Everyone should be an individual, everyone should take the steps to help themselves and not simply trust what they're told blindly. Maybe after that everyone can begin to help everyone else.
~Wolve

Tribalism makes even rational people blind to tolerance. Well put, Rabbit :)

Humanity??? WhaAaAaa...?
Oh, no! I am once again back in Earth's 20xx-era... *sigh then inhales* DOCTOR!!!!!

I am here for bunny boobies...

=^.,.^=

Mikefurry 2024. "I am here for bunny boobies" best sloggan.

I too am here for bunny, uh, bollocks?

well I might run in 2023... though I might hold off to the following election.
A vote for me is a vote for bunny boobage.

=^.,.^=

I'm sleepy, I read that as,

"... though I might hold off to the following erection." I feel like that was a missed opportunity there. ^_~

Knowing Mike, that might of been what he meant to type too. He's silly.

Hahaha :)

I'd vote for that!

I think it's kind of f'in' hilarious that the owner of what is mostly a porn website felt the need to let everyone know his options on current politics, what is and id not terrorisms!1 and what he think's is a conspiracy theory about a screwing election during a screwy year.

Not... exactly. It's to prevent lawsuits and legal action, not for a political view. You should complain to your politicians and legal system for this. Businesses are frightened of lawsuit because of it. They're liabilities if violence ensues. This has always been the case.

LOL what lawsuits?

Look up "Section 230" in US law.

It literally protects social media and websites from lawsuits over what their users post and labels "publishers" as "platforms".

Not entirely.

"The statute in Section 230©(2) further provides "Good Samaritan" protection from civil liability for operators of interactive computer services in the removal or moderation of third-party material they deem obscene or offensive, even of constitutionally protected speech, as long as it is done in good faith."

This is also in 230.

"Section 230 protections are not limitless, requiring providers to still remove material illegal on a federal level such as copyright infringement. In 2018, Section 230 was amended by the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act (FOSTA-SESTA) to require the removal of material violating federal and state sex trafficking laws. In the following years, protections from Section 230 have come under more scrutiny on issues related to hate speech and ideological biases in relation to the power technology companies can hold on political discussions, and became a major issue during the 2020 United States presidential election."

This is what they're worried about and trying to preemptively set up so they cannot be liable because of this.

Uugghh Now I wish I hadn't even brought it up.

I mean... there is issues involved with everything mentioned here as well as compelling arguments from both side.... but I am just flabbergasted that a porn website needed to let everyone know it's opinion. It's a damn porn website... who cares?

Wait, what? What are you even talking about? Again; this is a porn website. Not some hot-bed of political activity or organizing.

I don't get why this entire world has gone full potato all of a sudden. @,,@

I must be missing something. Does DCRabbit own a porn website? because I see nothing on 'neers page. I don't know what you're referring to

Ehh, never mind me. My brain is durp. Got got a condition called aphasia and I have a bit of a screwy disconnect in my brain about thinking words and saying them correctly. Or more accurately expressing what I'm thinking correctly. I was kind of venting about that rather hyperbolic site message that was posted on everyone's front page the other day. The constant screeching about it in the news, online, and pretty much everywhere just ramped up my anxiety and made my condition worse.

I am my own thing too. In my case at least the majority is bound to hate me for it as well, hence why I rarely even interact with people any more. Especially if you know you're right, stay yourself... don't let others change you through pressure. Cheers

People are losing their damn mind these days with their hostility...

Stay safe and stay sane everyone! ^^

Everyone should be allowed to speak freely, and to think freely. We are not ants, we do not think alike, we're more like a bunch of different zoo animals that just so happen to not eat one another ideally.

I'm with you on this. In any case, good luck to everyone!

I really wish it could be that way.

Unfortunately with the tribalism brought on by biased "news" media, and big money social media sites, along with the echo-chambers in many strict web forums, it is a lost cause to try and have people think for themselves any more.

That's why it's important to resist those things overall if you're able. One good place to start is maybe demand legislation to soften the grip sites like twitter have. Another would be to maybe find some way to curb bias media maybe make the Ethics of Journalism a "HARD by the books LAW" instead of a suggestion.

Ohh, media bias and the concentration of power has been a problem for a long long time. It really started to ramp up in the '90s when media conglomerates were buying one and other up. There was a small short respite when the proliferation of the internet because a thing, but even than is starting to fall apart when Google and Apple began to make themselves the gate-keepers of information access.

Yeah I think we need some hard regulation on these people. My personal suggestion: Go on a case by case basis.

The idea: Hold each one on trial. If the evidence shows that they're guilty, strip them of their 230 protections so they can be sued for bias. And keep doing so till they agree to stop controlling information. Of course if they are able to show they're no longer controlling information, they will get those 230 protections back, but they can lose it again of course. So that'll have to be the best way to do it.

If you're a platform, you act like it, not a publisher.

I'm pretty torn about it myself. I'm a big proponent of minarchist libertarian, so I don't like people, groups, of companies being told how to do their thing. Including corporations. But we are at the point where a relatively small group of corporate oligarchs are allowed to have almost carte blanche over most of communication on the internet. And at this point they've began to enforce their own morality and politics on everyone else. Even worse, some of them are not even enforce their own rules equally. And that's never OK.

I don't know what the answer is, but something needs to be done. Hell, maybe serious 230 reform is a good step towards that.

Pfffffahahahahahahahahahaha ahahahahahahaha

Dunno

Guess that kind of view does make you an enemy to humanity.

Collectivism is the future. Get in line or be censored and removed!

Lies are truth, hypocrisy is logic, science is based on feelings!

Your speech must be approved before you are allowed to it.

Your social credit score will be subtracted from for daring to have individual thought!

Misinformation is also a plague that needs to be destroyed... And both sides use misinformation to fight each other. If you deny this, you're worse than those you put down.

What is so bad about collectivism? The universal ideal that we should help each other, because we support each other is the human mentality. We're pack animals. That computer you're using? It was made by someone else. That water you're drinking? Purified by someone else. That food you buy at the store? Made and cultivated by other people. Why do you believe extreme selfishness is the way to go? It's like stating "We're all out to kill each other to get ahead of everyone else" when we're not. We're all in this together. Now COMMUNISM (which I believe is the insult you wanted to use, like your kind seem to throw everywhere), yeah, fuck that. It only works if everyone is a robot. And communism is not socialism is not collectivism. All three are different ideologies.

