Skip Navigation

Say Goodbye to the Internet as We Know It

europeanconservative.com

Say Goodbye to the Internet as We Know It

About the Online Safety Act in the UK and the Digital Services Act in Europe

Privacy @programming.dev

Say Goodbye to the Internet as We Know It

Hacker News @lemmy.bestiver.se

Say Goodbye to the Internet as We Know It

You're viewing a single thread.

88 comments
  • Funny how freeze peach sublimates directly into censorship vapor the moment liberals lose their cultural hegemony.

    • Dude you're on the instance where it is forbidden in worldnews to say "Fuck (a particular country which will remain nameless)".

      Literally the only one. You can say "Fuck the United States" or "Fuck Israel" everywhere on Lemmy, or near enough, which of course is as it should be. But if I start stepping on the wrong massive state actors' toes from one particular instance...

      • You can write fuck China on Lemmy.ml if it's relevant and motivated. The difference is that it's always obvious why the USA and Israel should be condemned. I think China's Israel stance is super weak, and I doubt I'd get mod pushback for saying that in an article about how China keeps selling genocide-equipment to Israel during a genocide. Or about how China is pushing for a two-state solution instead of saying Israel is illegitimate and should be dismantled.

        If you go "Fuck Cameroon" on an unrelated post, for example this one, a mod would rightly tell you to be civil or at least explain yourself. And if you then justify yourself on a basis of white supremacy or conspiracy theories as you are bound to do, then that reasoning will be rejected.

      • The difference is that communists accept the need for censorship and are open about why some ideas need to be suppressed. However, liberals hypocritically claim to stand for free speech and claim this is the key differentiating factor between liberal democracies and socialist systems, but only tolerate speech that they deem acceptable.

        • The difference is that communists accept the need for censorship and are open about why some ideas need to be suppressed.

          Because some ideas are so destructive to your whole model that they have to be suppressed, because these models in their practical application are often sort of un-defendable, and so the only option is to have secret police running around shooting dissidents.

          It doesn't mean that liberal democracies don't fall into the exact same pattern, to some extent large or small. It is in the nature of human power struggle. It's not innate to any particular political system (or it is innate to all of them because they're all made of people). The difference is that we don't celebrate it or make excuses for it. We publish books about what a lie the government is telling, we have a constant struggle between the forces of freedom in the streets and the government trying to stamp it out. Sometimes different factions get the upper hand, or it switches.

          The difference, as you brilliantly demonstrated here, is that some of the most thickheaded of communist supporters get themselves turned around sufficiently that they start supporting the government trying to stamp it out. Most sensible people, when the government tells them that some ideas need to be suppressed, and they need to imprison or shoot anyone who's opposing their power, can figure out that's a bad thing. You apparently cannot.

          • The difference is that we don’t celebrate it or make excuses for it.

            Except you do constantly make excuses for it, as you brilliantly demonstrated here. You want to pretend that you support more freedoms than communists, but in practice you just champion your own set of capitalist values.

88 comments