Comment by scarab92
5 days ago
You're right, and that's were the double standards come in.
Progressives: Elon doesn't care about freedom of speech because he doesn't allow (edge case)
Also progressives: Freedom of speech has its limits
Pick a lane.
5 days ago
You're right, and that's were the double standards come in.
Progressives: Elon doesn't care about freedom of speech because he doesn't allow (edge case)
Also progressives: Freedom of speech has its limits
Pick a lane.
Elon described himself as a free speech absolutist. There is no inconsistency in pointing out that his actions don’t align with this description, regardless of whether or not the person doing so is themselves a free speech absolutist.
Shifting the goal posts.
The attacks on Musk are almost always that he doesn’t support freedom of speech, without any qualification.
If you’re trying to attack the much narrower position that he’s not a free speech absolutist you need to do it at the time your make the criticism, not retrospectively after you make the allegation.
I don't think so. Twitter before Musk had all kinds of TOS that obviously blocked speech that would be protected by the First Amendment. No-one is saying that Twitter used to be a free speech absolutist free-for-all before Musk took over. They're saying two things. First, that his actions don't match his stated intentions. Second, that he is heavily biased towards unblocking far right accounts.
Here is my lane: Elon is a hypocrite. He bought twitter in the name of "free speech," then removes any speech he doesn't like.
His actions are inconsistent, and this one of many demonstrations that he doesn't care at all about liberty. That matters because he's now apparently in charge of every federal government agency.
Musk is a hypocrite, but so too are progressives on the topic of freedom of speech.
It's the pot calling the kettle black.
Wait so you're saying that anyone who criticizes Musk is in this bucket of "progressive" and therefore is accountable for the supposed hypocrisy of all "progressives"?
Actually this argument makes no sense. I know that it's commonly repeated in propaganda, but that doesn't mean it isn't stupid on its face. You can't just throw people into a collective arbitrarily and then hold them responsible for everyone else you'd call that's actions
2 replies →
That's a generalization that I think you'll find hard to back up with evidence. I'm the progressive you're discussing this with right now, and I don't think I've said anything inconsistent. But I'll respond to your imagination's idea of what "progressives" must be saying anyway.
The statements "Elon Musk Musk doesn't care about free speech because he doesn't allow (edge case)." and "Free speech has limits." Are non-contradictory.
Additionally, not allowing links to Signal isn't an "edge case," but a considerable offense against free speech (the general concept, not the literal law in the constitution), especially for one who calls himself a "free speech absolutist."
> Progressives: Elon doesn't care about freedom of speech because he doesn't allow (edge case)
No, it's "Elon claims to be a free speech absolutist yet somehow keeps denying freedom of speech to people who disagree with him". The hypocrisy is the problem.