Do you agree with Elon on free speech?

[Juxtapose]

[CrazyGirl2]

Yes 100% I love it when he said “Freedom of speech only matters if people you don’t like are allowed to say things you disagree with!” I agree with that wholeheartedly! As my father (Who’s an immigrant, and an American by choice) always told me, “We don't need a 1st amendment right to Freedom of Speech to protect people who say benign things which everyone agrees with! We need freedom of speech to protect those who say things we do not agree with!”
I do not like a LOT of things on 𝕏, (formerly Twitter), because I hate politics, and especially arguing about politics! I loathe the fact that politics are now like religious beliefs to some people, and politicians are like religious figures to those same people, so I avoid political discussions, and political questions like the plague.
But those who do spout off about the body politic the loudest, are usually those who are the most ignorant of history and the larger issues surrounding whatever it is they are arguing pro or anti. So I just stay out of it!
But I believe it is critical that people understand that in the United States, your fellow citizens have a constitutional right to say whatever they want whether it offends you or not! If it does offend you, walk away! You are under NO obligation to respond, so just ignore it and move on!
Just as an example, here on campus, I watched a group of students surround the campus conservatives for like 30 minutes complaining as to why whatever they were saying or doing was so offensive! What ¯\_(ッ)_/¯ ? If it was offending you, why the hell would you stand there for 30 minutes, waiting for your turn to berate them? Yes they had just as much right to be there as the conservatives, but why would you if their material, words, or upcoming speaker was SO OFFENSIVE? People need to learn to relax and not take political speech so personally!

Did I mention that I hate politics? 😂
Laura 🤗 🥰

[jazzyjic78]

I think that is true, because it's always a law that is normally brought up in a court case. "Freedom of Speech" is saying something that others don't like, Elon is correct 💯

[DrPepper12]

Elon opposes govt censorship but is just fine throtling and shadow banning people on his own billionaire privately owned toy. He CAN do what he wants, its his sewer now but dont be fooled. he's a hypocrite of the first order

[Dongie]

Really. Where you a few years back. I got kicked off that stupid biased Twitter 11 times.

[PreferNot2Say]

@DrPepper12 Provide credible proof of you being "shadow banned".

Just because people don't find your dribble interesting, doesn't mean something nefarious is going on.

I'm willing to bet that you post the same uneducated crap there as you do on here. Maybe try not just regurgitating what your liberal media spoon-feeds you and do some actual research for a change.

Elon isn't a hypocrite, you're just a moron.

[MrOracle]

He is absolutely correct.

Don Lemon not only wants speech he doesn't like to be banned, but he wants to be the one determining, from minute to minute, what he thinks is "too far" so that he can jail people who disagree with him. He's been dumb enough to actually say this on TV, in a "I'm joking but not really" kind of way.

The problem is that the people who choose to follow the law are at a disadvantage when fighting people who don't follow the law, ESPECIALLY in areas where DAs will decline to prosecute them and/or where judges will, at most, give them a slap on the wrist. That's one of the big struggles with Twitter/X right now - it's infested with bots, but those bot farms are used by very well-connected and well-funded people and it's not so easy to find them and shut them down.

[DrPepper12]

Elon could solve the bots instantly. Its in his interests not to.

[PreferNot2Say]

I agree with Elon Musk. The only speech that the Democrats/liberals/communist (yes I realize all three labels are excessively redundant) consider to be free is the speech that they like and agree with. Which isn't free at all.

[DrPepper12]

Okay 🙄🤷🏻‍♂️

[Juxtapose]

Fuck yeah tell it like it is!

[Lliam]

I would agree, except:

"Substack writers who post their work on X must include a note advising interested readers that the embedded links have to be copied and pasted into their preferred browser as X prevents the links from going directly to the article.
Moreover, the X post will not feature the lead graphic in your SS article, thereby considerably reducing the click rate. A graphic has to included separately to attract interest. This impedes the free flow of information. Along with being highly inconvenient and frustrating, it wastes time.
Elon Musk’s pretensions to free speech are just that. And don’t get me started on the shadow banning. He’s a fraud." Greg Maybury

[DrPepper12]

THANK YOU!!! He's a narcissistic global dangerous FRAUD!!!

