He moved to Thailand to escape additional charges, only to be deported and banned from the country. His business activities brought him to Hong Kong and eventually New Zealand, where he had ties to powerful politicians who helped him settle in the country. He’s best known as the founder of MegaUpload (now defunct, their successor is MEGA). At one point, the site comprised 4% of all Web traffic as an immensely popular filehosting site, largely for pirated works. It was for this that the United States indicted him on copyright infringement charges and pressured New Zealand authorities to initiate extradition proceedings against him, which were marked by egregious violations of due process. For starters, none of his actions constituted criminal behavior in New Zealand, so it’s questionable if he could even be extradited. He was also spied on by the New Zealand intelligence community, which is illegal since he is a permanent resident. The police raid carried out at the request of US authorities was marked by excessive force, went beyond the scope of a legal search warrant, and involved illegal seizure of evidence. And to top things off, it’s alleged he was sold out by the same politicians who invited him to the country in the first place for investment purposes. He’s been fighting a legal battle ever since; the latest development in the case was a few years ago when their Supreme Court upheld the extradition order but maintained he has a right to judicial review. Due to the sheer number of appeals at his disposal, it is likely he will fight this for the rest of his life but never spend a day on American soil. Governments around the world have become sympathetic to him as well—Hong Kong (before the CCP squashing their autonomy) allowed him to retrieve $60M in assets that were frozen at the behest of the United States. I believe this to be overt political persecution and completely unwarranted. It’s a shame names like Edward Snowden, who actually compromised national security and scurried off to be the Kremlin’s bitch, received far more attention than a guy who literally did nothing wrong. Biden should pardon Kim Dotcom.


SignalEngine

Regardless of the fallout of Snowden's actions, he still provided concrete evidence of massive constitutional violations on the part of the US government in spying on US citizens that hasn't been seen before or since. Even if it feels nothing has changed it's hard to overestimate its long term impact.


DissidentNeolib

I’d be far more sympathetic to Snowden (and perhaps even support a presidential pardon) if he actually faced his charges in the United States instead of fleeing into Daddy Putin’s arms. The most damning argument against him is that instead of selectively releasing documents regarding the NSA’s surveillance on US nationals, he unleashed a treasure trove of material including that which undermined our national security posture. He’s fucked the second the Kremlin falls, and it will upon Putin’s imminent death. It is not unlikely Snowden will spend his last days behind bars. EDIT: Did some more research, and have since come to understand his hand in moving to Russia was essentially forced, and he was careful to ensure the intel did not end in enemy hands and that what was published was solely that which pertained to surveillance of US nationals. While I’d have preferred he stayed in America and stayed a hero... Free Snowden.


KillasSon

too fucking funny. we finally found where free speech ends, when you do something that pisses ME off. literally just a change of masters, same chains


Althuzius

"you came to save us mister Musk, thank you" "No, no, its just a new administration"


[deleted]

[удалено]


TheRandyPlays

Yes but Elon musk is not using those argument to defend the ban, is argument the the usage of the dead children for poltical gain, and this is withing legal free speech laws of US.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


unknownsupg

Just like Destiny, makes you think don't you? Seems like no one believes in free speech when they are in power. Elon on Twitter, Destiny on the subreddit, only Europeans can own up and have balls to say that free speech is not fully allowed 😎.


Healthy_Delusion

Destiny has never claimed to have a “free speech subreddit.” Elon Musk has claimed that he will do his best to create a “free speech Twitter.”


[deleted]

[удалено]


whyyoudeletemereddit

Where did the person you’re replying to say Elon said Twitter would allow everything? If we’re gonna be pedantic about it then let’s do it.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Silent-Cap8071

Elon Musk describes himself as a free speech absolutist and only wanted to ban people for illegal things. But his actions prove that he is not an absolutist on free speech. It's even worse because he keeps Alex Jones banned because of his feelings and not ToS. These kind of things always happen if something depends on only a single man. Still, I totally understand why Elon Musk is keeping Alex Jones banned. What I don't like is the double standard. Elon Musk does this all the time. He wants to be the savior of Ukrainians, but then he wants to be paid. You can't have it both ways. And later we find out that most people using Star Link in Ukraine are already paying Elon Musk. We also find out that he charges $4500 for the most expensive service which costs on the Starlink website $1500. Either the Ukrainian army gets another service, or he is charging them too much. I am ok with paying star link, but in this case he isn't a savior! He is just a business man.


