Denying your political opponents a platform to speak is Socialist fascism. Ya/Na?

Question

razelove · Accepted Answer

I say no simply because of the socialism part. It is fascist, but that doesn't necessarily have anything to do with socialism. The biggest failing to me is if conservatives truly feel silenced and like they need a platform... why not make one? Why wait for Trump to do it? It's not like it's news that google and facebook are willing to censor, they make a lot of money pandering to China's requests to do so in their country.

You start a social media site, simply do temp rather than perma-bans, and have a ToS that doesn't have subjective interpretations of violations. Start out cheap with a server that doesn't need to handle much bandwidth, if it grows, you get more investors, more servers, snowball from there.

That conservatives completely fail to consider that option because Parlor was taken off the apple store is just ridiculous to me. Having an iPhone is more important than having and expressing beliefs, it's that simple.

OlderAndWiser · Accepted Answer

It depends on whether you typically provide a forum to others for the expression of political opinions. The Democrat Party has no obligation to allow Republicans to speak at their convention. If you are a purportedly non-partisan platform like Facebook and Twitter but you block users based on their content, I wouldn't necessarily call it 'socialist fascism" but I would say that it is wrong.

myname604 · Accepted Answer

No!
Denying your opposition a platform is capitalist/communist.
Take for example the fact that in most "capitalist" or "communist" countries that it is illegal to be fascist or national socialist.

Both fascists and National Socialists sought to preserve their nations and people, to protect the sovereignty and freedom of their people from subversives who proved to be harmful and destructive to their people.

Then logically communists and capitalists internationalists should be banned. As their objectives are proven to be harmful and destructive internationalist forces.

So it becomes a question, do you want your culture, your people, your rights and your nation to be destroyed or preserved?

Breanna_nonbinary · Accepted Answer

It’s not socialism. It is fascist. But trump took down his blog because he wanted to. Facebook, Twitter, etc are all privately owned. They can do whatever the hell they want.
For example people think that they don’t have to wear a mask on a plane. They think they have the right to not wear a mask and they do. But the airlines aren’t owned by the government. They are private airlines and can set their own rules.
If someone comes to my house and I say they have to remove their shoes first or they can’t come in and they say it’s their right to wear shoes, then I have the right to not let them in.
It’s the same thing.

Celtero · Answer

It has nothing to do with socialism, but it is indeed fascist. Tech corporations have exposed themselves as the fascists they are in recent times. You get banned if you share factual information about covid or the election because it is wrongthink and goes against what the state wants you to say. Meanwhile, professional liar Fauci is constantly in your face talking to state-sponsored media personalities. Look at this dogshit being pushed under my featured tab on youtube, what the FUCK!

D_Bone_Steak · Answer

But muh private platform argument: If you start to edit posts based solely on ideology then you're acting as a publisher and no longer protected by Article 13... but yeah their getting away with just that.

It should be open and shut by simple logic. Despite a particular ideology not even being the most popular, it's the ideologies held by those in positions of power that's allowing certain things to get a free pass and a pat on the butt. Ideologies that get ingrained through education systems and jobs that usually require those education systems... those particular 'jobs' are the positions of power.

Kaneki05 · Answer

Depends on scale amount, simply banning one extremist is not. Now if they went ahead and started removing comments and deleting anyone who is ageist there position then yea. Also this would have mean to the one deleting them would have there own bias side. But most of the time it don't work that it's just a simple terms of service been broke and removed by the system or by a person who works there to take it down on orders of a code. Not on the orders of just his boss don't like this guy so get rid of him lol.

CentralPerk77 · Answer

Honestly, I think it’s not enough to call it that. It’s more accurate to say cancel culture socialized fascism. It’s the people who are judge and jurying. The unfortunate side effect really could lead to a 1984 big brother situation where society says every flaw of the human brain needs to uniformed and one could easily see thought rehabilitation facilities. This said should trump be banned for 2 years? Absolutely! I think all presidents should lose their first amendment rights and be required to say 100% true statements when speaking on any public platform and by extension anyone who he/she shared their thoughts with the same is applied. I don’t think the American people need 21,000 provable lies coming out of an American president. Unacceptable.