"Lies are truth!" I mean, you said it not me, cite your sources, and read the sources of others. Spread fact over lies. And know when you are wrong, own up to it, learn from it, and grow, do not become stagnant and ignorant to the truth. And guess what? There's misinformation everywhere, especially on the right side right now because they seem intent on this war against science and medicine for some reason (bad for profits mainly).

"Science is based on feelings!" I mean, psychology is literally a science, buddy. Sorry, but it is. And emotional wellbeing is important to the human condition. There are extremists who take it too far (The SJWs) and then there are those who believe no one should have an opinion except themselves (the Alt Right) so... it goes both ways, buddy.

"Your speech must be approved!" You're on a private business's website. If you don't agree with the terms of service, you can leave. Just like if you do not like a bartender in a bar, you go to another bar. Freedom of speech does not affect private businesses because if it did, the government would have greater control on businesses and the private sector will be reduced... Meaning you want communism? Really? I thought you were against communism...

Using "Freedom of Speech" as a shield to be an asshole, troll, or incite violence is REALLY fucking pathetic. It's like a Nazi using the excuse "For the greater good" for their atrocities.
YOU HAVE RESPONSIBILITIES WITH YOUR FREEDOM. You have not proven you are responsible enough to have these freedoms. Actions have consequences. You just want to be immune to the consequences, and put people down when you cannot own up to the consequences.

I've noticed your journals have incited violence before. Hmmmmmmmmmm. Just saying... Maybe get therapy?

I'm sleepy and just passing by but I saw you say we're pack animals. That isn't actually true. We're a social specie. We don't follow pack dynamics and due to our ability to out think the competition we create complicated things. Also Collectivism is antithetical to human individuality. By promoting it, you promote the removal of unique ideas, which has only lead to disaster every time it has been attempted throughout recorded history. Have it all you want but the U.S. is full of people from many parts of the world, with drastically different histories, cultures, religions, creeds, etc. You should be more tolerant.

It was just a quick note on something you said, that caught my eye. I wasn't actually looking at your post, just spotted it as I was moving my eyes to a tab. ^_^ Hope these comments help or if they were taking what I saw out of context, apologies. ^_^

See? This is how you debate.

You are correct were a 'Social Specie', but I also study the 'pack mentality in humans' theory I've been working on, so I sometimes slip that in. It's weird and complicated and has more to do with the way the brain evolved than the way the brain functions.

Collectivism does not always destroy human individuality, but it can! All things in moderate doses. For example, if you help your neighbor without asking anything in return. This is why I prefer the term Humanitarianism. "Help those who need help, without attempting to profit from it." But Most think they're being forced to help people they don't agree with.

With regards to "You should be more tolerant", I'd say the same about many people these days. I am tolerant of opinions, I am not tolerant of misinformation. It can plague the world, and it has plagued me my whole life. So you did take that out of context. This individual I replied to only half-reads things (I assume from my interactions), so it's possible they will take things out of context and use it to attack me.

I guess what I'm saying is, humanity is a complicated thing, things are not black and white, and condoning everything because it has a word behind it is a bad habit too.

Crystal, I didn't take you for the political kind. But correct, Collectivism is -not- my ideology, humanitarianism is. "Help those that need help." But eh, not everyone wants to help those they consider 'enemies' just because they disagree with something. I've seen people scream at one another for not liking the same fast food, politics feels like that on a grander scale at times, completely overlooking the actual ramifications of their judgements and choices in the political climate...

https://beyo.global/thinking/collec.....ct-upon-retail Found this nifty article. "Collectivism ignores the individual" meaning that it is more of a 'hivemind mentality'... Which leads back to what I generally throw out "Communism only works if everyone is a robot". So that can be applied to that as well.

Mislabeling of collectivism (as communism and socialism) is kind of shit though, seeing as all three are different ideologies, even if they borrow some things from one another.

"See? This is how you debate." lol, you're right! I'm doing it old school. I'm supposed to be insulting you and calling you a Fascist Nazi or something while calling myself anti fascist. (censors you and blocks you)

Well if you are being forced to help someone you are being forced to help someone. o_O if you are choosing to help someone, you are choosing to help someone. It's pretty simple and you just made a distinction there explaining the problem people have. They don't want to be forced to help someone.

Ah, apologies then. I constantly see people accusing the other side of being Nazi's and Fascists while acting like Brown shirts. The side claiming to be tolerant are generally the least tolerant kind of like how Christians always claim to be humble. lol. But hey that's what I get for not reading the whole post. ^_^

Hehe, my friends and I have political discussions and we don't always agree on things but afterwards there is no problem going out and grabbing a beer! (Midori Sour in my case hehe) But if you don't have the discussions you'll be doomed! Diversity of thought and ideas is a very strong thing, I wish schools would embrace it again. My mind gets changed, I change minds, it's that simple. You could go down asking questions that leads to another thing that leads to another thing and before you know it... you've taken an observation of Mars "I can't see a thing" and you end up with "Dinosaurs on Mars"

Also, I help people without expected benefit all the time. ^_~

in High School there were these two girls having an argument about 'something' I wasn't paying attention but then they went away. People were talking about it, as it had gotten heated.... and these two guys started to argue over what the girls were arguing over. (not continuing the argument) and broke out into a fight. o_O heh. The real problem we are giving examples on is the lack of education on 'how' to discuss things like an adult.

If say, I bring up the crime stats and say black communities have a disproportionate amount of violent crime, I get called Racist instead of an argument to demonstrate I am incorrect. Censor it! They literally stick their heads in the ground because they can't stand it hearing it. Or they expect me to constantly say, "Not All" obviously not all, not most. But the fact they need me to say that, constantly... It's like how California's "Yes means Yes" law where you have to ask if it's okay to have sex with someone constantly during the act, or if it's okay to touch their leg, etc. "is it okay to keep rubbing your leg?"

argh, my brain....

In the end, all these systems are great on paper. That's kind of their problems. :P Once you introduce that pesky human element...

