Censorship and the elites and the rest of us. What is your take on this?

[againstthegrain]

"They were not traitors to our union , they were Confederates , We weren't united yet." How does that statement go unchallenged for 2 hours?


What the AF??? Better check your facts.

 

[Pepper]

History shouldn't be erased, @rgp. It should be in a museum, of course, it's rightful place, not "in your face the hell with you black people" public square, as if they weren't the victims of the "Confederacy" because they were, and to some folks still are. No place in your face, losers.

 

[againstthegrain]

The history doesn't get erased just the memorials to traitors.

 

[Pepper]

I basically agree, we can always add a footnote to history but we should never attempt to erase it or destroy the monuments that were erected by previous generations.

Let people have the symbols of the past that were important to their parents and grandparents while making room for the monuments that are important for today’s generation.

Who said, destroy. What about the children or grandchildren of slaves? You don't care about them? Do you?

Like if Germany built statues for Hitler. I don't think I'd like that one bit. Nor would I ignore it. Germany too intelligent, too bent on remorse, too wanting to make amends. Not our South, no sir, at least many parts of it.

 

[Pepper]

I don't believe it should be altered either. A fact is a fact and we learn from them.

Learn from it in museums and books, not in your black neighbor's face.

 

[Aunt Bea]

"They were not traitors to our union , they were Confederates , We weren't united yet." How does that statement go unchallenged for 2 hours?


What the AF??? Better check your facts.

At the time secession from the union was not treason.

The Civil War started over states rights, political overreach, money, power, etc…

After the civil war laws were written to create an unbreakable iron union that did not allow states to leave the union.

 

[againstthegrain]

At the time secession from the union was not treason.

Bull schit.

The Confederates were paroled en masse and Jefferson Davis pardoned.


"The U.S. Constitution defines treason as levying war against the government and aiding and abetting its enemies. By that definition, every Confederate soldier in the Civil War -- as well as every political leader --was a traitor"

 

[Aunt Bea]

Bull schit.

The Confederates were paroled en masse and Jefferson pardoned.


"The U.S. Constitution defines treason as levying war against the government and aiding and abetting its enemies. By that definition, every Confederate soldier in the Civil War -- as well as every political leader --was a traitor"

After the southern states left the union one could argue that they were no longer United States citizens and could not be tried for acts of treason against the United States.

In any case you are entitled to your opinion even if I’m not entitled to mine.

 

[againstthegrain]

After the southern states left the union one could argue that they were no longer United States citizens and could not be tried for acts of treason against the United States.

In any case you are entitled to your opinion even if I’m not entitled to mine.

You can have all the opinions you want, but not your own set of facts.

Wiki - "After two years of imprisonment, Davis was released at Richmond on May 13, 1867, on bail of $100,000 (~$1.79 million in 2023), which was posted by prominent citizens including Horace Greeley, Cornelius Vanderbilt and Gerrit Smith.[291] Davis and Varina went to Montreal, Quebec, to join their children who had been sent there while he was in prison, and they moved to Lennoxville, Quebec.[292] Davis remained under indictment until after Johnson's proclamation on Christmas 1868 granting amnesty and pardon to all participants in the rebellion.[293] Davis's case never went to trial. In February 1869, Attorney General William Evarts informed the court that the federal government declared it was no longer prosecuting the charges against him.[294]"

 

[Pepper]

You can have all the opinions you want, but not your own set of facts.

QFT as Shalimar would say....

 

[ChiroDoc]

...
The Confederates were paroled en masse and Jefferson pardoned.
...

Jefferson Davis was imprisoned for two years following the war. His incarceration was initially in a dungeon in chains, although the severity of his treatment was gradually relaxed. But it wasn't until President Johnson's Christmas proclamation of 1868 --3-1/2 years after the war-- that granted amnesty and pardon to all participants in the Confederacy. He was never tried nor convicted of treason.

At Lee's surrender to Grant at Appomattox, the Confederate soldiers were pardoned, but they had to surrender their weapons, artillery and public property. The Confederate officers were permitted to keep their sidearms and horses.

Davis outlived them all, dying in 1889, aged 81.