[patois]

Nope. He said if people want the law changed they should talk to their representative. The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States clearly lays out that Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press. It's crystal fucking clear that Congress has no power on this issue whatsoever. If people want to lose their freedom of speech they have to form a Constitutional Convention, not ask law makers to make some illegal dictates from Washington D. C. Otherwise, yes freedom of speech means people will say all sorts of shit you don't like. If framed in the context of the internet, that means if you allow users to have publishing power on your site, you have to allow them to say whatever the fuck they want whenever the fuck they want and you can't remove it or them from your site. If that doesn't appeal to you, then you have to run your own site and create your own content by hiring journalists to write your company narrative.

[BetaBucks]

It's been a while since 8th grade, but would legislators have to initiate the Constitutional Convention? Or does that come from Governors?

[patois]

@BetaBucks Not Federal Legislators (i. e. House of Representatives), but at the state level 2/3 of state legislatures would have to independently initiate the call for a Constitutional Convention. Then a delegation from each state has to be sent to vote on the matter. If 3/4 of states ratify, then constitutional amendments can be made. The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States prevents the Federal Government from initiating as in they already can make no laws laws abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press... It's a limitation of federal power. If 3/4 of the states were willing to abandon the foundation of the Constitution to begin with, the country would designate anyway, thus it would never happen.

[patois]

@BetaBucks Furthermore, states generally have some sort of free speech clause in their own state constitutions as well. It won't read the same as the federal limitations, but even states have limited power before the people.

[BetaBucks]

Ahhh, this makes sense. That's a massive fking hurdle. For good reason, obviously. Leave our damn rights alone.

[DrPepper12]

I agree that abhorrent, disgusting offensive speech is the speech most in need of protection from the GOVERNMENT.

Elon talks a good game but is so thin skinned and egotistical he manipulates his own algorithm to promote himself and shadow ban people he doesn't like. I entirely realize it's his private toy and he can do as he pleases with his bot-infested, pro-NAZI sewer but don't be fooled by the Space Nazi, he's a global danger by means of his wealth and personality. His control of StarLink satellite system has already threatened Ukraine and the USA keeps entering into contracts with him for essentially military / espionage services. Don't support the Space Nazi

[Juxtapose]

1. The public square should also be protected and right now the digital realm is the public square. Websites such as Facebook and whatnot be made into public utilities like telecommunication companies. You can't censor my phone calls, so don't censor my posts. Also you can't be both a platform and editorialize.

2. I'm not a fan of him increasing or reducing visibility on his platform and wish he would let it be more natural.

3. You are out of your mind if you think he is a space Nazi. He is under no obligation to use his satellites to a military operations, he is not a slave or a pond of the government. I am glad he didn't assist Ukraine, it's a piece of shit country where most of the aid that is being sent there is going to corrupt officials.

[Juxtapose]

Did you know that the leader of Ukraine has suspended elections and is imprisoning political rivals?

[Juxtapose]

And you know what? You are pro Nazi if you want to censor them because you are only propagating their ideology by engaging in censorship.

[LordMadara]

why do all these countrys need financial aid for?

these money game is gettin outta hand a ban on money should be imposed

[DrPepper12]

1) OMG. FB and it's ilk are NOT the public square! Nationalize them and then they will be. They are private companies and you don't hafta "buy" their product! If you do then the ToS is part of the deal. This isn't hard.

3) one private company should not have the monopoly ability to decide the fate of nations. You're wrong about Ukraine but immune to facts so 🤷🏻‍♂️

[DrPepper12]

No! Source please?

[DrPepper12]

I don't want the GOVERNMENT suppressing ANYONE. Stop conflating private companies and govts.

[DrPepper12]

@LordMadara tell that to the tens of thousands of workers in every congressional district who have jobs becuz 90% of foreign aid IS SPENT HERE!!

[Juxtapose]

1. No man they actually are the public square. The internet is where people debate now and it is disingenuous to pretend like the national conversation is not influenced through internet censorship.

2. All Elon did was stay out of it. You want to force people who own these companies to participate in wars they want nothing to do with.