"In the in, all of them are great on paper" I've been saying this for almost two decades now, and get fingers pointed at me for 'enabling the enemy' or something.

As a man I disagree with on a lot of things said accurately, "Facts don't care about your feelings" hehe.

The point seems to have flown entirely over your head, but I will humor you.

I keep forgetting people on the internet often take everything literally.

You might want to read:

"Fahrenheit 451" By: Ray Bradbury

and

"1984" and "Animal Farm" By: George Orwell

Absolutely amazing books that were a warning against fascism/communism/authoritarianism/totalitarianism.


-Collectivism is bad because it destroys the individual. You cannot be an "individual" in a collectivist society if said society deems you "problematic".

-Tell a lie enough and people start to believe it is the truth.

-Feelings will override hard science like in biology where "Men have a penis" because someone got "offended" and now said biological male is being considered a biological female when he is NOT a biological female. Also, Psychology is NOT a "hard"science, because each person has different reactions to psychological stimulus. Psychology is a "soft science", but not an actual "hard" science because it uses methods that have considerably more human involvement and qualitative aspects compared to hard sciences like physics.

-So are you saying it is okay for a baker to deny a gay couple a wedding cake because the baker's religion says so just because there may be another baker 35 miles away? Or for someone to deny service to someone based on their skin color? Or to kick someone out of a restaurant because they don't like their hair color?

Also, the whole point of the freedom of speech, much like you demonstrate by making false accusations, is to speak freely, but not be free from responsibility for what you say.

So I can defend myself and call you the liar that you are when it comes to the "incite violence" part.

Though you can call me a troll or asshole all you want, I really don't care, as that is just your opinion, man.

Also, who the hell are you to decide who is "responsible enough to have these freedoms"? That's a VERY fascist/authoritarian thing to say.

"My enemies are always the ones I should project my insecurities and flaws upon" Bad habit there buddy.

Replied about collectivism to Crystal already.

Psychology is more than a 'soft science' because it can enter the biological and molecularly biology table, but people refuse to accept the brain is a mass of fat with electricity running through it.

"Obviously you're an authoritarian if you state facts." I am stating a fact. The capitalism ideology has in it "If you don't like somewhere, you go somewhere else to do your business." You don't know what my ideology is apparently, it's not capitalism.

The responsibility lies in the speaker, not the judge. People who lack responsibility must be held accountable.

So I'll counter you with your own point style.

"Is it freedom of speech to allow someone to yell Fire in a theatre?" No. It's illegal. There are some things that do not fall under freedom of speech, this includes inciting violence. in regards to it not 'existing', I've found two furry journals telling people to go buy a gun and shoot people, one telling others to become vigilantes, and another stating that "The protestors are justified and should've killed some of those damn left politicians while there" All these journals have been deleted because they break the ToS. Those are the people who are not responsible enough. Those are the people who think they can use freedom of speech as a shield to cause problems.

You're not a troll or asshole, you're just misinformed on the current state of things. A lot of us are. Heck, I got collectivism backwards, so we're all flawed in thinking one way or another.

But I feel you won't learn from what I have to say and you'll instead assume I'm being hostile.

I am not a liar. I am a collector of facts. And finding which facts are being used in falsehoods are somewhat of a hobby. Misunderstandings happen a lot everyday, and it's good to learn from them and grow... But a lot of people will refuse to grow.

>Misinformation is also a plague that needs to be destroyed...

But it's not for companies or the government to declare what is true or not. That's how Lysenkoism happened. The best thing against misinformation is correct information and no enforced echo chambers (you can't do anything against self-made echo chambers)

>What is so bad about collectivism?

Because it puts people in boxes. It is, basically, "you are part of that-and-that group so you need/want that and that". It manifests not only in the classical "you're part of the country so.." but also in smaller spaces, like "you're LGBT so you must want X" (which personally irks me to no end). What the group wants is more important than what the individual wants. This is fine for certain things, but not for others. The example of a good thing is what would be voted on by the people or their representants in many modern democraties. The example of a bad thing would be.. most people want gaming and most people want xbox, so everyone gets an xbox. You prefer playstation, pc, nintendo? get fucked, you get an xbox and you better be happy about it. You're part of the Kollektiv and the Kollektiv decided it's xbox. You don't like gaming? too bad, you get an xbox anyway.
The needs and wants of people are different. We are not bees. Thanks to our comically oversized brains compared to most animals (only dolphins come close on brain-to-bodymass) you can't really compare us, in this aspect, to most animals.

>"Lies are truth!" I mean, you said it not me, cite your sources
I'm not sure of you're playing dumb or did not catch the 1984 reference (freedom is slavery etc) - or you catched it and expanded the joke, in which case the oops is on me :D

>I mean, psychology is literally a science, buddy. Sorry, but it is.
seems you're arguing in bad faith here. It's obvious he meant the hard sciences, not the soft sciences. Yes, they are science, but they don't really follow the scientific principle because they can't. Repeatability is a very big part of the hard sciences, if your results can't be repeated, there was an error with your work. Yet in psychology, for example, that is not applied. See https://www.thestar.com/news/insigh.....t-results.html
Nowadays, people get attacked for stating there was a difference between biological women and trans women. This is biology, a hard science, it still happens. Maybe not in the biological field (yet) but it does. Hell, I could be attacked for just this right here. Pretty sure it's that stuff the above poster meant.

>"Your speech must be approved!" You're on a private business's website. If you don't agree with the terms of service, you can leave
again, this seems to be a bit in bad faith. Personally, I don't believe he meant FA, he probably meant the social media giants, like twitter, facebook, reddit.
Nonetheless, yes, it's a private website. But for those of us that care about free speech, this doesn't matter too much. Free speech isn't just a law for government, it's an ideal. I have nothing against it when small websites use it, but when a website enforces certain viewpoints that have nothing to do with the website itself, and the website is a de-facto monopoly on their field, I don't like it. Telephone companies are private but they can't just deny you service because you phoned a friend and said something legal that they found objectionable. And that is good.

