Society/Culture Silver tape, not red tape, is a threat to democracy

its free real estate

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Posts
6,508
Likes
8,033
AFL Club
Fremantle
'I'm not allowed to say this...' - in front of sold out arena.
Isn’t this just a Speakers Corner? The space in which you are permitted to say outrageous things that in regular space would see you shunned or sacked.

It’s a bit like saying “what do you mean violence is prohibited, people play violent sport for money every weekend”.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

herculez09

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jun 1, 2009
Posts
8,263
Likes
10,013
Location
Essendon
AFL Club
West Coast
Isn’t this just a Speakers Corner? The space in which you are permitted to say outrageous things that in regular space would see you shunned or sacked.

It’s a bit like saying “what do you mean violence is prohibited, people play violent sport for money every weekend”.
Let's use Jordan Peterson as an example. He regularly prefaces what he says with similar refrains.

Who is stopping him from saying what he says? He still regularly has TV spots.

It's just an attempt to make his audience feel like they're a part of something dangerous and illicit when it's untrue.
 

Soft Downhill Skier

2008-2010 wasn't me.
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Posts
34,524
Likes
27,367
AFL Club
GWS
Thread starter #153
Let's use Jordan Peterson as an example. He regularly prefaces what he says with similar refrains.

Who is stopping him from saying what he says? He still regularly has TV spots.

It's just an attempt to make his audience feel like they're a part of something dangerous and illicit when it's untrue.
It’s like this IDW nonsense.

Peterson is on Dr Oz ffs.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

its free real estate

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Posts
6,508
Likes
8,033
AFL Club
Fremantle
Let's use Jordan Peterson as an example. He regularly prefaces what he says with similar refrains.

Who is stopping him from saying what he says? He still regularly has TV spots.

It's just an attempt to make his audience feel like they're a part of something dangerous and illicit when it's untrue.
Mike Tyson made millions punching people in the head too.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

its free real estate

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Posts
6,508
Likes
8,033
AFL Club
Fremantle

herculez09

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jun 1, 2009
Posts
8,263
Likes
10,013
Location
Essendon
AFL Club
West Coast
I don’t think it’s overstated. People can and do lose their livelihoods for transgressing speech codes.

Eg https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tax-expert-fired-for-saying-trans-women-aren-t-women-tpqgnm9vj
Well, one person in the UK so far given that article states:
An internationally renowned researcher on tax avoidance is believed to be the first person in Britain to lose her job for saying that transgender women are not women.
Maya Forstater, 45, was told by her managers that she had used “offensive and exclusionary” language.
It also appears her fixed-term contract wasn't renewed rather than her being fired.

Edit: I only just noticed it said first person for transgender misspeak. It's sad that I can't even read 2 sentences accurately.
 
Last edited:

HurleyHepsHird

Maximum Praxis
Joined
Oct 2, 2011
Posts
1,827
Likes
2,456
Location
Annares
AFL Club
Essendon
Culturally Marxist soy infused super soldiers have unleashed a wave of silver tapings on conservatives' mouths. You will hear the faint sounds of their oppressed voices on social media, the news, their websites, on speaking tours, at rallies and in Presidential tweets.















Cultural Marxism is a repurposed Nazi dogwhistle, being a spin on cultural Bolshevism.

And the same attacks broadly directed at "Cultural Marxists" now, were those levelled at alleged "Cultural Bolsheviks" in the 30's. That they are undermining Western or European society, that their values and social product result in degeneracy and that their mode of assault is through culture mixing and subversion.


https://www.theguardian.com/comment...-for-rightwingers-who-love-to-play-the-victim

But it's odd seeing avowed capitalists blame Marxism for capitalism at work. Tech giants see the cost in terms of advertisers and a broader user base, for allowing reckless conspiracy mongers like Jones to use their platform to incite violence or hatred. Banning him isn't "cultural Marxism", it's a purely financial decision. You wan't unrestrained capitalism, you don't want government interference in markets, in legislating codes of conduct for media or media platforms, well this is what it's boot looks like.
 

HurleyHepsHird

Maximum Praxis
Joined
Oct 2, 2011
Posts
1,827
Likes
2,456
Location
Annares
AFL Club
Essendon
If it wasn’t restrained the financial system would have been allowed to collapse on 2008, and Rudd et al wouldn’t have been praised for their GFC response.
No, because like I said, capital subsumes government.

It now self regulates, controls broader financial and monetary policy, escapes legal responsibility for systemic crimes. And that ridiculous vision of a perfect market can never exist. Because once capital is allowed to accumulate sufficiently, this is what happens.

The end result of capitalism isn't some libertarian wet dream, it's oligarchy or worse. An unaccountable and tyrannical replacement of the state. Monopolies and distortion of markets not perfect competition.
 

its free real estate

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Posts
6,508
Likes
8,033
AFL Club
Fremantle
No, because like I said, capital subsumes government.

It now self regulates, controls financial policy, escapes legal responsibility for systemic crimes. And that ridiculous vision of a perfect market can never exist. Because once capital is allowed to accumulate sufficiently, this is what happens.

The end result of capitalism isn't some libertarian wet dream, it's oligarchy or worse.
Facebook was first invested in by Peter Thiel, whose Palantir spying company was invested in by the CIA by their VC front firm.

Who subsumes whom?
 

HurleyHepsHird

Maximum Praxis
Joined
Oct 2, 2011
Posts
1,827
Likes
2,456
Location
Annares
AFL Club
Essendon
Facebook was first invested in by Peter Thiel, whose Palantir spying company was invested in by the CIA by their VC front firm.

Who subsumes whom?
And yet Thiel is a vampiric free market fundamentalist. And the CIA is being outsourced piecemeal. Largely due to the lobbying of people like Thiel. Also who's interest does the security state serve, certainly not the American publics?

But either vision is capital controlling the reigns, be it the CIA, or tech billionaires. Politicians dictate strategic mission to the CIA, the CIA invests in budding tech giant, leaders of the tech giant dictate policy to politicians. Members of the CIA and representatives/political operators eventually leave the public service and join tech giant or start their own. Service to capital and it's interests continues.
 

its free real estate

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Posts
6,508
Likes
8,033
AFL Club
Fremantle
This idea that something like Facebook is a product of unregulated capitalism, as opposed to a means by which the state can monitor its citizens, is ahistorical.

The internet was invented as a military communications platform with the intention of mass surveillance. It’s now working exactly as the state always planned.
 

herculez09

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jun 1, 2009
Posts
8,263
Likes
10,013
Location
Essendon
AFL Club
West Coast
This idea that something like Facebook is a product of unregulated capitalism, as opposed to a means by which the state can monitor its citizens, is ahistorical.
This is not mutually exclusive.
he internet was invented as a military communications platform with the intention of surveillance. It’s working exactly as the state always planned.
Undoubtedly true but it's a result of capitalism functioning as a cover for surveillance.
 

HurleyHepsHird

Maximum Praxis
Joined
Oct 2, 2011
Posts
1,827
Likes
2,456
Location
Annares
AFL Club
Essendon
This idea that something like Facebook is a product of unregulated capitalism, as opposed to a means by which the state can monitor its citizens, is ahistorical.

The internet was invented as a military communications platform with the intention of mass surveillance. It’s now working exactly as the state always planned.
I said unrestrained, not unregulated.

Capital controls the levers of power. The idea that ceding control through partial deregulation would result in absolute deregulation is a fantasy, just like the idea of perfect markets. That a little freedom would create a knock on effect. The libertarian vision is an impossible joke.
 
Top Bottom