I'm glad he was the one in charge of those satellites.

[LordMadara]

thats a sad predicament
we just supplying an endless flow of blood to the vampire empire

what do we get in return 🤷🏽‍♂️ except for the following :
LQBTQIs
3rd word invaders (aliens)
Feminism 🤷🏽‍♂️
BLM nonsense
msm bullsxht
etc

[Juxtapose]

@LordMadara I don't care about people's bullshit I care about having free speech.

[DrPepper12]

@Juxtapose. Not according to scotus. They are PRIVATE BIZ and VOLUNTARY. I wish it were the way you describe with a "digital commons" but its not.

Elon didn't stay out of it. he's picking winners and losers. Musk's control over Starlink access has allowed him to restrict its use by Ukrainian forces in certain operations, while also facing scrutiny over potential Russian exploitation of the technology despite sanctions.

[Juxtapose]

"Section 230(c) was designed to address early court decisions holding that, if an online platform restricted access to some content posted by others, it would thereby become a “publisher” of all the content posted on its site for purposes of torts such as defamation. As the title of section 230(c) makes clear, the provision provides limited liability “protection” to a provider of an interactive computer service (such as an online platform) that engages in “‘Good Samaritan’ blocking” of harmful content. In particular, the Congress sought to provide protections for online platforms that attempted to protect minors from harmful content and intended to ensure that such providers would not be discouraged from taking down harmful material. The provision was also intended to further the express vision of the Congress that the internet is a “forum for a true diversity of political discourse.” 47 U. S. C. 230(a)(3). The limited protections provided by the statute should be construed with these purposes in mind.

In particular, subparagraph (c)(2) expressly addresses protections from “civil liability” and specifies that an interactive computer service provider may not be made liable “on account of” its decision in “good faith” to restrict access to content that it considers to be “obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing or otherwise objectionable.”

[Juxtapose]

"It is the policy of the United States to ensure that, to the maximum extent permissible under the law, this provision is not distorted to provide liability protection for online platforms that — far from acting in “good faith” to remove objectionable content — instead engage in deceptive or pretextual actions (often contrary to their stated terms of service) to stifle viewpoints with which they disagree. Section 230 was not intended to allow a handful of companies to grow into titans controlling vital avenues for our national discourse under the guise of promoting open forums for debate, and then to provide those behemoths blanket immunity when they use their power to censor content and silence viewpoints that they dislike. When an interactive computer service provider removes or restricts access to content and its actions do not meet the criteria of subparagraph (c)(2)(A), it is engaged in editorial conduct. It is the policy of the United States that such a provider should properly lose the limited liability shield of subparagraph (c)(2)(A) and be exposed to liability like any traditional editor and publisher that is not an online provider."

trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/.../

[Juxtapose]

One part of this I really want to stress is below..

[Juxtapose]

"Section 230 was not intended to allow a handful of companies to grow into titans controlling vital avenues for our national discourse under the guise of promoting open forums for debate, and then to provide those behemoths blanket immunity when they use their power to censor content and silence viewpoints that they dislike. When an interactive computer service provider removes or restricts access to content and its actions do not meet the criteria of subparagraph (c)(2)(A), it is engaged in editorial conduct. It is the policy of the United States that such a provider should properly lose the limited liability shield of subparagraph (c)(2)(A) and be exposed to liability like any traditional editor and publisher that is not an online provider."

[Juxtapose]

I completely agree with Trump and I think websites like YouTube who censor should be completely stripped of their protections as an online platform.

That would mean every single video YouTubers post would be on the lap of Twitter and they will be fully liable for every single post every user makes.

[Juxtapose]

*lap of YouTube

[DrPepper12]

But that would be SEVERE govt interference in a private business. How do you square that circle?
So far the EU has done more to reign these tech titans than the USA

[DJB72]

To a point.

There should be a difference between the freedom to say something and totality of dissemination.

Just because you have the "right" to say something doesn't mean I should have to provide a platform for you to scream it to everyone.

Veganism, for example. You may, as a vegan, want to see animals treated well. Fair enough. My son's teacher is a vegan and we're good friends, but we don't invite each other to a barbeque. I want to see animals treated properly as well - I just think they taste better if they're raised in an environment where they have very little stress.