>Using "Freedom of Speech" as a shield to be an asshole, troll, or incite violence is REALLY fucking pathetic
Inciting violence is already illegal. Freedom of speech doesn't cover illegal stuff. You can't post kiddie porn and claim freedom of speech either. "inciting violence" is insofar interesting that some oversensitive people see it where it was just a fiure of speech. "that fucker teabagged me, I hope you kill him before this round is over" in a videogame, for a simple example, is not inciting violence tho some may feel like it was.
Or for a more real example, take the orange mans "it's gonna be wild".
But free speech is a perfect shield to be an asshole or a troll. Free speech does not prevent other people from disliking you, it just protects you insofar as you can say it. If I said "you're fucking stupid" (which I don't think btw, this is just for the argument) it would be free speech and it would make me an asshole. Those two things don't cancel out, in fact, they support each other. The right to free specch is also the right to be an asshole. And this is, at least for me, not a downside but a feature. I rather know someone is an asshole and hates my guts instead of not realizing that because they're forced to act like a friend.

Btw.. using this:
>It's like a Nazi using the excuse "For the greater good" for their atrocities.
in the current climate is kinda hilarious. "for the greater good" is currently used by the people that want to suppress free speech. It wasn't a good idea back then and it still isn't.
but it is a fine example. (nearly) no one who ever said that didn't think he was right. The nazis back then thought that, the ones using it right now think that. This should show you that it's not a good idea.
If you approve of social tactics used by the people you claim to oppose, maybe you should stop that.
Nazis hated free speech, because then someone could challenge their views. The current haters of free speech hate it for exactly the same thing. but they're right, and the nazis were not, right? well the nazis thought they were right, too. This is EXACTLY why free speech is really powerful and useful. No matter if you think something's right or not, you should still allow people to challenge whatever viewpoint someone holds. Even if those people are flat earthers, creationists, 5g conspiratards, it doesn't matter.

as an example why censorship is fucking stupid. Thought experiment time. Imagine being a random person, not too scientifically literate. A cell company builds a cell tower in your neighborhood and suddenly you get sick. you wonder if there's a connection.
in a free speech world: you search for 5g and stuff and find a video of someone saying it causes sickness. you read the comments, and they link to studies and stuff disproving it, you read it and you realize the 5g had nothing to do with your symptoms because electromagnetic waves don't work that way
in the world you seem to advocate for: you find nothing. yet you get more sick. A person you know tells you they heard about this and gives you the IP to a private server not found by google. you go on there and see article after article about the dangers of 5g. as a curious indivisual you search the net for some of the stuff, but you can't find anything, no rebuttals, so you believe it. (A few days later the police knocks on your door and questions you because you searched for forbidden things)

The best disinfectant is light. This is now as true as it was back in nazi germany.

>I've noticed your journals have incited violence before. Hmmmmmmmmmm. Just saying... Maybe get therapy?
Why did you look at the profile? I didn't look at yours. Or his, if that matters. Why seek outside for ways to discredit, hen you can discredit on their own merit, as you showed (tho I disagree on pretty muc all of it)?
Just as a general guideline.. I don't know you. I don't know if you're out for gotchas or "viewer approval" or if your target is actually changing a mind, but.. steelmanning arguments is way better way to change minds. Strawmanning or intentionally misunderstanding (you seem to be a smart cookie, but you did that twice) just leads to dismissal. I know, lofty ideal, I probably fall this too way too often, but it's something we all should strive for.
In the end, attacking the easiest interpretation of arguments is, indeed, easiest, but it won't change anyones mind. Attacking the best possible interpretation of the argument may. Or may not, but the chances are better.
as said, I properly fail that as well here, but eh. something to strive for.

btw.. do me the favor and keep your answer short. I know I didn't but.. I wouldn't fault you for not reading it because TL;DR, and I know I often shove long replies to the very end of my mental to-do-list (if I knew I'd write that much I wouldn't have answered to begin with XD).
Again, seeing the wall of text above, I realize it's hypocritical, but eh, you don't have to do it, it would just be nice if you kept it short.

Keeping it short? Fine.

"What is your goal?" I want people to realize that manipulation, misinformation, and assholery aren't the way things should be done.

"You support censorship" I support not being an idiot so we don't HAVE to censor stuff. Unfortunately, a lot of dipshits ruin shit for us because they think it's 'cool' or 'lolworthy' to bully others for being different.

Freedom of speech is not freedom of consequences, that was the point I was trying to make, and people use it as a shield all the time.

"Why do you seek out others if you disagree" So I can see through their perspective. I am a neutral observer. I see a lot of lies on the internet, and do you know how many continue spread it just because they refuse to accept what they're doing is wrong? Quite too many...

I was called a Nazi for not supporting SJWs. I was called a socialist sheep for not supporting conservatism. I was called -several names- for trying to state someone was wrong and actually citing sources.

I hate the 'soft science' perspective, but I'll accept it for now. People have used to to oppress others in regards of gender psychology (and even religious psychology, that I've seen elsewhere off the fandom... It was, uh, an interesting war against certain religions, I won't go into it, but it made me quite sad people got attacked over it)

"inciting violence is illegal" I asked someone to not incite violence and they yelled "You're encroaching on my freedom of speech!" What did they do? They said "We should go murder some libs next week, go get your guns" So tell me I am misinformed in stating this isn't acceptable... Because apparently a LOT of people seem to think this should be 'allowed everywhere'.

There's a difference between using free speech as a tool to help others, and using it as a tool to harm others... And I've noticed a lot of people lately trying to use it for the latter. It makes me sad. I am not talking about mixing terms up about killing someone in a game, I am talking about premeditated violence in journals. The things FA is trying to fight against.

But eh, you'll probably call me out, call me wrong, and try your hardest to pick me apart so you can try to make me feel like I'm 'less' of a person like the others.


Do whatever you guys want, I don't care anymore.

I've been threatened. I've been attacked. I've been told I should commit suicide. All for stating "Quit lying about shit." And I am terribly tired of it. Tired of the way many of the patrons of the fandom are using it to further violence and harassment. Tired of people who refuse to defend others who are being ACTUALLY threatened and attacked... And tired of being called out like I'm some idiot.