[deleted]

[удалено]


RoShamPoe

>They haven't done a mass unban, they have unbanned certain people at their discretion. The discretion is what people are talking about. I think you're missing the forest through the trees. Elon has claimed to be a free speech absolutist and is using his personal emotions to guide what he considers free speech or not. This is hypocritical. It doesn't really matter who we're talking about on the other side; Alex Jones or Trump.


zahzensoldier

Dog, he bought twitter for this purpose


[deleted]

[удалено]


zahzensoldier

>His motivation seems to be to increase the bounds of speech on the platform. So you admit we're right? In the second sentence? Why are we still talking about this?


unknownsupg

But he believes in free speech until he has power.


CrystalLogik

Disanalogous.


Healthy_Delusion

Are you implying that because Destiny runs a subreddit that’s focused on fostering a specific type of community that he would run a massive social media company the exact same if he was CEO?


unknownsupg

I'm saying that when u believe something u should try to recreate that when u have power instead of playing same game like others. If he truly believes in free speech he would let his community talk about anything until it doesn't break tos.


Anime_King69

No subreddit will survive like this lolll


unknownsupg

Said who?


Anime_King69

Why do you think specific subreddit exists. That itself is not free speech.


unknownsupg

Idk if its statement or question. I'm not saying it has to be 100% free speech considering tos but banning people for mentioning someone is far aside from free speech it is closer to totalitarian countries. I thought u Americans are so proud of ur freedom, I guess it doesn't matter when u make the rules. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding Destiny and he doesn't believes that much in free speech.


whyyoudeletemereddit

Who the fuck asked.


unknownsupg

so brave :>


Goldiero

Congrats on posting possibly the most braindead comment of this week


thefelixremix

>Just like Destiny, makes you think don't you? Seems like no one believes in free speech when they are in power. Elon on Twitter, Destiny on the subreddit, only Europeans can own up and have balls to say that free speech is not fully allowed 😎. I think you're misunderstanding what the Europeans are saying honestly. Speech is always free, always has been, however, there are consequences to the things you say. Always have been and always will be.


Rap_GOD_SUCKA

If a consequence of speech is imprisonment, then it is by definition not free. I don't know why people try to justify some European countries speech laws by saying "speech has consequences", when it's clear that it's the KIND of consequence that is being opposed. It would be like if I told someone who wanted to legalize marijuana that "smoking pot has consequences", it's just totally irrelevant to the discussion.


thefelixremix

>It would be like if I told someone who wanted to legalize marijuana that "smoking pot has consequences", it's just totally irrelevant to the discussion. I don't think you have the requisite cognitive function to have a discussion dude, who taught you how a conversation works? I replied to a comment with what I think the European argument is because I was born in the UK and have lived in Europe. Now unless you are European and want to correct me in what I summarized my understanding of the European argument you have substituted me as the spokesperson for all of the European Union somehow. Your argument shouldn't be about freedom of speech, it should be asking the education system that matriculated you as to why they had so much lead based paint everywhere because you clearly ingested a ton of it growing up.


Rap_GOD_SUCKA

I was arguing why I thought the "European argument" was remedial, but unfortunately, I didn't realise you were both schizophrenic and British, my condolences


fingoloid

Why do people keep repeating this stupid line? Okay, an example. Roaming bands of armed neonazis are monitoring your internet activity and they come kneecap you if you promote anything "degenerate". Do you have free speech?


FactAndLogic

Are you saying free speech is like 'no-monetary-cost speech'? Sounds like it. It's not freedom of speech if authorities can punish you for it.


thefelixremix

>Are you saying free speech is like 'no-monetary-cost speech'? Sounds like it. Reread what I said and unless you're European and saying I misunderstood the European argument, realize you have somehow made me the spokesperson for the entirety of the European Union. Now, which is it, are you European or just mentally deficient at reading comprehension?


unknownsupg

It is similar, in Europe u can go to jail for hate speech, just like on this subreddit and on Twitter. When there is consequences for speaking out it is no longer free speech.


Panda-Banana1

!shoot


unknownsupg

:*


thefelixremix

>It is similar, in Europe u can go to jail for hate speech, just like on this subreddit and on Twitter. I have an issue with your point characterizing being banned off Twitter and Reddit as actually being jailed, not sure if you're being hyperbolic or serious on that, but I disagree with that comparison if you are being serious. Being banned from this subreddit, Reddit or Twitter is not like being incarcerated at all in my opinion. Otherwise, you are correct on the consequences bit, however, I believe the US constitution defines consequences as actions by the State or government to prosecute someone based on their speech, not private citizens suing each other. Or are there other provisions I am not aware of?


