Dissenter from Gab

History shows that censorship only drives hateful ideas and movements underground, and ensures evil ideologies fester unchallenged. Good and decent people must be free to challenge evil in the open.

 

Just looked up gab.com.

Not banned here (yet). Interesting, since that dissenter add-on could make things messy.

 

Like , what was it. 8 chan?, that provided the cheering section for the nutjob who shot up the mosques in New Zealand--live, on candid camera! Ain't it awful that Facebook and You tube are trying to rein in the footage! How dare they deprive us of our gore, or the wisdom of Alex Jones! Do they think they own those platforms?
Facebook, YouTube trying to rein in footage of New Zealand mosque shooting

 

Do you actually think that suppressing the dark web is going to make the dark web go away?

I think we could all benefit by knowing who is cheering this horrific atrocity, and what kind of people they are. Are they merely trolls, or a part of a legitimate underground hate group that funds and perpetuates such violence?

 

I actually think that a monstrous movement like ISIS made the headway it did because social media allowed it to use their platforms to broadcast all those "cool" pictures of the "unstoppable" goons in the black masks. And yes, those commercials for evil should have been suppressed early on. Any benefit from knowing who was cheering and what kind of people they were was way overshadowed by images that were irresistible to the weak-minded misfits who took up their banner. Same with this white supremacist dude.

 

I remember immediately after 9-11-01, many people were trolling on the internet were praising the attacks only to get a rise out of others. It was offensive and mean spirited trolling indeed. Do I think they should've had their free speech rights taken away? No. When you suppress free speech, it just goes underground, it becomes more forbidden, and it becomes more mysterious, counter-cultural, and alluring for people to satisfy the darker sides of their curiosity.

The religious right tried to suppress Harry Potter in its early days, because they feared witchcraft and satanism. It only made Harry Potter more popular.
The mainstream tried to suppress rock-n-roll music in the early 1950s because they thought it was gonna corrupt the nation's youth. Rock-n-roll only became more popular.
When you try to suppress hateful extremism, it's going to draw more people to it.

Since news websites have silenced the voices of the people by disabling the comment sections. And social media sites have been banning those people with the "wrong" opinions, those voices are going to find their way underground. Hello Dissenter.

 

Mozilla Bans Dissenter App as Chrome Follows Suit

 

You're never so sincere and impassioned as when you're defending the unfettered right to mislead. I think the law has set reasonable limits in defining protected speech: no obscenity, no defamation, no fighting words, no perjury, no incitement, no crying fire in crowded theaters. And Facebook, YouTube and other private companies can control what is said on their platforms--no real difference from Disney theme parks. If "They" is a private company, they can set the rules for their own platforms. And even if it's your TV show, there are and should be limits to what you can say or do on it. Alex Jones has settled his libel suit by Chobani over his statements on InfoWars and other outlets: "Idaho Yogurt Maker Caught Importing Migrant Rapists." He seems to be trying an insanity defense in the case brought by the parents of murdered Sandy Hook kids, whom he mischaracterized as "crisis actors": He said during his deposition that he "almost had like a form of psychosis back in the past where I basically thought everything was staged, even though I'm now learning a lot of times things aren't staged."Alex Jones blames conspiracy claims on 'psychosis' Sorry, Alex. It doesn't work in private lawsuits. What would the country be like without libel laws?

 

Race is a protected class

 

Discrimination of any type is wrong .. so playing the whole only races and gender apply is bullshit..

Banned from the digital public circle based on political affiliation, when people change their politics like they change their socks.

What you are actually saying is they cant use these platforms because they lean conservative.

 

This is not the reason why they're banned from such a platform...

Not true. You turn it into that. Bogus.

 

I'm not saying they cant use these platforms because they're conservative, you're putting a lot of words in my mouth there

If conservatives were being banned from social media half my Facebook friends would be gone

I'm looking at this from a legal standpoint. Political leanings are not a protected class, and even if a lawyer wanted to prove that it should be a protected class in court - they would have to prove that people are being banned simply for being conservative rather than for violating social media guidelines.

 

funny my browser crashed when I was said. these three platforms /facebook, youtube, twitter are like the visual telephone to some people. so when only 3 phone companies are blocking your content. Its makes the entire internet a floppy disk. they should be able to use the platforms like everyone else. Im missing what makes Milo so dangerous.
there are twitter accounts threatening to murder your family, eat your dog, rape you. But those are just fine with Dorsey because there isnt a mass report to remover one crazy blue haired trans kid with a shotgun from walmart ...

sorry to make word bubble to you. like someone else pointed out Id rather they post their crazy content so we know how crazy they are..

and platforms do have some rules like we have here. But those 3 are like the telephone with the going LIVE and all that jazz.


What is Philando Castile's girlfriend was banned from Facebook< which happens anyways.. But imagine she didnt even know she was banned and when she went to take that shit live.. Opps sorry folks the park closed, the moose out front shouldve told ya.

There are alternate platforms. so I dont get half of what they are bitching about, while bitchute, minds, steetmit and gab might not be your gig, what is interesting how some these sites pay you in bitcoin for content, shares, likes, comments, and advert interaction and they are growing.

they havent banned all conservative creators yet,your right.. about to watch louder with crowder on fb..

 

talking about this very thing ... will be better when uploaded tomorrow.. probably wont let you drift back in time line

 

The purge starts at 11:00

 

You're right, and there's an important distinction between politics and race that Troglodytes might find hard to grasp. Race is a characteristic you're born with. You didn't choose it. Same ordinarily applies to gender, although thanks to the wonders of modern science not necessarily these days. Religion and ethnicity are not intrinsic in the same way, but commonly are tied to family upbringing and culture--so we treat them as a fundamental part of a person's identity. Political beliefs may be at lest as intensely held, but the law treats them as different. To be a protected class, not only do people have to belong to such groups, but also the group has to have a history of being the target of invidious discrimination. Right wing snowflakes whine a lot about being persecuted, but since members of their category occupy command positions in our society (at the moment, the Presidency, the Senate, the Supreme Court, many business corporations, etc., they are unlikely to win their case in court.) So as the law stands, WalMart or Coca Cola, would be violating federal law if they discriminated on the basis of race, gender, ethnicity, or religion, but are free to turn away liberals, conservatives, libertarians, socialists, etc., just because they don't like their kind. The only recourse would be customer retaliation.

And another thing, I think we need to be careful about using the term "conservative" to describe everybody right of center--in this case using the label to apply to radical nativist jerks. They're no more "conservative" than Antifa or Black Lives Matter are liberal.

 

I suspect that the alternative conservative internet will be mostly a commercial flop, never contributing any new, but by surging the wake of the political fringe it will sustain enough momentum for some webmaster make a little cash off.

I'm certain I could ditch my moral code and whip up a conservative Instagram in a few weeks.

 

How does having a free speech platform make the website conservative?

Is freedom of speech now an anti-progressive stance?

 

I...have no idea how this pertains to anything I said so I dont know how to respond

Someone else said people were being banned for being conservative, I actually dont know or care what sites are conservative or who is getting banned because I dont really follow this sort of thing. I was merely commenting on it from a legal point of view