Maybe I am an idiot. I don't care anymore. If I were to die tomorrow, things would be better yeh? More people want me dead than alive... But not true. Nothing would change. The world goes on. So this idiot is going to dip out and return to being a quiet lurker who just enjoys his art.

I offered my insight on misinformation. I offered my advice on not being assholes to one another. I was rejected.

You seem to quote me on things I didn't say that way, but eh.

>I support not being an idiot so we don't HAVE to censor stuff.
you don't HAVE to censor anything no matter what.

>Freedom of speech is not freedom of consequences
I really fucking hate that often-repeated sentence because it makes no sense. If the government arrested you for saying "I like trains", that would be a consequence of you saying that and it would still violate free speech. EVERY reaction to speech is a consequence, it doesn't matter what the reaction is. So saying "Freedom of speech is not freedom of consequences" is pretty much meaningless. Someone being less liked because they said something most people don't like? That's a consequence and it's ok. Someone being killed for something they said? that's a consequence and it's not ok. Someone being fired from a company that is not political for a political thing they said privately? that's also a consequence and it's also not ok. being banned from a de-facto public square for saying something legal that some ideologues resent? Also a consequence, also not ok. Being sent to a gulag because you voiced your doubts about lysenkoism? that happened, it's also a consequence, and it's also not ok.

>"Why do you seek out others if you disagree"
I don't really see where you got that from. This is good. This is the basis of free speech, to see people with other opinions. Your pseudo-quote goes against the very thing I'm saying, so I don't really know where you got it from.

>I was called a Nazi for not supporting SJWs. I was called a socialist sheep for not supporting conservatism
That is just something people not in the extremes have to put up with. I've been called a nazi countless times for, say, objectin g to the floyd riots. I've been called names too by the other side (less consistent there, sometimes cuck, sometimes sheep, sometimes something else) for similar reasons. That's just what happens if you're not an extremist.

>I hate the 'soft science' perspective
The scientific method is based on repeatability, falsifiability and testable predicstions. Soft sciences are called that because they can't rely on those. They are science, yes, but you can't say something was true or false in those fields, you can at best say anything was "likely true". Personally I'm a fan of evolutionary psychology but that is as soft as it gets.

>"inciting violence is illegal" I asked someone to not incite violence and they yelled "You're encroaching on my freedom of speech!" What did they do? They said "We should go murder some libs next week, go get your guns" So tell me I am misinformed in stating this isn't acceptable...
(assuming this actually happened, your statements further below make me doubt it) I won't because you aren't. this isn't free speech, this is incitement to violence. I'd be considered by many a free speech absolutist because I think even nazis schould be able to share their views (because only counter arguments deter any feeble teen from joining the cult) but direct incitement of violence is not free speech. It is not sharing of ideas, it's calling for harm. If they thought that was free speech, well, I'm not sorry to tell you but it wasn't.

>There's a difference between using free speech as a tool to help others, and using it as a tool to harm others
depends on your definition of harm. if it's "directly inciting violence" like your example above, sure. but nowadays many people seem far to eager to just take a figure of speeech as incitement (see trumps "it's gonna be wild". And I'm not defending those riots, they were riots just like any beside it)

>But eh, you'll probably call me out, call me wrong, and try your hardest to pick me apart so you can try to make me feel like I'm 'less' of a person like the others.
I resent this accusation. Where have I ever called you less of a person? We disagree on key points, and you could call this "calling you out", tho I wouldn't call it that way, we just have a difference of opinion, and I do indeed think you are wrong on several points, but it never as much as crossed my mind that you weren't a person. what the fuck?

Again, try steelmanning your opponent, instead of strawmanning them, you change more minds that way. And again, I probably fail that as well but I try

>I've been threatened. I've been attacked. I've been told I should commit suicide.
if you see my post as attacking, I feel save to say you're exaggerating in the other points as well. But if you don't, I don't see that here in the replies you got. If that was by private messages, report them. Free speech does not encompass threats. Free speech is the principle of sharing ideas. Threats are against sharing ideas, so threats are against free speech. I certainly didn't threaten you, and I didn't attack you and I didn't tell you to commit suicide. Neither did the other replies. I just think you're wrong in the points you made, but I'm all in favor of you making them.
but please excuse me for being jaded because I saw that way too often in recent years. An accusation of received threats without evidence to bolster your point was such a common tactic in recent years that I'm highly sceptical of it. But if it happened, again, report them.
after all, this is the exact reason for free speech, so that no one whose opinion is not liked by the system or indivisuals is silenced. I don't agree with you, but I want you to be able to say what you want to say without anyone silencing you, and private threats are attempts to silence you, and therefore are wrong on the very same basis.

>Maybe I am an idiot. I don't care anymore. If I were to die tomorrow, things would be better yeh? More people want me dead than alive..
again, this sounds like obvious bait. Or fishing for compliments. But just in case it isn't. No. I certainly don't want you to die, having other opinions is the base principle of the free speech I defend, wihout other opinions free speech wouldn't be needed. But even above this.. Even looking at it in a very cold logical way, your death would be a net negative unless you were a mass murderer or something. The world wouldn't care much as with any of our deaths, but your family, friends, personal contacts would. and your opinion would be lost, and in the danger of repeating myself, this is exactly what free speech strives to conserve. And people telling you to die (if that really happened) probably wouldn't even notice it because that's just another way of insulting someone. "commit suicide" is equivalent of "you're a doo-doo-head", it's nothing but an insult.
maybe you're a teenager and the internet just made me jaded. we all went through such phases when we were teens. the people telling you to do it wouldn't even notice if you did and the people that would notice it would hardly be for it.
I know, that isn't the emotional response you were fishing for, but eh. Don't.


...fuck, wrote too much again. Originally I just wanted to respond to your closing words but I thought you deserved a real anser and well, here we are.

Already said I've given up.

You win.

Get your satisfaction out of that.

I'm an awful person, and you proved it. Happy?

I'm going back to lurking.

And no, I'm not going to read all of that. It seems you like to type a lot to try to effectively overwhelm people. Congrats, you did it. You overwhelmed me. You're the victor.

I'll stay quiet, like I normally am, and people can mock me while I sit in the shadows as per usual. Nothing will change. Nothing ever does. If it does, it's for the worse if it involves me.