[Billlewis]

Of course I agree with him, but it doesn't matter what I think, because I don't belong to the protected class.

[Juxtapose]

You got to remember that these protected classes are in the minority and you don't have to take their shit anymore.

[Dongie]

Yeah. I think I already saw that. Was Don Lēmon on it.
I don't want to see that specimen.

[Juxtapose]

He was but you have the tender mercy of not having to see him or hear him in this clip.

[Dongie]

Hah, yeah. I'd love to see oh honest genius hope over there and pound his head in.

[Dongie]

You know they practice keeping a straight face. The msm announcers. They know we on the right know their idiotic lies. But they've been coached that it doesn't matter. You see the brainwashed left gobbles it up. I see it in their eyes and the left politicians aa well. Trump get in and all those that have perpetrated all this shit since 2017. Destroying the sanctity and destroying the complete dignity of the democratic system of this Republic. Not jail. The price for traitorous acts just to keep control.

[Dongie]

One thing I know about this man they have been trying to kill, Trump, any lies he's told has been in his personal affairs. He had no reason in office to lie. Hell, officially still at war with North Korea and he walks across the 38th parralell.

[DrPepper12]

Your funny! I like you!

[DrPepper12]

Open wide! Here comes another spoonful of propaganda!! Mmm! Yummy!!

He told 30K lies in 4 years pertaining to govt ops. He has every reason to lie, he doesn't know HOW to tell the truth.

[Dongie]

🤔😙

[Juxtapose]

@DrPepper12 you mean the like how Joe Biden lied about a family member of his being shot down over cannibals and then eaten?

[DrPepper12]

Joe is DEFINITELY known for hyperbole and has tried to pull the wool over people's eyes. No doubt about it and no argument here. Its the SCALE of trumps attempts to make the facts confirm to his REALITY that makes him the GOAT of dishonesty

[Juxtapose]

@DrPepper12 Trump has not said anything on the scale of having a relative eaten by cannibals.

[Dongie]

Ha, ha, & ho.

[DrPepper12]

Even if i linked you too the 30K lies you woukd reject it as reality. My god just this week he claimed he never said "Lock her up!". Youve gotta be dim as a MAGA to buy that!!

[Dongie]

Dr. Dickhead, how in the world have you kept up with 30,000 whole lies?

[DrPepper12]

This thing called reputable media. You should try it!

According to The Washington Post's fact-checking analysis, Donald Trump made 30,573 false or misleading claims during his presidency, averaging approximately 21 erroneous claims per day.

The number of falsehoods escalated over time, starting at around 6 claims per day in his first year, increasing to 16 claims per day in his second year, 22 claims per day in his third year, and peaking at an alarming average of 39 false claims each day in his final year.

It took Trump 27 months to reach 10,000 false claims, another 14 months to surpass 20,000, and then just under 5 months to exceed 30,000 false or misleading statements.

The Post's fact-checking team meticulously documented these falsehoods in a database, which became a widely-cited measure of Trump's disregard for factual accuracy. The database includes a search engine and filters to explore Trump's false claims by topic, time period, or venue, amounting to approximately 5 million words of fact-checking.

[Dongie]

Yeah, they sure wouldn't lie on him.
Where have you been. 99% of the media trashed him constantly. A lot of Republicans did as well. You might know how the other side worked things. Tell me, do you recall Adam Schiff lying in Congress about that fake dossier? Hum? Maybe you were enjoying Trump being attacked daily by Congress pieces of shit that had nothing better to do but waste our money trying to impeach him for anything they could conger up.

[DrPepper12]

How can one lie about a document that comes with the wording "raw inteligence"? It was always partially corroborated and/or verified by untrustworthy sources. Much turned out to be true!

[Juxtapose]

@DrPepper12 if there was such evidence against Hillary Clinton you would dismiss it off hand.

[Kelley1]

I 100% agree with him.

[DrPepper12]

A private oligarch in charge of tech that can change the fate of nations? Why?

[Kelley1]

@DrPepper12 That is not relevant. What he said is relevant. What he does may not be because it may conflict with what he said.