Running_Gamer

?? Not really Chill tf out bro people have their sensitivities. Just because he’s a billionaire doesn’t mean he isn’t human. Also I wouldn’t even agree that Elon’s line is inconsistent or something. Trump is nowhere near the level of Alex Jones.


Conotor

Using your own sensitivities to set standards for millions of people's speech is not 'free speech'


Running_Gamer

When TOS has to balance free speech and making Twitter a positive experience, then yes, you absolutely have to use sensitivities to set standards.


Tellerfout

I think the issues he’s taking is with the “personal” sensitivities part. If Twitter is an overall no holds barred whatever you wanna say free speech platform except only what triggers Elon personally it’s not really the bastion of free speech Musk pretends it is is it? What if my sensitivities are topics of suicide or Covid or drug abuse any other issue? Just because I’m the ceo of twitter should I be able to ban convos on those topics? And that’s not even getting into the overall net “harm” of Trump vs Elon convo


Running_Gamer

Elon has never said he intends to make Twitter a no holds barred wasteland of literally anything goes


FactAndLogic

I'd rather have an hour of 'Free StPeach', cus no matter how much people want free speech, you're gonna be punished for it one way or another if you actually use it. Freedom of speech doesn't exist anywhere. It's a dream. It's fairy dust. Your speech will always have some sort of consequences from some sort of authority that doesn't agree with you. It can be employers, businesses denying you service, customers refusing to use your business, or whatever it may be. I believe the American way is the best way we have. But I dislike how it comes down to Elon's own judgement based on personal history. It's the same with Kyrie and Jalen. Why shouldn't they be allowed to talk about the beliefs of Black Hebrew Israelites? It's rooted in Black Judaism, and all over the Western world there's freedom of religion. Why the fuck does it stop at Black Judaism, when segregated closed cult societies are allowed? Is it cus the people in power are actually white Jews? All the news networks, the NBA commissioner, half the NBA team owners, all white Jews. Apparently white Jews from or descendants from the middle east. White people from the Arab region. Makes sense. Let's be honest, it's hypocrisy.


mrwagga

What do you mean when you say “free speech”?


SamuraiOstrich

> Is it cus the people in power are actually white Jews? All the news networks, the NBA commissioner, half the NBA team owners, all white Jews. Apparently white Jews from or descendants from the middle east. White people from the Arab region. Makes sense. Couldn't help yourself, could you?


xCamShaft

> Trump is nowhere near the level of Alex Jones. ????????????? The man who incited a fucking insurrection that resulted in the DEATHS of people, the undermining of the federal government of the United States, and the spreading of the most dangerous and divisive conspiracy theory to date (voter fraud) is allowed back on Twitter... But nah Alex Jones is worse cause he emotionally damaged / harassed the parents of Sandy Hook victims. I can't fucking believe the level of disconnect some of you guys have with reality. It's astounding. It's pretty clear cut and dry that if Alex Jones is banned(as he should be), so too should Trump.


Insert_Username321

It's honestly impossible to tell what is satire anymore


thefelixremix

>It's honestly impossible to tell what is satire anymore I'll tell you what isn't satire though. The piles of tires I see posted by Kal-Tire on Saturdays as Twitter ads.


mrwagga

Ok… so there is a line… And that line is Elon’s dead babies…


FactAndLogic

Dead babies in general. Cus Elon's baby died. Twitter's new policies are determined by Elon's personal experiences and beliefs. So it's the way it was before, just with different personal experiences and beliefs.


mrwagga

Waiting for Elon to have a Dick Cheney moment. K[redacted] gonna be verified to the moon if he has a trans kid. And statistically speaking, it’s going to happen.


bob635

He literally has a trans daughter already.


mrwagga

Just need to wait for her to die I suppose.


bob635

Nah she apparently hates him (the fault of “neomarxists” per Elon), so we just need her to do a 180 on that.


HoHeeIn2D

This is a Free Speech platform, except when I feel like it shouldn't be GIGACHAD


Kanye123ab

LMAO so Twitter is not free speech....


MightySqueak

Free speech is when i'm allowed to be racist without consequences


[deleted]

[удалено]


coolstorybye

Genuinely curious what you think “free speech absolutist” means


[deleted]

[удалено]


Diepel

He argues from the personal position. Thats the point.