 

[KSav]

Bull schit.

The Confederates were paroled en masse and Jefferson Davis pardoned.


"The U.S. Constitution defines treason as levying war against the government and aiding and abetting its enemies. By that definition, every Confederate soldier in the Civil War -- as well as every political leader --was a traitor"

That's one person's opinion. Here is the source of that quote, for others here: https://www.psu.edu/news/research/s...-war-northerners-reconciled-treason-leniency/

 

[papa tiger]

T

Recently, there has been violence committed in a country now on fire in many ways. Instead of listening and helping a wounded nation to heal, laws are being drawn up to censor anyone who complains with arrest, fines and even jail time. This goes for online sharing as well and even reposts on places like social media facebook or twitter/X. This is extreme. Why is it happening? Where is it going? How will it end? Is it Orwellian? That is my guess. The billionaire elites have priorities. Preserve the status quo unless it benefits them to change.

I wonder if it's all happening because we were discouraged/forbidden to discuss anything important in the first place? People don't talk to each enough anymore.

"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable."

How do you feel about censorship and where it is going? What are your thoughts on this??

This isn’t a wounded nation, it is a nation full of b.s. and screw the common folk. They will let you if you talk crap all the time.

they cleverly use the Free Speech crap to talk the talk but not walk the decent walk always.
It’s Easy to under stand stupid and stupider and what is carries with that load of crap
__________
lary the bird U are (X’d) out of here.

 

[January]

I am Ok with some level of censorship - I dont think things like child porn, hate speech online bullying should be allowed t o spread freely - so that is censorship on what can be said and written

I am also OK with statures being removed from public places, places re-named etc - that is not censorship, people can still talk about the things/people/events and see them in museums and suchlike - but the people are no longer honoured.

Like Rolf Harris, for example (to use a non political example) - I can talk about him, I can play his music etc - but places that had his paintings on display or plaques honouring him can choose to remove them.

 

[againstthegrain]

That's one person's opinion. Here is the source of that quote, for others here: https://www.psu.edu/news/research/s...-war-northerners-reconciled-treason-leniency/

Actually it was the opinion of the US government as well, including the House of Representatives and Attorney General, at the time, which led to the indictment of J Davis, his subsequent pardon, and the granting of amnesty to the rest of the traitors.

 

[VaughanJB]

Canada has no free speech.

That's a stretch. One incident like this does not dress everyone in the same clothes. Has Peterson gotten over his drug problem yet?

You know, it's hilarious to me that someone will spend their entire existence being controversial, and pushing the limits, but as soon as they reach one they moan and complain.

I have yet to see one U.S. media outlet that is not biased. I can't speak for the news media in other countries.

There are NO truly unbiased media. None. Be it left or right, news today is primarily for entertainment, be it eyes on the screen or clicks. This includes the so called "alternative media".

"How do you feel about censorship and where it is going? What are your thoughts on this??"

My thoughts: you have to look at what kids from 12 to 20-something are doing, and how they're responding to what's going on in their worlds. Internet access is a major part of that. It exposes them to what's going on in the world at large, and literally connects them to it. They equate internet exposure with actual experience, and that's not entirely unreasonable. And in that way, a lot of them experience a lot more than most adults do.

True -but that's just brought up a larger problem. That is, what is real and what is not, what is true and not? There is a severe lack of discernment, and it seems as though "if it's on the internet it must be true" going on. That's the real danger.

Where censorship is ultimately going depends on them, imo. These kids thrive on information, and have done basically all their lives. They feel entitled to it. And I agree, they are. I doubt they're going to tolerate being robbed of it by any means.

I agree with this. We're a lot of old people here, and we won't be around in 30 years to see the ultimate outcome. At some point the future lies in the hands of the young to make it as they see fit. We've had our chance, and this is where it led.

I am Ok with some level of censorship - I dont think things like child porn, hate speech online bullying should be allowed t o spread freely - so that is censorship on what can be said and written

I am also OK with statures being removed from public places, places re-named etc - that is not censorship, people can still talk about the things/people/events and see them in museums and suchlike - but the people are no longer honoured.