And I wasn't creating bait, I was making a point that "What I say means nothing. People wish me death, it means nothing. If I were to die, it'd mean nothing to them. There's too many people who bullshit threats and I hate it." But you just read it as "OH WOE IS ME" you didn't even bloody read the whole thing, why should I humor you by reading everything you type? *sigh*

I'm done.

ooh, ninja edit!

>And no, I'm not going to read all of that. It seems you like to type a lot to try to effectively overwhelm people. Congrats, you did it. You overwhelmed me. You're the victor.
no. as said somewhere far down, at the start I just wanted to adress a faction of all of it but I felt you earned a reply to all the points. Seems that backfired. But I understand because I'm lazy as well. Honestly if I git that big of a reply I'd probably ignore most as well.

dude. I begin to think the depri stuff wasn't just a tactic.
so lemme be clear here.. neither do I think you're an awful person, nor does your statement as such give me any satisfaction.
You may be an awful person, I don't know, I have a rule to never check the profiles of people I interact with because I don't want to poison my own well,but form the interaction I had with you, I'd guess that no, you're not an awful person.
But even if, that would't really change things. I'd be less inclined to interact, sure, but that's about it.
I think you're wrong and misguided, but that doesn't mean I think you're awful.

stating "you win" without me actually changing your mind is useless anyway. To be honest, we both never expected to change each others minds, like with most online interactions this was mostly for the audience. I'd love to change your mind, but this was always very unlikely. I understand your "eh enough of that" sentiment, and it's fine, but please don't just assert that was what your "opponent" wanted.
I'm fine to end this discussion, but I rather end it on amicable terms

You don't read what I have to say. You take things out of context to use them against me. You seem very caustic towards my phrasing of things.

Get this straight.

I am not one of the idiots trying to say "Enforce police rule over words". I am saying, I have encountered people who use "Freedom of Speech" as a means to threaten others' lives. Not a political standpoint, but actual inciting of violence, actual threats, actual hostility. And they state "being unable to say what I want when I want" is fascism or an attack on free speech. You didn't even read my example of "You can't say Fire in a Theatre" the most common form of Consequence Example for people who use 'freedom of speech' as their shield. I am not saying outlaw the word fire. I am saying people need to be responsible with their words, and not be complete idiots or violent towards others... But apparently I'm a fascist for saying that. Apparently I should be killed for saying that (That's, you shitty dragon, fuck off, you know who you are).

"This was mostly for the audience" makes me want to delete the comments. I am not here for other's amusement... And honestly, that makes me wonder if you were getting a chuckle at my 'misguided' self. I miscommunicate a lot. I am not misguided, I am shit at putting words down so that people can understand them. I'm a fantasy writer and world builder, not a bloody political journalist.

>You don't read what I have to say. You take things out of context to use them against me. You seem very caustic towards my phrasing of things.
I try to react to things you said. Which is why I directly quote you and don't use imagined quotes like you did. If I got you wrong, please tell me. I would like to know. You assume I had an agenda, I don't, I just support free speech which also covers stuff I'm against.

>I have encountered people who use "Freedom of Speech" as a means to threaten others' lives
>Not a political standpoint, but actual inciting of violence, actual threats, actual hostility.
In that case, freedom of speech simply doesn't apply. slander or incitement to violence was never covered in free speech.
To put it on an extreme: "I think jews are bad" - free speech. "jews should be killed" - not free speech but incitement to violence.
I agree with neither, just for the record.

>But apparently I'm a fascist for saying that.
As stated before, you're not. But your eagerness to throw everyone that disagrees with you in the same bucket is problematic. Honestly dude, we probably agree on loads of things, so why do you insist of throwing me together with people that have no idea what free speech wa smeant to be?

>"This was mostly for the audience" makes me want to delete the comments.
I understand that feeling.. but after years of interntet agruments you realize, you almost never change the mind of your direct opponent. What you may change is the minds of independent observers not yet sure about the topic. It's quite simple. Anyone willing to even enter an argument about something already has a pretty good idea what's right and what's wrong, no matter if that is true. We both have that. You would have a hard time changing my mind, and I would have a hard time changing yours. Bit some people may be reading that that didn't form their opinion yet, That is who is really changed by arguments, people not already fixed on one possible answer. This is not a jab at you, this is just how things are. For years I set out to change the mind of my opponent, and I'd still like to, but it's not likely to happen. I mean, did I change your mind at all? Doesn't look like it. The inverse is also true. but that's normal.

>I am not misguided, I am shit at putting words down so that people can understand them
I'd say you're misguided, but I understand the rest. I'm not even native english. so I make mistakes all the time :D

Refer to the secondary comment below.

And I guess you can go gloat to your friends "LOL I owned this idiot" or some shit, or what ever gratification you get out of trying to lecture idiots like me.

As for my 'freedom of speech' against you? You contradict yourself in it. I'm shit at communicating, always have been, so people take everything I say wrong, and turn me into a villain. Then I'll be a villain to justify people to hate me in order to feel better for themselves. So ha ha, I'm bad, I'm awful, you can point and laugh, you can judge me harshly. Doesn't matter. My intentions are never malevolent, but are always taken as such.

Do not lecture me again with heavy paragraphs, for I will not bother to read them. Not out of ignorance, but because you've said everything you need to say to me to prove to me that I'm a failure at this 'politics shit'.


All I really want? Is people to stop fucking lying to me and ganging up on me when I point their lies out. That is all. But that won't happen. It'll never happen. No one backs me. No one supports me. So if I'm in the wrong for showing facts, the fuckin hell, maybe I don't deserve to live or exist.

