"It's our job to control what people think"
(mobile.twitter.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (7)
sorted by:
But by reason a democracy unlike a dictatorship, communism, socialist republic, has free speech. It has political parties debating and governing and electing free speech. It therefore doesn't control speech or what people think. By reasoning.
The same with capitalism, it has free enterprise, where you should have as much right to capitial gain as any other market, like twitter.
There is no controlling what people think, that is unconstitutional, and it is a traitorous comment. It shouldn't be said at all. It is seditious. In fact it's a lawsuit. Sue them for it. Sue them to hell. They've openly admitted plagiarism, bigotry, and prejudice. They're not our morality.
But there is unlawful speech, this has often become absurd laws today, unconstitionally away from the founding charters, and suggestively opposing nations targeting your own, they shouldn't be on the national domains if they're so "concerned".
You're using their terms and it's just plain wrong. The bolsheviks murdering millions of ethnic Russians in camps was "democratic". This is why the US was always meant to be a representative republic. This is why they use the phrase "danger to our democracy". They do not mean freedom of speech, they mean THEIR democracy. Their narrattive. Their totalitarian rule "because twitter polls"
Obama legalized propaganda when he signed the NDAA.
Controlling what anybody thinks is fundamentally against the bill of rights.
Of course broadcast and the Internet have worked around this by adding laws and various meanings. Programming various narratives. But controlling what people think is sedition. They might as well be mind controlling the POTUS as opposed to be offering choice or selective programs.
No, there is no controlling what people think. That's Communism and Fascism. People are free to think what they want, and should also be free to speak it within reasonable discussion. Clarifying reasonable discussion, anything where the threat of violence or harm doesn't persist. Apart from possibly in war, or there of.
Yea there is grounds for a lawsuit. It's not their program, it's social media, a platform for free speech and debate. Not mind control the Potus. By banning who they want.
It's nicer to dream of before the before the bullshit. When these assholes didn't usurp the narrative. Now they are akin to an opposing ideology. Fuck them fuck it. Jettison them into Mars.
The monied media has ALWAYS served the purpose of its investors and board. Thankfully a very small population have any interest in the ideas these medias project in this day. This small minority is always vocal at first, until called to account. As to what members of a Free Republic should be doing, calling to account those that should.
Next up... Julian Assange extradition.