Apparently there’s an issue with some instances banning users for criticizing authoritarian governments. Is lemmy.world a safe place to criticize governments?

  • DudePluto@lemmy.world
    3·
    1 year ago

    Difference between enforcing democratically accepted ideology and enforcing that which is not. You mentioned that you thought speech that questions natural rights should not be given a platform. I pointed out that you’re applying an ill-defined and subjective term, and so it’s just not wise

    • GarbageShootAlt@lemmygrad.ml
      6·
      1 year ago

      Please read what someone writes a little more carefully before trying to do gotchas. I said:

      Of course, my answer is that some speech is worth protecting and some is not and questions of natural rights have nothing to do with that,

      i.e. natural rights are not relevant to useful questions about moderation. I only use the term to call the concept irrelevant. Then I said:

      so the chauvinistic redditors posting social credit score memes that were tired years ago and thoroughly debunked don’t need a platform

      My complaint is letting people post low-effort* memes and misinformation isn’t worthwhile, and if your concept of “Free Speech” conflicts with that, then that concept should be replaced by something better because you’re just caping for garbage.

      *please don’t get debate club about this term, it’s a waste of time. Shit that is just a jpeg copied and reproduced endlessly so you can get updoots to the left because winnie the pooh is evil is low-effort. If someone does their own bespoke photoshop of the bear copulating with a tank, it is not low-effort, though you should ban that person for other reasons (obscenity, etc.)