Speech is equivalent to violence for most members of the Biden camp, the Dems long term project will be to abolish 1A and write European style restrictions on speech into law.
Yup but here is another thing.
The speech equivalent to violence is only the speech they object to.
The SPLC went after MRAs putting them on "hate watch" (and later classifying them as male supremacists) for merely expressing disapproval of men sacrificing their lives for women
www.splcenter.org
Meanwhile radfemhub which had posts by women in daycare positions and where there were posts about abusing male babies and children wasn't at all brought up or addressed by the SPLC and radfemhub users sent gifts to the SPLC for targeting MRAs.
The story AVfM broke about the Radfem Hub is the most read material on this site. And now the story returns, with Fidelbogen at the helm in concert with the illustrious Agent Orange. Luuuucy! You g…
avoiceformen.com
To a large extent Big Tech ToS already enforces such a rule set - but very enterprising individuals can still dodge that by building their own things, for now...
This whole "build your own platform", "I believe in free speech but there isn't such a thing as free speech without consequences." bullshit is just obfuscation and misdirection.
A king that was going to chop off someone's head for blaspheming him could say the same thing.
"You have a right to free speech but not a right to consequences from that speech, and you have to accept the punishment that has resulted as a consequence of your hateful language."
And companies like reddit and twitter are hiding behind their content policies about being "free speech sites and places for open expression of ideas" while selectively censoring and banning communities that they don't like:
replacement of mods in r/the_donald and eventual banning, "fact checking" Trump's tweets for example;
in addition to selective promotion of left leaning news on their frontpage (have you seen what the stories pinned on reddit's frontpage and twitter's trending panel are usually about? All anti trump, pro liberal policies, immigration, pro female, stirring up this idea there's a war on women because women can't get taxpayer funded abortions and contraceptive coverage)
Does he even live in the us?
He apparently voted in the US 2020 Presidential election so I would assume he lives in the United States and is a citizen of the United States currently.
The law does not permit people who don't live in the United States and who are not citizens to vote with maybe the exception of people in the US armed forces, to my knowledge.
From his previous avi with the University of Oxford logo I assumed he lived in the UK but traveled to and from the UK and US. Maybe that changed in the last few months idk.
The main goal is to make Trumpian populist politics impossible in the future by denying Trump's base to even talk about the things that concern them. Incels and the manosphere, are grouped into that base. Whether it's true or not doesn't matter, in the Schmittian sense they have defined us to be their enemy.
Oh I know that very well.
And they are so hell bent on forcing everyone into their narrative that they'll claim that ethnic incels complaining about women's selective dating preferences are racist far right extremists allied with the alt-right.
Imo this removal for any nuance and the two-dimensional "good guys versus bad guys narrative" also explains their insistence that people can no longer afford to say they are apolitical and how apolitical people are immediately labeled far right nazis or at least "suspected" extremists by the media.
I have a feeling that some of the subs like r/mgtow due to a lot (but not all) members of their sub's support for the rhetoric and policies of Donald Trump increased reddit trying to target that sub for quarantining and eventual banning.
reason.com
