Angela Merkel attacks Twitter over Trump ban

[pamak]

The Germans courts are showing the same wisdom once available in US courts and the public. But now the rioters and the media have shut down opinions unacceptable to the MSM and Big Tech in the US. Such irony would once never had been thought possible.

The German courts still do not let people fly nazi flags in political demonstrations. There is no doubt that the US system as it is, offers stronger protections of freedom of speech. But one should be able to question if the current interpretations of the first amendment (with respect to freedom of speech) should be reevaluated. And this includes the limits of hate speech (and in Germany it is illegal to deny the holocaust) or the requirements that make a speech illegal because it incites violence (which will be relevant if speakers like Giuliani and other political figures (including Trump) are criminally charged.

 

[Mr Person]

So... this probably won't affect any of your arguments but just to clarify ... Twitter is NOT a private company ... It's a public company with publicly traded stock and corresponding additional requirements imposed by the government (most of which are related to publishing finances).

Whether we're talking about a company with a sole founder-owner, or a publicly traded company with lots of shareholders, "private" in this context means not a state actor, aka, not government.

 

[Jonsa]

For capitalists many trumpists don't seem to understand some pretty basic facts about the marketplace/

 

[Fred C Dobbs II]

This is a subject where the rubber meets the road in terms of free market ideology and the need to regulate industry.

But this isn't a free market. They've formed a monopoly. something many power hungry people would envy.

 

[Fred C Dobbs II]

What the **** are you babbling about? You made a moronic remark, as usual, about the leftists destroying small business, not about riots.

Who do you think was destroying small businesses over the past several years, burning and looting shops, making the streets unsafe? Do you really believe they were Republicans?

And when the usual shopping areas are unsafe, apart from the major chain stores, the people go online. These guys get richer due to these riots while the poor, working poor, and middle class suffer. It's leftists creating this chaos and suffering and no one else.

 

[Fred C Dobbs II]

For capitalists many trumpists don't seem to understand some pretty basic facts about the marketplace/

Who creates the marketplace?

 

[eohrnberger]

So... this probably won't affect any of your arguments but just to clarify ... Twitter is NOT a private company ... It's a public company with publicly traded stock and corresponding additional requirements imposed by the government (most of which are related to publishing finances).

An argument that these private companies are State actors.

Section 230 is the carrot, and there’s also a stick: Congressional Democrats have repeatedly made explicit threats to social-media giants if they failed to censor speech those lawmakers disfavored. In April 2019, Louisiana Rep. Cedric Richmond warned Facebook and Google that they had “better” restrict what he and his colleagues saw as harmful content or face regulation: “We’re going to make it swift, we’re going to make it strong, and we’re going to hold them very accountable.” New York Rep. Jerrold Nadler added: “Let’s see what happens by just pressuring them.”

Either Section 230 or congressional pressure alone might be sufficient to create state action. The combination surely is. Suppose a Republican Congress enacted a statute giving legal immunity to any private party that obstructs access to abortion clinics. Suppose further tat Republican congressmen explicitly threatened private companies with punitive laws if they fail to act against abortion clinics. If those companies did as Congress demands, then got an attaboy from lawmakers, progressives would see the constitutional problem.

Save the Constitution From Big Tech
Congressional threats and inducements make Twitter and Facebook censorship a free-speech violation.

Opinion | Save the Constitution From Big Tech

Congressional threats and inducements make Twitter and Facebook censorship a free-speech violation.

www.wsj.com

 

[Jonsa]

Who creates the marketplace?

nobody. its the result of human demands and needs, regulated to greater or lesser extent by government supplemented by the dynamics of market forces. (self regulation of market participants to similar extent)

 

[Jonsa]

Who do you think was destroying small businesses over the past several years, burning and looting shops, making the streets unsafe? Do you really believe they were Republicans?

And when the usual shopping areas are unsafe, apart from the major chain stores, the people go online. These guys get richer due to these riots while the poor, working poor, and middle class suffer. It's leftists creating this chaos and suffering and no one else.

Yep which explains why the rightists attacked the Capitol, tried to overturn a certified election based on pure trumpian bullshit and crapped in the halls of congress.

those dems are to blame for all the chaos and suffering allright. And I suspect they are going to be responsible for a lot more of those attackers chaos and suffering in the very near future.

 

[Fred C Dobbs II]

nobody. its the result of human demands and needs, regulated to greater or lesser extent by government supplemented by the dynamics of market forces. (self regulation of market participants to similar extent)

Nobody creates a marketplace and yet its a result of demands and needs? And there can be no marketplace without government regulations on this non creation?

NDP supporter?

 

[Jonsa]

Nobody creates a marketplace and yet its a result of demands and needs? And there can be no marketplace without government regulations on this non creation?

NDP supporter?

No one person creates a marketplace. It takes a minimum of two. And surely as a capitalist you understand the concept of supply and demand? It started when the first two wandering clans met and one liked the beads on the others and the beaded ones really wanted that buffalo skin.