[Juxtapose]

Dude are you really that salty that he didn't let governments bully him into using his satellites for the purposes of illegal wars?

[DrPepper12]

can't have it both ways. He is a hypocrite. He is NOT a free speech absolutist. He is an ELON speech absolutist. Simply put he has too much wealth and too many POWERFUL toys.

[DrPepper12]

Im salty that a private citizen has that kind of power.

[LordMadara]

Free speech causes wars

apparently 🤷🏽‍♂️

the case of the NSDPA party in Germany might ring a bell to others in the know

[BetaBucks]

Banning opposing speech was probably a big factor in the ability for the nat socs to rise so quickly.

[LordMadara]

@BetaBucks free speech causes social unrest and rioting amongst citizens,
the nat socs so to speak had a political free speech which sunk into the german soul & fabric , rightfully so bcoz after they kicked out democrats , social change was almost immediate and standard of living became a bit better 🤷🏽‍♂️

however we all know what happened next 😒

[Juxtapose]

[BetaBucks]

They heavily banned opposing speech though. They controlled outgoing speech too. This isn't freedom of speech. They pretty much forced everyone into alignment. Very similar to what is begging to happen in the Western world.

[LordMadara]

@BetaBucks
but theirs was for the betterment of the citizens

Hitler's 12yrs economic success in germany while the rest of the world was in depression is still a puzzle to most scholars

the autobahn construction saw scores of previously unemployed youth working

the free Housing and gov assitance programme to help young adults start families and build a legacy

the deployment of many young men into the army

technically writing, the NSDPA had solved unemployment crisis in germany in less then a year, and went on to ban opposing speech (speech from the royals + international clique 🤷🏽‍♂️)

were they justified? yes i guess. . .🤷🏽‍♂️ bcoz none of those economic miracles occured during the double decade long stint of democrats when they were in power. i guess they were not serving the interests of the germans sooo its only right NSDPA ban them from office and silence their trolling arse mouths from making any speech against NSDPA 🤷🏽‍♂️

[BetaBucks]

I don't know man. I think this is a pretty delicate topic. "Ends justify the means" can be a crazy, slippery slope. Just a double edged sword, no matter how you swing it.

[LordMadara]

@BetaBucks
burried in ashes of history
and today we wonder why everything is upside down ,🙃

[BetaBucks]

Weimar 2.0 is here

[Juxtapose]

The Nazis were inhumane scum not worth praising.

[LordMadara]

i didn't praise them 😂
you just exposed yourself as another gatekeeper

dammmmn there's too many of you agents on the internet 😳

nobody is self from y'all
no wonder 🤦🏽‍♂️

dont tell me you are jewish
i would feel bad about my opinion tho i didn't touch the subject 🤷🏽‍♂️

so you have me on record . . . you and your ilk?

[Juxtapose]

If you didn't praise them.. why doth tho protest so much?

[LordMadara]

gatekeeper im trying to justifi. . . .

nevermind

so you also work for the gang stalking programme 😳?

which people are you told to look out for?

how much is your pay in dollars? 😳

[Juxtapose]

What the hell are you talking about?

[LordMadara]

nahhh i suspect you
you giving off weird vibes
def an agent

[DrPepper12]

@BetaBucks correct!

[Juxtapose]

@DrPepper12 you are feeding into the delusions of an anti-semite.

[DextroShade]

Yes 💯. And Don 🍋 is a tool who embarrassed himself in that interview and blew an opportunity.

[bolverk]

Yes I agree with Elon, for there to be Free Speech someone has to be 'offended' as Free Speech is an Absolute, you try hedging it in with the Law and you end up likes of what Canada is at the moment.

[BetaBucks]

I agree with him, but X doesn't. They still censor and ban people for being mean.

[PreferNot2Say]

That's due to the fact that there are still liberals working at X.

[gorydetails]

I’m not sure of Elon’s understanding of free speech is, but it almost sounds like he things the government grants the right to free speech.

[Juxtapose]

I mean realistically they do. Look at what the government can already tell us to do, they can tell us when we can drink alcohol and even sometimes when we can go outside. The legal system as is treats us as property and until we overhaul the entire thing we pretty much are property and have to keep pointing that out and keep fighting against it.

