Freedom of Speech

[maxjam]

25 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

How on earth have I proved that unwittingly? I don't make the forum rules. I just reminded you what they are!

The fact that you posted yet another lengthy rant about your perceived view of "cancel culture" unwittingly proves that you aren't being silenced at all.

It strikes me that a lot of the time when people cry about cancel culture it's less about not being able to say what you think and more about being sore that the consensus doesn't agree with you

You tried to make a mountain out of a molehill in an attempt at shutting the conversation down.  I don't believe the post was contentious and it would have been removed if it was.  I was very careful with what I said and it helped make my point.

I have never said that I am being cancelled, this thread is about freedom of speech on social media in general.  It is my opinion, one that I have tried to argue, that clear bias exists.

What consensus doesn't agree with me?  The half a dozen or so people that have contributed to this thread?  I'm not out to win hearts and minds, and I'll stand by opinions regardless of whether I stand alone.  If people want to agree with me, great - doesn't make for a very good discussion though and if they don't, so long as everyone is polite and courteous I'm not sure what the issue is?

Apologies if this comes across as another lengthy 'rant', I'll stick to more simple points for you in future ?

[Comrade 86]

On 09/09/2022 at 11:44, maxjam said:

Dangerous topic as it could easily boil over into politics...

 

On 09/09/2022 at 12:45, maxjam said:

I'm not trying to veer off into the world of politics

 

On 09/09/2022 at 14:45, maxjam said:

Social Media rules aren't applied the same across the political spectrum. 

 

On 09/09/2022 at 16:20, maxjam said:

I'm not trying to make political points

 

On 09/09/2022 at 19:06, maxjam said:

This is going to be my last comment re. social media politics as its now become just politics. 

 

On 09/09/2022 at 19:10, maxjam said:

I've said enough re. the politics of social media now...

 

On 10/09/2022 at 08:45, maxjam said:

...social media has been captured by the left ...  I think I'll end my input here.

[Stive Pesley]

3 hours ago, maxjam said:

I was very careful with what I said and it helped make my point.

Do you really believe that? To me, whenever a warrior in the culture war tries to "carefully make a point" without saying what they really mean, it just makes everyone roll their eyes and read between the lines. We know what they really think on the matter 

I maintain that the only way forward for society is to reject the "culture wars" that the media endlessly push to drive their revenue and concentrate on being kind and respectful of each other and ignore those who aren't 

Your solution seems to be that we should allow the far right a platform because you think that will somehow lead to a fairer society. For me that just leads to deepening the divide

But I'm a lover not a fighter ?

[G STAR RAM]

5 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Do you really believe that? To me, whenever a warrior in the culture war tries to "carefully make a point" without saying what they really mean, it just makes everyone roll their eyes and read between the lines. We know what they really think on the matter 

I maintain that the only way forward for society is to reject the "culture wars" that the media endlessly push to drive their revenue and concentrate on being kind and respectful of each other and ignore those who aren't 

Your solution seems to be that we should allow the far right a platform because you think that will somehow lead to a fairer society. For me that just leads to deepening the divide

But I'm a lover not a fighter ?

Would your kind and respectful manner extend to the family who had just had a 96 year old mother, grandmother and great grandmother just die?

Or, as we can also read between the lines, did you just mean kind and respectful to the people that you deem worthy?

I do find it strange that the people that often sit their telling themselves how righteous they are and how horrible everyone else is, are often the ones with the most extreme and abhorrent views...

[Stive Pesley]

7 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Would your kind and respectful manner extend to the family who had just had a 96 year old mother, grandmother and great grandmother just die?

Or, as we can also read between the lines, did you just mean kind and respectful to the people that you deem worthy?

I do find it strange that the people that often sit their telling themselves how righteous they are and how horrible everyone else is, are often the ones with the most extreme and abhorrent views...

Actually - I am fully aware that my initial post on the Queen thread wasn't very respectful. A couple of posters called me out on it and I apologise. I've softened a lot the past few days as I've had time to reflect on the momentous occasion, and although I still don't support the concept of a hereditary monarchy, I realise that it wasn't the time or place to start discussing that 

But aside from that - honestly - if you think i have extreme and abhorrent views then you need to give your head a wobble. 

[G STAR RAM]

10 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

Actually - I am fully aware that my initial post on the Queen thread wasn't very respectful. A couple of posters called me out on it and I apologise. I've softened a lot the past few days as I've had time to reflect on the momentous occasion, and although I still don't support the concept of a hereditary monarchy, I realise that it wasn't the time or place to start discussing that 

But aside from that - honestly - if you think i have extreme and abhorrent views then you need to give your head a wobble. 