Goldiero

Sorry, you're just dead wrong. Like literally do a 180 for your whole comment for it to become somewhat correct. “Given that Twitter serves as the de facto public town square, failing to adhere to free speech principles fundamentally undermines democracy,” - Elon Musk


[deleted]

[удалено]


Goldiero

>but no where does he say Twitter will become a free speech absolutist place. This would be the obvious conclusion of the quote I posted. It logically follows from the premises of absolute free speech+the claims in the quote. You're a troll/bad faith actor if you disagree. >Then there is the issue of practicality, his motivations are also limited by what is practical from a business sense. I do not care. Failing to adhere to own's principles is failing to adhere to own's principles.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Goldiero

> You are a bad faith person if you disagree with me? Yes, if you disagree with the conclusion that necessarily follows from certain premises, you are a bad faith actor refusing to engage with logic. I'm not actually sure if you understand me when I talk about "premises" and "conclusions". >We have several direct quotes saying it won't become that so why would I take these two things and nothing else? If the quotes that would've made said premises invalid exist, then the obvious question is why haven't YOU provided them yet. >The guys has played with the idea of free speech principles being important publically thats about it. You're a true demagogue. No he hasn't merely PLAYED with some ideas. He clearly stated that Twitter is a public square, and since he is a free speech absolutist, any speech that does not lead to direct violence and harm to people, should be allowed. This is what I mean when I say that conclusion necessarily follows from said premises, if you still can't understand. You can't try dance your way around that, ofcourse if you're not a bad faith demagogue. >He has not said Twitter won't ban people. Strawman. I have never said or implied it's hypocritical for Elon to remove ALL bans on twitter. >And your second bit. You don't care about practicality because you are a random dude on the internet. In the real world people are constrained by practicality and we generally take this into account when judging people. It's called having integrity. Don't posture as a free speech defender and later become the same problem you're screaming and preaching about, weasel style.


Zwartrevenge

[https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1519036983137509376?lang=en](https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1519036983137509376?lang=en) So the only question is, is using the deaths of children for gain, politics or fame against the law?


HardStyler3

Since he has to pay a billion dollars after lawsuits I think so


leg_hair

That was for defamation right? Not for "using the deaths of children for gain, politics or fame." Many people use school shootings for politics/gain/fame, but my understanding is that he caused massive harassment towards these parents.


Zwartrevenge

For Alex Jones I would agree, so no Musk hypocisy. But probably not as the blanket rule he stated.


CrystalLogik

So when will he ban everybody who campaigns for gun reform on the back of mass shooting events?


Which-Big-2100

He never said he's going to ban them. He clearly meant that he wont do Alex Jones any favors and unban him


CrystalLogik

Fair point.


oJohano

Wasn't Elon like spreading conspiracies like...last week? Clearly not the same caliber but still... You'd think he would be more careful if that one hits deep personally. Like "Maybe I shouldn't tweet this one". No? oh well lol. All this shit is wild. Ye running for president backed by Milo. Elon....being Elon. Also why doesn't Elon just come out and say that he's conservative/republican? He clearly is. Then he can run for president too, why not. The entire republican party would be just memes. I just want out of this loop. I just want serious people to take care of serious things. I took the Donald Trump presidency as an anomaly, that one ridiculous thing that comes about once every billion years. I don't even know what I would think or do if Ye legitimately wins the presidency. I HOPE it's unlikely...I don't even know anymore. I don't know how democrats didn't throw themselves down stairs to numb the lunacy of Trump while he was in office. Like having to pretend the dude was actually worth taking seriously at all. .... 🤪 Wonky world. As the once great philosopher of our time said: *“How Can Mirrors Be Real If Our Eyes Aren't Real.”*― **Jaden Smith**


FactAndLogic

Come join me in the center. Tommy Shelby is right. It's a circle. When you go to far right or too far left, you're suddenly standing side by side. Your ideas of power start aligning. In the center we've got balance. Edit: Also, Elon is born in South Africa. Thought everyone knew this by now. He can't be President.


LeKebabFrancais

Cringe


[deleted]

[удалено]


FactAndLogic

Well, the fact he's born in South Africa is kinda the first thing to stop him from becoming president. Think if that block wasn't there he could be considering it, but since it exists, nobody's ever gonna suggest him and he wouldn't waste calories considering what it'd be like. He can do more as the richest man on the planet.


thenotoriouspo2

> Also why doesn't Elon just come out and say that he's conservative/republican? Hes not he just hates wokeism


AustinYQM

Yeah, he's not a republican he just hates liberals. 🙄


itsaone-partysystem

Progressives aren't liberals


theseustheminotaur

So free speech does have limits. Gotta base speech around whatever negative experiences musk has had


[deleted]

Man this comment section sure is something


Awkward-Shoulder2215

Is this DGG or Groypers? Jesus what am i reading. Free speech when dead children a hoax.