Can't think of any market that is not effected by some government regulation even if that regulation is merely an outright legal ban. Npt that it stops those markets from existing. (see supply and demand)

 

[mrdeltoid]

In America, Twitter banned Trump.

In America, he first amendment right to free speech only applies to government, aka, state actors. Twitter banning Trump has absolutely nothing to do with "the fundamental right to free speech" because twitter is not a state actor.

Therefore, Twitter did not violate the fundamental right to free speech by banning Trump, and nothing about the way Germany likes to do things changes that.

Germany has seen what happens when giant businesses and the state are best buds. When the 3 biggest social media platforms conspire to sway an election by silencing a party ( they claimed there was no investigation underway into Hunter Biden, when there was), there are 1st amendment implications. They don’t need to be state actors to violate rights. The Democrat party now controls all 3 branches of government, the education system, MSM, Hollywood, and social media. They will soon control healthcare. They played the long game. I don’t see them ever loosing power again. This may be the beginning of a regime that will hold power for decades, or until we are liberated.

 

[Fred C Dobbs II]

The German courts still do not let people fly nazi flags in political demonstrations.

Unless there is a reason, as in a reenactment. Even the KKK and that ridiculous Church group was allowed. Now, in the US. you can get fired from your job for saying 'all lives matter'. That's sick.

There is no doubt that the US system as it is, offers stronger protections of freedom of speech.

That is absolutely untrue, as shown in the example above.

But one should be able to question if the current interpretations of the first amendment (with respect to freedom of speech) should be reevaluated.

It has already been 'reevaluated' and if the right people gain power you can get arrested for even suggesting such a thing.

And this includes the limits of hate speech (and in Germany it is illegal to deny the holocaust) or the requirements that make a speech illegal because it incites violence (which will be relevant if speakers like Giuliani and other political figures (including Trump) are criminally charged.

Sure. The power of the left, as is usual. is to deny the rights of your political enemies, and that's what we're seeing here. The fever has gripped a formally free country and the consequences of this, as in the past, will be brutal.

 

[pamak]

Unless there is a reason, as in a reenactment. Even the KKK and that ridiculous Church group was allowed. Now, in the US. you can get fired from your job for saying 'all lives matter'. That's sick.

We already talked about it, and since reenactment is irrelevant to what we discuss, so there is no reason to repeat the same thing. I also thought that you had no problem with the economic idea of "at will" employment where they can find you for any reason, including for trying to organize a union.

That is absolutely untrue, as shown in the example above.

Sorry, but as long as in the US people can fly a nazi flag without the restrictions you see i Germany, the example supports my point.

It has already been 'reevaluated' and if the right people gain power you can get arrested for even suggesting such a thing.

Apparently, you think that you have the power to tell the crrent generations what has been already reevaluated. Guess what! You cannot make such decisions.

Sure. The power of the left, as is usual. is to deny the rights of your political enemies, and that's what we're seeing here. The fever has gripped a formally free country and the consequences of this, as in the past, will be brutal.

Well, I thought you had no problem with the German approach of making it illegal to fly nazi flags in political demonstrations. So, apparently you are among those leftists who are okay with some restrictions of free speech.

 

[Fred C Dobbs II]

We already talked about it, and since reenactment is irrelevant to what we discuss, so there is no reason to repeat the same thing

Sorry, but as long as in the US people can fly a nazi flag without the restrictions you see i Germany, the example supports my point.

Apparently, you think that you have the power to tell the crrent generations what has been already reevaluated. Guess what! You cannot make such decisions.

Well, I thought you had no problem with the German approach of making it illegal to fly nazi flags in political demonstrations. So, apparently you are among those leftists who are okay with some restrictions of free speech.

There is a great deal more to freedom than flying a Nazi flag, which is now irrelevant to the conversation. And yes, i certainly can make the decision to teach anyone about historical facts. How would you intend to stop me?

People can fly any flag they want. I really don't care but I may, or may not, believe they're uneducated and stupid.

 

[pamak]

There is a great deal more to freedom than flying a Nazi flag, which is now irrelevant to the conversation. And yes, i certainly can make the decision to teach anyone about historical facts. How would you intend to stop me?

People can fly any flag they want. I really don't care but I may, or may not, believe they're uneducated and stupid.

Now flying a nazi flag is irrelevant to the conversation we have about the freedom of speech?

Okay, let's make it illegal in the US to fly the Confederate flag too in any political demostration...if flying flags is irrlevant to the freedom of speech and there is so much more to it, LOLOL

The real point is that you cannot stop people who may want to reevaluate the iinterpretations of the first amendment.

Again, if you want people to fly whatever flag they want, do not try to make the claim that my example actually contradicts my original point that there is a stronger protection of freedom of speech in the US than in Germany.