Final regards> "I don't see anyone threatening you here" Ohhh you've not seen the shit I get in my notes and on other journals. Ha ha, I got threatened by one furry on discord saying "If you fucking touch my guns I will come to your house and murder your whole family" I reported them to discord. Nothing has happened. Nothing will happen. (And the comment was specifically at me saying 'Maybe ammunition should be regulated a little better') But hey... you support perfect free speech so he's allowed to say that... without consequences... but you also say... threats need consequences..? When I say "Freedom of speech requires responsibility" EVERY FUCKING IDIOT THINKS I MEAN CENSOR EVERYTHING. No. I mean, if someone fucking threatens a life or tries to incite violence, they should be punished. Not "The government will arrest you for liking trains" mother fucking Jesus. All of you do this. All of you EXAGERRATE AND TURN IT AGAINST ME. Leave me the fuck alone. You want to vilify me? Fine. Whatever. I'm the boogieman who'll steal your freedom to like trains... When I just want people to stop being so fucking violent... But whatever.

daddy chill. as said in the other comment, neither do I derive any enjoyment out of the win you attribute, nor do I think you're an idiot. you have way too much projection going on right now. please ask yourself, if you categorize anyone with a different opinion as an enemy this hard, what does it say about you?

>As for my 'freedom of speech' against you? You contradict yourself in it.
in that case please point it out because I don't think I do and if I did I'd want to know it.

>Do not lecture me again with heavy paragraphs
this wasn't meant as a lecture. I know I do it too often if I get carried away writing, I also know I feel deep dread receiving such answers. You can disapprove of something even if realizing you do it.

>Ohhh you've not seen the shit I get in my notes and on other journals. Ha ha,
forward them to FA_Notes on twitter or something. Don't use it as an argument against people that never said as much.

>All I really want? Is people to stop fucking lying to me and ganging up on me when I point their lies out
that's fair but also more in support of free speech than against it,. you always get people disagreeing, but you being able to express your views, well, that's free speech.

>No. I mean, if someone fucking threatens a life or tries to incite violence, they should be punished.
this is actually really the point. That stuff is already illegal, no matter where you do it. freeze peach doesn't cover it. you advocate for an extension of the censorship (that already covers your points) which is what I object to.

You're getting it! You're finally getting it!

I SUPPORT FREEDOM OF SPEECH. I don't support using it as a shield to do something illegal or hostile. How many times do I have to say that?

But you seem to read into the things you want to read into, not what the actual person is saying. *facedesks*

You lectured me repeatedly, trying to prove me wrong, only to agree with me in the end... Did you just try to troll me? Just to create 'entertainment' for the comment section..? for no reason at all? You're like the third person to do that if it is true... And it's not cool. I don't like debating for 'entertainment'. It's stressful and anxiety inducing. Maybe not on you, but it is on me.

Referring to the other points...

"What does that say about you?" I have extreme paranoia. I've been manipulated and attacked by people I once called friends, in some cases for just being sad. I've had people who considered themselves best friends disown and attack me. I have a LOT of trust issues in my life, because I know most view me as an insignificant idiot. In regards to the view point of others being my enemies? I treat people who disagree as an opponent, not an enemy. (Fucking synonyms... Reword: I treat them as a rival? I treat them as someone who disagrees? Fucking Hell, fuck English. 内部で悲鳴を上げる >_<)

"You can disapprove of something even if realizing you do it" >Refer to me stating I miscommunicate a LOT. I am not hostile, I am not caustic, I am not trying to hurt others. I'm a pacifist. I want people to get along.

"Forward them to FA_Notes-" I don't use twitter. As for stating 'don't use it as an argument against people that never said as much', point out where I stated -You- threatened me. I am stating I've had it happen too many times, and it's worn me -THIN- in this fucking climate. I know a lot of furries, including those close to me, who've left the fandom for how toxic the people are in it these days.

"in support of free speech than against it" never said I was against it. You never read into my points.

"this is actually really the point." THAT is the point I was trying to make the entire damn time. But you kept reading into it like "The government should censor anything" instead of "stop using free speech as a shield", my actual argument.

EDIT: And if I hated you and felt you were malicious towards me, or otherwise were my 'enemy' or had a perspective that is violent towards my ideals, I would block you. I've blocked over 50 furries in the past few days for exhibiting those traits and some showing their true colors for 'supporting violence' (not to be confused with questioning free speech, I mean actual furs saying that people should be injured or killed)

It's pointless, they're going to grab every liberal anti-government talking point for themselves now that they're on the defensive. The hypocrisy makes me sick. 20 years of 'fuck terrorists and who cares about civil liberties' and overnight it's 'we're freedom fighters and our civil liberties are being oppressed.'
The supreme court says you can't yell fire in a crowded theatre. Every 'freedom' in the constitution has limits. These people want limitless freedom, aka anarchy, which leads to freedom for one (ie the warlord in charge) and slavery for everyone else. Because they all secretly think they'll be that warlord, and that their gun collection's going to save them from an organized (ie collectivized) group of gang members with motorcycles and dogs that have oversight on their bunker. They don't get it because they're uneducated, they don't understand how the constitution actually functions, and because of that you can argue with them all day and they won't budge because they lack the basic knowledge of history and civics to even understand what you are saying. They'd rather wave 1984 in your face without realizing the total irony, or understanding the historical background to that book either.

Wait, aren't you Canadian? :P

Yeah. : )

We're individuals too.. despite the stereotype! We don't ALL live in igloos.. there's some ice huts too..

Huh! I was meaning to ask you about how warm an Igloo really is when having sex. I imagine when you get shoved up against a wall it gets too cold and awkward since it isn't a flat wall...

Hehe *Hugs you tightly and seriously*

Mmm.. tight hugs...

Always♥

Well stated, DC. Well stated.

1984 was supposed to be fiction, not an instruction manual.

Being a wishy-washy fence sitter doesn't make you enlightened bro it just means you're a political pussy

So what is that supposed to mean?

Pick a "tribe" or else?

Guess what, both sides of the political divide can be the WRONG choice.

Being "forced" to vote for or pick the "lesser" of two evils is still voting for or picking evil. Political parties often change over time to the point they often do not represent the political party a person first came into, so said person will vote for people and laws that still match their ideals.

A political pussy is someone that keeps voting for or picking the same broken establishment again and again thinking shit will get better if they just do it hard enough. You may think it is "throwing your vote away" to vote 3rd party or not vote for any party, I say it is throwing your vote away to keep voting for the same broken establishment over and over again.

>Pick a "tribe" or else?

yes

At least you are honest.

So what about the "or else" part?

What are you going to do if someone doesn't want to be in your tribe or your broadly defined "enemy" tribe?

This is what political discussion does to people now. Turns people into vile, petty things. Disgusting.