Like Rolf Harris, for example (to use a non political example) - I can talk about him, I can play his music etc - but places that had his paintings on display or plaques honouring him can choose to remove them.

You know, too often I hear about "censorship" when in reality it's just someone saying/doing something you don't happen to like.

There has to be limits I'm afraid. Why? Because of extremists on both sides.

 

[chic]

That's a stretch. One incident like this does not dress everyone in the same clothes. Has Peterson gotten over his drug problem yet?

You know, it's hilarious to me that someone will spend their entire existence being controversial, and pushing the limits, but as soon as they reach one they moan and complain.


There are NO truly unbiased media. None. Be it left or right, news today is primarily for entertainment, be it eyes on the screen or clicks. This includes the so called "alternative media".



True -but that's just brought up a larger problem. That is, what is real and what is not, what is true and not? There is a severe lack of discernment, and it seems as though "if it's on the internet it must be true" going on. That's the real danger.



I agree with this. We're a lot of old people here, and we won't be around in 30 years to see the ultimate outcome. At some point the future lies in the hands of the young to make it as they see fit. We've had our chance, and this is where it led.


You know, too often I hear about "censorship" when in reality it's just someone saying/doing something you don't happen to like.

There has to be limits I'm afraid. Why? Because of extremists on both sides.

Not true. They can shut you down and eliminate all you've said. In some countries of the world, since this is a global problem, they are threatening arrest of people making videos of violence or sharing those already made. Some want to hold Elon Musk responsible because he owns Twitter/X which is a free speech platform. I think they will have trouble with him but you never know. People don't seem to care about freedom of speech as they once did.

 

[VaughanJB]

Not true. They can shut you down and eliminate all you've said. In some countries of the world, since this is a global problem, they are threatening arrest of people making videos of violence or sharing those already made. Some want to hold Elon Musk responsible because he owns Twitter/X which is a free speech platform. I think they will have trouble with him but you never know. People don't seem to care about freedom of speech as they once did.

Twitter/X is NOT a free speech platform. A good number of people are banned from it, and frankly since Musk took over it's become a vacuous hole of nothing. It's a platform where you have to pay to have your "free speech" in one way or another. IMO.

One problem you face is that "free speech" can't be thought of globally. Some places have more, or less "free speech". It's a mistake to assume people want the same thing. The easiest topic is film (movies). I well remember the late 70's where a whole range of movies were released on VHS in the UK. These were deemed bad, and there were protests to get them banned (these were largely horror movies, not pornographic in nature). People went to jail for selling a horror movie!

Ultimately, these films were censored in the UK, as was enshrined in law. American ideas and concepts are not accepted throughout the world.

 

[Murrmurr]

Twitter/X is NOT a free speech platform. A good number of people are banned from it, and frankly since Musk took over it's become a vacuous hole of nothing. It's a platform where you have to pay to have your "free speech" in one way or another. IMO.

One problem you face is that "free speech" can't be thought of globally. Some places have more, or less "free speech". It's a mistake to assume people want the same thing. The easiest topic is film (movies). I well remember the late 70's where a whole range of movies were released on VHS in the UK. These were deemed bad, and there were protests to get them banned (these were largely horror movies, not pornographic in nature). People went to jail for selling a horror movie!

Ultimately, these films were censored in the UK, as was enshrined in law. American ideas and concepts are not accepted throughout the world.

In Musk's own words, Twitter is a free speech platform. He acknowledges that free speech has never meant free to cause harm to others, and normal civilized people know what that includes. He also acknowledges that free speech has never meant free to violate laws, and normal civilized people know that includes publishing and peddling pornography.

The right to free speech does not entitle people to be uncivilized, violent, criminal, and free from the responsibilities of being a member of a civilized society. People who don't accept or understand that face consequences.

 

[Murrmurr]

There are NO truly unbiased media. None. Be it left or right, news today is primarily for entertainment, be it eyes on the screen or clicks. This includes the so called "alternative media".

That simply isn't true. There ARE unbiased free-lance journalists. Dozens of them. And I'd estimate that at least 75% of them go to where the thing they want to report on is happening so you can see it with your own eyes. They aren't on national TV, you have to look for them. But they're out there.

it seems as though "if it's on the internet it must be true" going on. That's the real danger.