 

[Fred C Dobbs II]

Now flying a nazi flag is irrelevant to the conversation we have about the freedom of speech?

Okay, let's make it illegal in the US to fly the Confederate flag too in any political demostration...if flying flags is irrlevant to the freedom of speech and there is so much more to it, LOLOL

The real point is that you cannot stop people who may want to reevaluate the iinterpretations of the first amendment.

We must be having a communication problem. Or is English not your first language. I think we've exhausted any possible further discussions re nazi flags.

 

[pamak]

We must be having a communication problem. Or is English not your first language. I think we've exhausted any possible further discussions re nazi flags.

We do have a communication problem and it is either because you are not thinking reasonably or because you have failed to follow the conversation in this thread and you jumped in to make comments without reading the previous posts in this thread. The fact that we have communicated without problem very often in the recent past shows that my English is good enough to have a conversation with you.

 

[Fred C Dobbs II]

We do have a communication problem and it is either because you are not thinking reasonably or because you have failed to follow the conversation in this thread and you jumped in to make comments without reading the previous posts in this thread. The fact that we have communicated without problem very often in the recent past shows that my English is good enough to have a conversation with you.

Yes, your English is very good.

 

[Sandokan]

World Leaders Denounce Big Tech Censorship of President Donald Trump

World Leaders Denounce Big Tech Censorship of President Donald Trump (theepochtimes.com)

BY VICTORIA KELLY-CLARK

January 12, 2021 Updated: January 12, 2021

Political elites worldwide have criticized big tech companies for banning President Donald Trump from their social media platforms.

At present, the president has been banned from Twitter, Facebook, Pinterest, Snapchat, Reddit, and Instagram.

Twitter permanently removed Trump’s account, saying that his recent posts were in violation of the “Glorification of Violence Policy.”

German Chancellor Angela Merkel called Twitter’s ban on Trump “problematic,” and said that freedom of opinion is an essential right of “elementary significance,” her spokesperson, Steffen Siebert, said on Jan 11.

“This fundamental right can be intervened in, but according to the law and within the framework defined by legislators—not according to a decision by the management of social media platforms,” Siebert said.

“Seen from this angle, the chancellor considers it problematic that the accounts of the U.S. president have now been permanently blocked,” he said.

Members of the French government agreed.

Clement Beaune, the junior minister for European Union affairs, said he was “shocked” a private company made this kind of decision.
Click link above for full article.

Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, said that, “A lot of people are going to be super unhappy with West Coast high tech as the de facto arbiter of free speech.” Big tech is banning speech it hates. A dictator cannot be censored, since he is the one doing the censoring.

 

[joko104]

Australia's PM has condemned Twitter's ban of Trump

Australia's acting PM says Capitol attack 'unfortunate' and condemns Twitter 'censorship' of Trump

Michael McCormack attempts to draw comparisons between deadly storming of building and last year’s Black Lives Matter protests

www.theguardian.com

 

[joko104]

India condemns Twitter ban on Trump

'Don't want Twitter to ban anyone': Tejasvi Surya on action against Trump

Shiv Sena leader Priyanka Chaturvedi too slammed Twitter for its sudden 'holier-than-thou' stance.

www.hindustantimes.com

 

[joko104]

A ‘bad sign’: World leaders and officials blast Twitter Trump ban

Allies and critics of the US president slam Twitter’s move to ban him from its platform, citing freedom of speech.

www.aljazeera.com

The USA is becoming known throughout the world as the anti-free speech country. Rather than being the shining light on the hill the United States is becoming the medieval torture chamber in the Biden's basement.

We also read the Democratic Party and richest white men in the world declaring that any member of the opposition party that does not vote for how the state demands as a member of Congress also must be forcibly removed because to hell with voters.

Corporate-fascist authoritarianism came very fast to democratic Germany. Almost as fast as is happening now in the USA. The USA can no longer claim to be a free country with liberal ideals of guaranteed individual civil rights.

 

[Fred C Dobbs II]

Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, said that, “A lot of people are going to be super unhappy with West Coast high tech as the de facto arbiter of free speech.” Big tech is banning speech it hates. A dictator cannot be censored, since he is the one doing the censoring.

The Chinese are filling the finest Universities everywhere while much of the western youth are doing dope, destroying their freedoms, tearing down their democracy and winding up just a short distance away from where these censors have their multimillion dollar mansions. Who eventually profits? https://www.google.com/search?q=hom...X1On0KHW1EBpQQ_AUoAXoECAYQAw&biw=1344&bih=644

 

[Fred C Dobbs II]

India condemns Twitter ban on Trump

'Don't want Twitter to ban anyone': Tejasvi Surya on action against Trump

Shiv Sena leader Priyanka Chaturvedi too slammed Twitter for its sudden 'holier-than-thou' stance.

www.hindustantimes.com

Leaders around the world are saying much the same thing.

Was it Goebbels who said that something like if you repeat a lie big enough and often enough people will eventually believe it?