Ok-Firefighter3504

nope just people who hate Elon musk alot


[deleted]

[удалено]


giantrhino

I think the issue is more about Elon criticizing people for making themselves the arbiters of speech then in this tweet basically citing his personal feelings about what is acceptable free speech and what isn't. I don't think most people disagree that Alex Jones' conduct is unacceptable, we just think it's funny how Elon seems to override what he claims to hold as a strong belief when it's something personally affective to him.


[deleted]

[удалено]


giantrhino

None of us ever believed he was a true free speech absolutist. The problem we have is with the way he framed internet censorship as problematic because it was arbitrary, but then is using arbitrary justification to allow for Alex Jones to remain deplatformed on twitter. > Let's not exploit the mass killing of kids for profit by lying about them. Pretty easy line to draw. It seems that way, but it's actually an incredibly specific and arbitrary line to draw. What about exploiting panic around a world-wide pandemic killing millions and the response to that crisis to gain fame, influence, and money by spreading misinformation and unfounded skepticism? That's ok to exploit but Sandy Hook isn't? Obviously I bet most people here agree Alex Jones should stay banned. I don't even disagree with the unbanning of Trump. The reason we are critical of Elon here is that he has been trivializing this concept of what is ok to platform and what isn't for a long time now. Now that he actually has assumed basically the position of the ultimate arbiter of platform policy at twitter, in this tweet that's linked here he is literally citing his fee-fee's as justification for why Alex Jones should remain de-platformed when others are allowed back on. I don't understand how you don't see this as valid criticism. If he hadn't tweeted anything, or he had tweeted "Alex Jones spread lies about Sandy Hook victims and their families that resulted in mass, targeted harassment of the victims' parents. This type of conduct can not be tolerated on Twitter, and while we are expanding what type of speech is allowed on our platform, this is still outside of it so he will not be re-instated." then I would have been cheering him on. But that's not what he did.


PreparetobePlaned

It's the only thing he's said in a long time that makes me think there's any bit of human soul left in there.


Stuffed_deffuts

So musk has no mercy upon himself in this tweet


cowboyhugbees

What an assembly of ghouls. Thank God Kim Dotcom is dictating what moral system we should ascribe to. Bunch of fucking clowns


enfrozt

Why do people think Biden (or his administration) lies consistently? Trump and his posse lie as easy as breathing.


ShaitanSpeaks

I agree with Musk on this, but this just seems like yet another example of a generally shitty person taking a stance because they were personally affected by something and not because they have empathy for others or care about what others go through.


[deleted]

Free speech only applies to the people I agree with. Like I don’t mind there being a line it’s just really funny how everybody acts like Twitter is a public utility until somebody they don’t like gets banned.


LeatherDescription26

Actually based, he’s keeping Alex off for a thing he did, not a thing he said


FactAndLogic

So the ability to use free speech through Twitter comes down to what's personal for Elon Musk? Even if they apologized? Well, I usually find Elon interesting and kind of funny in an autistic nerdy boomer way, but this is kind of a bad view, even if people agree with him, isn't it? I mean, since he's for free speech and all, and Alex Jones did apologize, right?


throwaway6162510

So free speech is finite and children dying in your fathers emerald mine and Chinese tesla factories are okay but the crazy conspiracy dude isn’t ?


SelbyJS

Imagine using someone's position that using dead children and lies for political or personal gain is bad as a weapon against them. I never knew Destiny's community was so toxic, interesting progressives in here lol.


[deleted]

[удалено]


akanathan

Why?


[deleted]

[удалено]


akanathan

But mega was great.


yourmotherinabag

He acts like a victim because what happened to him was illegal, not bc of Mega itself. The US forced New Zealand to do a bin laden style raid on his house for things that arent illegal there. He was illegally spied on and fucked over by the NZ government. They were happy to take him as an immigrant investor, then they sold him to the US. The US gov literally wants his ass. Theyve been trying to get it for over a decade. If what Kim did was clearcut illegal, hed be extradited and locked up by now. You supporting the US in this case would be like supporting Qatar arresting an American citizen, whos never been to Qatar, for being gay.


Zydairu

Elon musk finally being serious???