Only old people say that.

There has to be limits I'm afraid.

There ARE limits to free speech....mentioned in another comment.

 

[VaughanJB]

In Musk's own words, Twitter is a free speech platform. He acknowledges that free speech has never meant free to cause harm to others, and normal civilized people know what that includes. He also acknowledges that free speech has never meant free to violate laws, and normal civilized people know that includes publishing and peddling pornography.

The right to free speech does not entitle people to be uncivilized, violent, criminal, and free from the responsibilities of being a member of a civilized society. People who don't accept or understand that face consequences.

Honestly, I don't much care what Musk says. However, your post illustrates that "free speech" clearly has its limits, which is realistic and fair. Ultimately, Twitter is a commercial platform that exists to generate money. That's about it really. It's not a bastion of democracy and/or free speech.

It's an interesting conundrum - in order to have free speech, you need to have methods to police it; you have to have consequences for misusing it. Which means we must surveil. Free speech is maintained through being ever vigilant, and using the tools at our disposal to ensure it's not misused.

 

[VaughanJB]

That simply isn't true. There ARE unbiased free-lance journalists. Dozens of them. And I'd estimate that at least 75% of them go to where the thing they want to report on is happening so you can see it with your own eyes. They aren't on national TV, you have to look for them. But they're out there.

Individual journalists? Perhaps. But media providers? No. Personally experiencing something guarantees nothing once it's been through editorial reviews and the like. Personally, I find national TV to be as reliable as so called alternative media. I find people tend to like whatever reinforces their already held belief.

Only old people say that.

I wish this were true, but it's not. Not everyone that was rioting was an oldster. As people congregate in the echo chamber of their choice, an increasing amount of lies become truth. Take the recent murder of three children, and those who initially accused a migrant of this heinous act. Far too few people allow an element of doubt. Instead they're driven by emotion. IMO.

 

[Murrmurr]

@VaughanJB

"I wish this were true, but it's not. Not everyone that was rioting was an oldster. As people congregate in the echo chamber of their choice, an increasing amount of lies become truth. Take the recent murder of three children, and those who initially accused a migrant of this heinous act. Far too few people allow an element of doubt. Instead they're driven by emotion. IMO."

Which riot?

You have to admit that mainstream media has incited riots and protests. And just off the top of my head, science publications and university professors have as well. It is incredible how many riots and violent protests have been fueled by rumors, misunderstandings, and lack of information, but I don't hold the internet entirely responsible for that. IMO this is people reacting before they're fully informed and reacting emotionally rather than intelligently and logically. Laziness is a big part of that.

 

[VaughanJB]

@VaughanJB

"I wish this were true, but it's not. Not everyone that was rioting was an oldster. As people congregate in the echo chamber of their choice, an increasing amount of lies become truth. Take the recent murder of three children, and those who initially accused a migrant of this heinous act. Far too few people allow an element of doubt. Instead they're driven by emotion. IMO."

Which riot?

You have to admit that mainstream media has incited riots and protests. And just off the top of my head, science publications and university professors have as well. It is incredible how many riots and violent protests have been fueled by rumors, misunderstandings, and lack of information, but I don't hold the internet entirely responsible for that. IMO this is people reacting before they're fully informed and reacting emotionally rather than intelligently and logically. Laziness is a big part of that.

Recent UK riots.

The internet, and everything is brings, is a prime cause of accelerated disenchantment, and the dissemination of misinformation. When people are reacting to half-assed, if not incorrect, information, then it's not purely emotional, it's intellectual.

The internet has brought about huge change in our societies.

The internet allows minorities to act as though they're majorities. As soon as you find your place of belonging, it feels more of a "norm". There is nothing inherently wrong with the internet, but it's showing the cracks in our societies in stark relief. Far too many people don't think things through, they simply go with emotion.

 

[dilettante]

This man connects the dots between censorship and the current violence in the UK. People were muzzled so the neoliberals could pave over society. It doesn't help that they promote a philosophy of self-denigration and nihilism. Eventually pressure built up until pushback finally burst through.