bulletbob555 · Answer

The way this question is stated it makes it a rhetorical question. A rhetorical question is a question that is asked in a way that when answered will have a ceartain response. Donald trumps problem isn't freedom of speech its not censorship of an opponent. It is in the way he was using social media to inflame others and that his previous statements led to civil unrest. We all have freedom of speech we don't have freedom to say things that causes harm to others. The example always given is freedom of speech doesn't give us the right to yell fire in a crowded movie theater if there isn't a fire. Because it could harm people try to escape a non existent fire

JediSisko · Answer

Under definitions of the words it is neither socialism nor fascism. Socialism is based that everything is owned by everyone, the simplest breakdown. Fascism is a where a small group or people or and individual takes control of everything, usually to try to circumvent something. Again it is simplistic definition of it. Twitter and Facebook don’t fit under those since they are private companies, not ideology that govern people’s lives.

DaveToo · Answer

Socialism and Fascism are two totally different political philosophies. Socialism holds that all of the resources of a country should be shared equally with the entire population. Fascism is exactly the opposite, those who hold to fascism believe that only a certain class of people should divide the spoils.

In NAZI Germany the entire war was to gain dominion over other countries, take their riches and hide them away until the end of the war so they could divide those riches among the elite.

So to answer your question, in a Democracy or a Republic, both of which apply to this country, we have what's called the first amendment which gives everyone the right to free speech. We may not always agree with some of someone else's commentary, but I will defend your right to say it.

Anonymous · Answer

Social media has community guidelines that you must abide by and doesn't have anything to do with rights. I've seen other videos of pranksters who do things like throw fake bombs or pull out fake guns at people and their videos get taken down and channels get a strike. Most of those are fake anyway! Even if they are fake and didn't mean to cause harm or panic, it is still wrong because it's how it comes across and others might see it and try it out themselves. Even if Trump didn't intend for his posts to cause harm, that's how it was perceived and action had to be taken. It may not be fair but life's not fair.

CrazyGirl2 · Answer

Yes, absolutely! True freedom of speech is the freedom to say unpopular things. Nobody needs the “RIGHT” to say things everyone agrees with. One only needs a protected right to say things that people DISAGREE with! However, these days, whenever someone writes an uncomfortable, or unpopular opinion, the knee jerk reaction seems to be to lobby to have that person thrown off the platform! That seems to me, to be the antithesis of freedom of speech!

loveslongnails · Answer

First of all (eyeroll), this "point" has absolutely NOTHING to do with Socialism. For fuck's sake, LEARN what Socialism is.

Second, there are rules that govern the arenas you speak in. If you violate those rules continuously, you should expect consequences. When you think that your freedom to speak should include outright lies, false accusations, incitement, slander, libel, and sedition, THEN you have Fascism. It's one thing to offer a difference of opinion, but quite another to intentionally misinform, mislead and incite, especially after your opinions are all proven to be false and only lead to division.

jshm2 · Answer

Don't be silly.

All opinions are not equal. Nor can you have dangerous cultist bigots like Trump on equal footing with real politicians.

It's like putting a fox in the chicken coup because you feel sorry for the fox. Facebook, Twitter and others are right to ban Trump. The public need protected from such dangerous people.

Agape93 · Answer

Nope  Side note, Trump was banned from certain platforms because of his routine rule breaking. He has other options like parlor, or his own blog that he himself took down.

Leavesbound · Answer

There is a difference between expressing an opinion and inciting an insurrection. The first is a right and the second is treason and punishable by prison or death.

Exterminatore · Answer

It’s certainly a tactic fascists would be likely to use. I do not consider the left wingers in America to be fascists. That’s giving fascists a bad name. I consider them to be bolsheviks.

I also do not consider fascism to be left wing but rather right wing. While it is true that most if not all fascist governments that have existed were in fact socialist economically, everything else about them was right wing.

andreasderjuengere · Answer

No - it's just practical consideration.
The asshole in question can simply spread his bullshit somewhere else.
If anyone cares to listen to it, these 'anyones' can join to that other place.
It can be as simple as a parking lot of a garden shop... just saying.

exitseven · Answer

Unfortunately this is pretty much what we have in this country. My wife works in healthcare and treats mostly the elderly. She says that a great percentage of her elderly patients knew nothing about the Hunter Biden corruption scandal because they only watch network news. Most said they would have voted for Trump if they knew.