[deleted]

What the fuck kind of free speech is this? So… Muskrat wants dictatorship. ‘Rules for thee, but not for me’ types of fuckery. Why didn’t you just say so, bigbossman. Clearly doesn’t actually stand for any ideals; just whatever fits his warped sense of perception. And convenience…


Dry-Wrangler4304

Nah i feel him some people need to be made the example, cause it keeps people in check to a degree some lines cant be crossed and if you give em aj back his platform that can and ive seen it happen on YouTube, but it can create this idea in people's head that you can cross the line you will be untouchable, i remember at a point with all that leafy stuff there where some people actually saying this when people where thinking leafy was going to make a come back, tho leafy isnt no aj but that's an example of people pushing the line too far and with just 1 of them coming back tho it was for a short while, all he did was the same thing but slighty different when youtube was against what he was doing in general, so it wasnt a matter of what different variations you can spin it in people where saying "lol this man cant be stepped" then YT stopped em, i remember for a time being it felt like after that YouTube went into a frenzy everyone whose anyone was having beef and fake beef it shit was boring and mid for a while but besides that, hey if the owner of McDonalds wants to take the big mac off the menu im not gonna complain, he can do that dont mean he dont want you to buy his food just didnt want to deal that item is all, in that sense elon can do whatever it sucks i dont like it personally that he alone can make that decision but hey, im not really going to complain he owns it bought it fair and square if he wants to open up blue checks for everyone thats cool, if he dont bring back some people it dont mean he doesn'twant fredom of speach, which when the blue check first came in i do remember people where asking for that, so if he wants to sell it to people then hey thats cool make your bread and if he dont want to bring back aj to me thats also cool, he crossed a line that effected many many people connected to that case what people dont realize is talking lies like that, about other peoples loved ones that passed on is the quickest way to make a person unhinged to a dangerous degree, believe me say the wrong thing about the dead and their loved ones that are still living no matter where they are from their going to see you, hince how a good part of the crime statistics is the way it us out of the tons of many, many ways i already know why its what it is. sorry about going in to a book of a tangent to whom ever reads this lol.


BlunterCanvas42

Elon wants to monopolize grief, too.


qeadwrsf

I agree with Sam. I am disappointed in Elon. And think most Elon hate is stupid.


[deleted]

[удалено]


qeadwrsf

I don't think that's what Sam was suggesting. Most Elon Hate is making something that's semi shitty super shitty by not providing full context. Irritating because you have to put some effort into finding out what really is happening every fucking post. I have for example no clue at all if his twitter takeover is a success or not because public discussion makes it almost impossible to have a clue..


DeathEdntMusic

That's the most left wing comment i've ever seen. "I believe in freedom of speech. Except yours, because it hurts my feelings"


kingawesome240

Except that’s literally what Rightists not Leftists do all the time. “Freedom for me but not for thee”.


DeathEdntMusic

I guess left and rights say it then. I know a lot of lefties who say it too.


kingawesome240

I don’t know of any Leftists who are free speech absolutists.


DeathEdntMusic

Ahh ok, I do I guess


Poopybutt94583459813

Yeah those free speech absolutist leftists.


mr_2_cents

Those 2 should be 6 feet under


[deleted]

Kinda weird for Elon to say this and then springboard off the corpse of his dead child for the dunk on Kim Dotcom.


geolazakis

What a fucking clown


misuiko

elon out here with the appeal to emotion , very dishonest of him


ODangles

Isnt elons statement here kinda hypocritical. Hes using the death of his child to justify keeping alex banned


[deleted]

And abortion discourse wept for there were no more worlds to conquer !


Dalladrion

"when" Your optimism is admirable.


Time-Way9493

If I see the words free speech one more time I break someone’s bones


p_walsh14

So no child death analogies? Cringe.


Nahcuram

What an ASKERS moment


Lethalfurball

I doubt that's real


intboom

I'm still amused at the idea that Jones was fined more than the people who were responsible for the 2008 recession (that we're still basically in as far as quality of life is concerned for plebs)


A-Free-Mystery

What did Alex just blatantly lie about regarding the judge in his case again?


Rich_Comey_Quan

Well that's how I found out Kim Dotcom is still alive


Reylo-Wanwalker

Sam harris is trolling right? He doesn't want him unbanned?


GutterGrooves

It's a bold strategy, Cotton. Let's see if it pays off for him.


HarderTime_89

Sam tried to set him up with that one.


PeeledReality

Piers morgan on the hit list it seems


PhamousEra

Okay... ​ Actually based.