The extreme and abhorrent views comment wasnt aimed at you.

The kind and respectful one was.

Apologising doesnt change your initial thoughts, I actually respect the fact that you're honest, and I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't defend your right to free speech on the matter. Any later backtracking I'll just view as a futile attempt to appease the people who called you out for your views, unless of course your post was made when drunk or just to be a troll?

[Stive Pesley]

42 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Apologising doesnt change your initial thoughts, I actually respect the fact that you're honest, and I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't defend your right to free speech on the matter. Any later backtracking I'll just view as a futile attempt to appease the people who called you out for your views, unless of course your post was made when drunk or just to be a troll?

This raises another good point, pertinent to the topic. Should a sincere apology be enough (and mine is sincere btw)? To clarify your line above it "doesn't change the fact that I had the initial thoughts" but it does show that I've reflected and admitted I was wrong.

In my view that should be enough, otherwise we end up in a situation where - if there is no forgiveness then what is the point in ever apologising? 

FWIW I can't remember exactly what I said (and it's been removed) other than to say I wasn't a supporter of the monarchy. I don't think I said anything especially horrendous (compared to the opinions of Trevor Sinclair and Phoebe Bridgers for example)

I note that @Archied made the same point about not supporting the monarchy and not really enjoying media overkill when a famous person dies, but he wasn't called out on that for some reason...

[G STAR RAM]

41 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

This raises another good point, pertinent to the topic. Should a sincere apology be enough (and mine is sincere btw)? To clarify your line above it "doesn't change the fact that I had the initial thoughts" but it does show that I've reflected and admitted I was wrong.

In my view that should be enough, otherwise we end up in a situation where - if there is no forgiveness then what is the point in ever apologising? 

FWIW I can't remember exactly what I said (and it's been removed) other than to say I wasn't a supporter of the monarchy. I don't think I said anything especially horrendous (compared to the opinions of Trevor Sinclair and Phoebe Bridgers for example)

I note that @Archied made the same point about not supporting the monarchy and not really enjoying media overkill when a famous person dies, but he wasn't called out on that for some reason...

Was your apology for what you said or the timing of your posts?

I thought your posts went a bit further than not supporting the monarchy but cant remember what you actually said and, to be honest, I'm not that bothered that I'd waste my time looking. I don't remember it being offensive in any way, shape or form, just thought the timing was insensitive.

Might be wrong but think @Archiedsaid he was upset that she died but didnt get the media coverage, very different to anything that you posted. 

Will have a read of the the thread shortly to make sure I'm not misrepresenting either of you.

 

Edited September 11, 2022 by G STAR RAM

[Archied]

37 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

This raises another good point, pertinent to the topic. Should a sincere apology be enough (and mine is sincere btw)? To clarify your line above it "doesn't change the fact that I had the initial thoughts" but it does show that I've reflected and admitted I was wrong.

In my view that should be enough, otherwise we end up in a situation where - if there is no forgiveness then what is the point in ever apologising? 

FWIW I can't remember exactly what I said (and it's been removed) other than to say I wasn't a supporter of the monarchy. I don't think I said anything especially horrendous (compared to the opinions of Trevor Sinclair and Phoebe Bridgers for example)

I note that @Archied made the same point about not supporting the monarchy and not really enjoying media overkill when a famous person dies, but he wasn't called out on that for some reason...

A bit unfair there stive , makes my post sound very different from what it was and I havnt seen a single person react in a negative way to my views on this subject 

[Stive Pesley]

3 minutes ago, Archied said:

A bit unfair there stive , makes my post sound very different from what it was and I havnt seen a single person react in a negative way to my views on this subject 

No - exactly. That's my point, your post wasn't a million miles from my sentiments. 

6 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Was your apology for what you said or the timing of your posts?

The latter. I don't support the monarchy and as i literally said "i won't apologise for that". My apology was for not being sensitive around the timing. I hadn't appreciated that it wasn't what people wanted to read in a thread for condolences.

In 6 months time if we have a thread entitled "how is King Charles doing?" I could post exactly the same thing and no one would bat an eyelid

 

[G STAR RAM]

10 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

No - exactly. That's my point, your post wasn't a million miles from my sentiments. 

The latter. I don't support the monarchy and as i literally said "i won't apologise for that". My apology was for not being sensitive around the timing. I hadn't appreciated that it wasn't what people wanted to read in a thread for condolences.

In 6 months time if we have a thread entitled "how is King Charles doing?" I could post exactly the same thing and no one would bat an eyelid

Like I said, can't remember context of your posts and looks like they have been removed.

Pretty sure they weren't anything like @Archiedpost though.

[Archied]

16 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

No - exactly. That's my point, your post wasn't a million miles from my sentiments. 