[gorydetails]

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the bill of rights.

[Chazmatazz269]

The Bill of Rights is one half of a symbiotic system if civility is to be maintained. The opposite of rights is responsibilities. The first ten amendments to the US Constitution outlines our rights, laws outline our responsibilities. We can’t have one without the other and still have a functioning society.

[gorydetails]

@Chazmatazz269 No. The US Constitution does not outline our rights. The US constitution restricts the government's infringements on our rights. We have rights because we are free people. They are given to us by God.

[Juxtapose]

That's the thing, there is no evidence for any supernatural creatures such as Yahweh, Allah, Zeus, whoever. The myths are completely unsubstantiated and given that it is foolish to believe something without evidence, I don't accept reasons based on supernatural beings to be reasonable or valid.

You can do what you want with your personal life but you can't convince me something is given to me by something you can't even prove is real.

[gorydetails]

You can't prove evolution or the big bang, either.

[Juxtapose]

Evolution actually has more proof for it than gravity does. DNA evidence, the fossil record..

[gorydetails]

There is no fossil record to get you from a single cell organism to a human being.

[Juxtapose]

DNA evidence homie.

[gorydetails]

Where's the fossil evidence?

[DrPepper12]

Why do you say "the government" as a 3rd person singular when "the govt" is "we the people" 1st person plural? When using the term government its is WE deciding curfews or alcohol. Its not some high handed gestapo shit, its us collectively.

[gorydetails]

@DrPepper12 Really? I don’t recall offering to tax myself into oblivion and allowing illegals in the country while spying on myself.

[Juxtapose]

@DrPepper12 yeah that's a big load of bullshit. I never voted on the covid lockdowns, these high taxes, opening the border, all these stupid gun laws and so on.

[Juxtapose]

I also never voted on drug laws which violate my bodily autonomy and essentially regulate me to property of the state.

[DrPepper12]

Whoever told you that inventions of man were flawless? He lied to you!

[DrPepper12]

Again, any invention of mankind is not infallible. Never will be.

[NathanDavis]

he doesn't even agree with himself... lmao

see @Lliam 's post

[genericname85]

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. - Voltaire

[exitseven]

Yes, any time the liberals hate somebody i always figure that they area on the right track.

[DrPepper12]

I dont hate anyone. I pity MAGA and want them to come back to earth prime.

[andreasderjuengere]

No matter what this bloke says:

I will -by default- disagree.

[BetaBucks]

I heard he said you're a really cool person with a huge dong.

[andreasderjuengere]

That's one nice return from your side.
:D... touché

[BetaBucks]

😂 thanks man. Cheers 🍻

[53669]

This website acts like a leftist.

they remove any question that speaks a truth about Jews.

violating freedom of speech.

silenced.

[DrPepper12]

Whats the truth?

[Pterodon]

Yes I do

[llorando]

I 100% do.

[OddBeMe]

Funny that Twitter still censors.

[Juxtapose]

They influence visibility of posts but take down as few of them as possible.

[OddBeMe]

Twitter said that before Elon bought it.

[Juxtapose]

I don't care what the old Twitter said because that is irrelevant

[OddBeMe]

[Juxtapose]

Shrugging doesn't change anything lol.

[Juxtapose]

Now are you going to address the original premise of the question or not?

[OddBeMe]

What is the reason behind this Q? What are you really asking? Because Elon is just spouting what every ceo says about the first amendment like a whore in church.

[gorydetails]

@Juxtapose he’s salty they got rid of the child porn

[OddBeMe]

@gorydetails no, I applauded trumps guilty verdict.

[Juxtapose]

Elon has actually left a lot of hate speech up on his platform to the point where he's being criticized for it. He's not just being like a whore in church.

[Juxtapose]

He is doing what old Twitter could not do and bless him for it.

[DrPepper12]

Yup!!

[DrPepper12]

Old twotter could bias the algorithm just as well but didn't.

[Goodoldguy]

Elon is god

[DrPepper12]

You worship oligarch unhinged space nazis? Hmmm