I am going to bully them and take their lunch money, obviously.

And that makes you the hero in this because...?

The nerds deserve it. Now cough up the dough, pony boy. I wanna buy some Hot Cheetos.

Yeah... no.

Politics make me want to commit suicide. No, I'm not kidding. There are guns in my house. I know where they are. I know how to load and chamber one. It would be so easy to pop a bullet into my skull. I refuse to live in a world so bitterly divided that tries to justify petty hate boners.

I refuse to pick a side in this shit. Because they're all wrong. I'm not some wishy-washy fence sitter. I'm tired. I want to die.

How does that make someone feel good? How is that sensible or right?

It isn't sensible and right.

Neither is killing yourself over a stupid internet forum/thread.

They want to lump people into easily defined categories like "friend" and "enemy" and nothing pisses them off more than a "milk-toast-fence-sitter" that can or will change directions over time. They want things to be so rigid and defined so they can justify their outright hatred for other people.

What they don't realize is that they will only create MORE enemies when they attack the moderates and center and neutral people that don't want a part in their knuckle dragging tribalism and identity politics.

We need more people willing to point out that NEITHER side is right or wrong all the time. We need MORE people than can see the good AND bad of the tribal sides. Because maybe, just maybe, some reasoning and logic can keep them BOTH from dragging everyone down into their "us vs them" hell on earth.

I don't think this person is solely using this internet 'forum/thread' as the catalyst, but the political climate itself.

I agree that I'm sick of the 'you're with us or against us mentality', but it feels worthless to even try. We're bullied. We're insulted. We're attacked. We're threatened... And a lot of us are wearing thin because of it. Many of us just want to leave, we're tired, and we want out. We're the tennisball in the polarized tennis court, and we're tired of being hit. We'd like to choose what we side on, not be smacked into either side... But it won't happen.

The political climate is toxic and unhealthy on the internet... As my father has told me "No one in the days before the internet would voice stupidity or misinformation because it'd get them punched in the face." This doesn't mean people actually got punched or didn't voice stupidity, it just means being there in person acted as a deterrent.. with the internet there's nothing to lose these days for many of them.

I too grow tired. I too grow unstable. I am someone you seem to greatly disagree with, so I doubt you have sentiments for me as much as for the more quiet fellow before me. But understand, a lot of us moderates are just tired.

That's exactly how I feel. I'm tired of being manipulated or guilt tripped. I'm tired of people telling me I "lack conviction." I'm tired of people using falsified or suspicious information as an excuse to justify their actions. I'm tired of all of it. I deleted my Twitter twice because I was just sick of being abused. That's what political discussion is to me now. It's abuse.

I feel like I'm in the middle of this massive crowd of people. I'm constantly getting shoved in one direction or the other when I just don't want to go where either half of the crowd wants me to go. Instead, I just... break down and collapse. Instead of everyone in that crowd avoiding me or stepping aside, like sensible people would, they're all... kicking me while I'm down, yelling at me, spitting on me, demanding I get up and do something.

How is this right? How are people looking at this kind of attitude and think, "Yeah, that's totally okay. That dude deserves to have a mental breakdown. It's okay. He's a centrist, he's a spineless coward who lacks conviction!"

What do these psychos know about conviction? I'm not some skinhead bigot in a red hat or some delusional punk in a black hoodie looking for a fight.

I don't want compromise! I want it all to STOP!

I just... want it to stop.

I only use twitter to follow my speedrunning friends, and even they're politically fueled right now... so I'm avoiding twitter... But I know all of them understand I'm a moderate and respect me...

Maybe we should surround ourselves with tolerant friends instead of strangers... I don't know. It's hard.

I used to think the same thing on Twitter. I was wrong. I'm sticking mainly to a handful of Discord servers now with people I know for a fact I can trust. They want to play their little pretend fantasies about fighting fascism or terrorism? I say let them kill each other. At the end of the day, it'll be us who will have to clean up their mess. Lousy, insane punks...

"Wars should be fought with tactical precision and knowledge. If we are aimless in our attempts to fight, we are nothing more than barbarians who've learned nothing from our past. To avoid bloodshed in a war is to achieve absolute victory for the people." The war on fascism and terrorism and antifa and police and all of that... Is not being fought with knowledge, it's not being fought with any form of precision... It's just a bunch of people screaming at each other on social media. Those that actually do stuff are the radicals that WILL harm others and involve in bloodshed... And those that actually try to peacefully protest will be harmed in the process by the radicals that join them... Thus blanketing them all... There's nothing tactical or advantageous to these idiots... And when we bring forth our knowledge, our understanding, our facts, we will be called fools for not agreeing with them...

I don't want them to kill themselves. I want them to learn, I want them educated. I want to prevent this needless bullshit... But it won't happen. And I am terribly sad. I am tired. And I am weary.

Yeah... me too.

As a self-declared Libertarian, I disagree with a lot of people on almost every topic EVER.
but even if we do disagree, I still 100% support you in regards to this journal.

a voice from long ago: "I AM NOT A NUMBER! I AM A FREE MAN!"

Sorry, had to chuckle because of your avatar.

Oh. Heh I didnt see that one... talk about obvious XD. It belongs to a ship moreso than me though

Oh yes, I was just having a giggle, don't mind me. XD

i wish i can like this.. so instead.. I will reply.

i concur.

More words from the past: "I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" -Voltaire

At this point I half-expect Voltaire to be 'canceled' as a 'fascist enabler' after the shit-show that has been this week. It went from a politically protest that went sour hard and has now accelerated into an open and vulgar expression of far-left corporate-political power. I fear that the boomerang affect from this is going to be way worse than that's happening now. Regardless of what angle you come from in terms of political ideology most people don't like being oppressed.

I quite agree on all points

There is this thing called reality that doesn't give a shit about your or my or anyone's 'opinion' or 'tribe' or 'political beliefs,' or what you call the other side. It is so depressing to see the number of furry porn producers who don't seem to get it. Don't seem to see the peril in following political agendas that would result in them being banned or imprisoned for what they do. If youre going to be an independent thinker you better have some sort of data and understanding to back it up, or your just a sucker for someone else trying to convince you the sky is green.