The latter. I don't support the monarchy and as i literally said "i won't apologise for that". My apology was for not being sensitive around the timing. I hadn't appreciated that it wasn't what people wanted to read in a thread for condolences.

In 6 months time if we have a thread entitled "how is King Charles doing?" I could post exactly the same thing and no one would bat an eyelid

 

The context of my post , the balance between the personal and the impersonal was very very different from your post even though I had no problem with your post and I’m not sure you need apologise for yours I think it’s a bit unfair to drag me into it , if my post was as close to yours as you imply I can assure you I would have been pulled up big style 

[GboroRam]

I presume we're all in agreement that this, from the limited information we have, is uncalled for? 

[Stive Pesley]

19 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

I presume we're all in agreement that this, from the limited information we have, is uncalled for? 

I just saw this too

It's weird isn't it? I mean on a point of principle making peaceful protest an arrestable offence is deeply wrong in a democracy, but I don't think we should be highlighting the hypocrisy. We should be applauding the fact that those who normally cry "free speech" have learned an important lesson about considering matters of respect before exercising your free speech. Minorities everywhere will be very happy that this penny has dropped

Edited September 11, 2022 by Stive Pesley

[GboroRam]

45 minutes ago, Stive Pesley said:

I just saw this too

It's weird isn't it? I mean on a point of principle making peaceful protest an arrestable offence is deeply wrong in a democracy, but I don't think we should be highlighting the hypocrisy. We should be applauding the fact that those who normally cry "free speech" have learned an important lesson about considering matters of respect before exercising your free speech. Minorities everywhere will be very happy that this penny has dropped

And the reality of "freedom of speech" is entirely this. Its not will JK Rawling have her speech cancelled by some university for her views on trans issues, and it's not about comedy clubs cancelling Jim Davidson bookings for his less-than-enlightened views. It's not about football commentators making political posts despite being highly paid by the BBC. And it's not about your freedom to post on social media. 

It's about whether or not you are going to be arrested for what you say or write. 

And the other uncomfortable truth is, there is no freedom of speech. We've got libel and slander laws, we've got laws that limit what you can say about protected characteristics such as race, religion and a list of other things. And if you ask me, I don't think a free-for-all approach to write hate speech is defensible. I can't support the freedom to preach intolerance. 

I certainly don't think you should be arrested for peacefully protesting against the monarchy, if that's what it turns out to be. 

There's a lot of difference between "(insert private online platform) banned my account for what I said about xxx" and being arrested for saying something innocuous. 

[Alph]

39 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

I presume we're all in agreement that this, from the limited information we have, is uncalled for? 

Why does it bother them so much? I don't understand what outcome they can best hope for. 

Just seems, again, like people have to have strong opinions on every topic. They have to be offended or go on the offensive. They can't just sit at home and not care about this week. Just don't get it 

 

[GboroRam]

3 minutes ago, Alpha said:

Why does it bother them so much? I don't understand what outcome they can best hope for. 

Just seems, again, like people have to have strong opinions on every topic. They have to be offended or go on the offensive. They can't just sit at home and not care about this week. Just don't get it 

 

But they are free to have those views. It might mean people are unhappy with them expressing it, and there could be repercussions in their communities later - but do we want people arrested for expressing it? 

From our perspective it's not a controversial thing, but I can acknowledge that there's plenty of countries who don't hold our imperialist past in high regard and see the Royal family as a central tenet of what happened. 

[Highgate]

2 hours ago, GboroRam said:

I presume we're all in agreement that this, from the limited information we have, is uncalled for? 

I don't understand...was that all they did, hold up that banner?  Surely they weren't arrested for just that?

[Highgate]

57 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

But they are free to have those views. It might mean people are unhappy with them expressing it, and there could be repercussions in their communities later - but do we want people arrested for expressing it? 

From our perspective it's not a controversial thing, but I can acknowledge that there's plenty of countries who don't hold our imperialist past in high regard and see the Royal family as a central tenet of what happened. 

I think that's fair to say at the very least..?.  Although the royal family, being just figureheads now and in the recent past have little blame in that regard nowadays.

[Gone]

1 hour ago, GboroRam said:

But they are free to have those views. It might mean people are unhappy with them expressing it, and there could be repercussions in their communities later - but do we want people arrested for expressing it? 

From our perspective it's not a controversial thing, but I can acknowledge that there's plenty of countries who don't hold our imperialist past in high regard and see the Royal family as a central tenet of what happened. 

Shouldn’t of been arrested imo, however due to the timing and location could this not be seen as incitement? As an other poster has said, what did they think they’d achieve, seems senseless to me.