RealMarek · Answer

Socialism and fascism are differing forms of government. Restricting speech and denying employment due to political speech, whether done by the government directly or through monopolistic practices of companies cooperating with a political faction, is authoritarianism.

PeterCharie1991 · Answer

Not just political fascism but fascism in any way any country is denied or taken away cos of fear and power, also cos certain people certain political parties governments dont want we the people to hear and know the truth

BCA6010 · Answer

It can be, but doesn't have to be. Censorship and deplatforming are authoritarian measures taken by malevolent and/or paranoid factions, not inherently indicative of socialism and/or fascism.

InfobotLives · Answer

Drumpf is old news, his opinions don't matter anymore.

The_Other · Answer

Seems like many have forgotten what all these *isms actually mean.

Nikolai2004 · Answer

I use 4chan anyway and his son does post from his side. Amerika is fucked and so we'll be too if we don't revolt soon enough.

DarcRefractions · Answer

no its a free market and it's capitalism. go make your own. pick yourself up by your bootstraps. and don't use google amazon or apple.

Gray-Wisp · Answer

Denying freedom of speech doesn't make someone a socialist or a fascist. It would make them an authoritarian. There are three main axes which are culture, social, and economic. This would mean you are socially authoritarian.

Snakeyes7 · Answer

They have a right to speak their mind. No one is forcing you to listen to them nor will they punish you if you criticize them (or at least they shouldn’t).

NightHawk99 · Answer

Censorship is censorship. The only exception is when you are threatening violence and urging terror with the words you say. That's why Trump no longer has platforms that support him.

crazy8000 · Answer

Bad example. He has himself to blame with what he have done and appeared to possible do. Or do you want a new civil war on your hands with almost no rights and nothing works as it did or preferable?

Anonymous · Answer

Man t don't put Ivanka in the no. By the way it is against freedom of speech to not allow political parties to have a platform to speak. I am not in favor of missinformation though.

Anonymous · Answer

denying fascist like trump a platform is not fascism, it's protection against fascism. and private companies can remove anyone they want from their platforms. especially fascists like trump.

Anonymous · Answer

You don't seem to understand the definition of socialism and fascism. Fascism is a system of right wing control of the people. It has nothing to do with socialism.

Anonymous · Answer

She is mutha Fuckin Hot

cth96190 · Answer

The left wants to silence its opponents because the ideology of the left cannot survive a fact-based debate.

OddBeMe · Answer

Your vocabulary is very weak, but I’m not for censoring.

crmoore · Answer

I'd say it's fascistic, if not fascism (depends on how it's defined). But I don't see how it's socialistic.

LeftHappy · Answer

The real tragedy is, taxpayers pay for their data centers just like their Tv stations and they get rich and their only repayment is taxes as they conduct themselves like this and the tax paying public in none the wiser!

blondfrog · Answer

Yes it is but you do know Fox news has censorship as well. So by your own logic Republican's also use forms of fascisms.

Hispanic-Cool-Guy · Answer

No. You're not entitled to use any private website to spread your political messages if they don't desire you there.

Anonymous · Answer

It doesn't have to be socialist fascism; but it is fascism.

Sevenpointfive · Answer

did you see those nips?

JesseJayNeak · Answer

Yes, because you'd might be afraid of what your opponent has to say

Anonymous · Answer

Trump deserved to be banned from Facebook andTwitter

collie22 · Answer

disseminating miss information not a virtue

Joseph69 · Answer

The Nazis didn't believe in free speech either.

Anonymous · Answer

democrats>socialist fascist  always has been

jjj101010 · Answer

It sounds more like communism than socialism

Sabretooth · Answer

depends on the reasoning?

msc545 · Answer

The term "socialist fascism" is self contradictory

Andres77 · Answer

Pretty straightforward

Zygum · Answer

I avoid political comments on this forum

FýrdracaDócincel · Answer

It's American lol.

Denying your political opponents a platform to speak is Socialist fascism. Ya/Na?

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

Denying your political opponents a platform to speak is Socialist fascism. Ya/Na?

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said

We're glad to see you liked this post.