[Discussion] Free speech. I think its ok to shut down fascists.

Pages

Robear wrote:

I don't know if you got this idea from libertarian ideology, but in a wider perspective, think of all the companies that abuse their customers (chemical giants, large retail corporations, fast food companies, tobacco companies for God's sake) that have not gone down in flames, and it's obvious that this supposed truism is bunk in our current system. You *can* poison, kill, bankrupt and maim customers (and for the police, innocent civilians) and get away with it, at corporate scale. And that goes double if your victims are Black or have an accent.

Not just your customers but often your non corporate employees.

NathanialG wrote:
Robear wrote:

I don't know if you got this idea from libertarian ideology, but in a wider perspective, think of all the companies that abuse their customers (chemical giants, large retail corporations, fast food companies, tobacco companies for God's sake) that have not gone down in flames, and it's obvious that this supposed truism is bunk in our current system. You *can* poison, kill, bankrupt and maim customers (and for the police, innocent civilians) and get away with it, at corporate scale. And that goes double if your victims are Black or have an accent.

Not just your customers but often your non corporate employees.

Non just non-corporate. A lot of industries (biotech is the one I know personally but i'm sure it applies to to others) are small and insular, so reporting discrimination may mean not only having to find another job, but having to learn a new CAREER when word of mouth spreads among hiring managers about you.

Listing all the permutations was of course impossible... The point is, there are these weird truisms people get stuck in their heads when the facts on the ground solidly contradict them.

Well. Thats... um... i had no idea how difficult being an editor could be.

As someone on Twitter noted, while the editor is angry with Milo's sloppiness, he seems to wholeheartedly agree with his gross ass politics.

Do we know they don't object or is their job to stay unbiased in work given to them. The notes I saw rip apart lots of arguments and make digs at his philosophy.

I don't feel like I can tell one way or the other whether the editor agrees with the subject matter. It looks like someone trying to critically edit the book and frustrated with a poor writer. It seems a poor standard to set to equate "viewpoint agreement" with "failing to intentionally do sub-par work"

It appears Milo doesn't need any help sabotaging his own writing anyway.

S&S is apparently pretty historied in giving conservative writers and ideologues publication opportunities. If you became an editor there, I'd have to imagine you knew what you signed up for... and with a book like Milo's (given his already rising fame prior), I can't imagine someone working that without having a vested interest in it succeeding.

Germany agrees.

Facebook, Twitter, and Google will have to delete racist and other hateful posts a lot faster in Germany after a new law came into force on January 1.

The companies will have as little as 24 hours to judge whether a post is hateful, and then delete it. They faces fines of up to €50 million if they don't comply.

The new law has already claimed its first scalp in far-right politician Beatrix von Storch, who is under police investigation after describing Muslims as "barbarians" on Facebook and Twitter.

Critics say social media companies are likely to delete content which doesn't qualify as hate speech under the new law, negatively impacting press freedom.

I understand the criticism, but honestly don't care that much about censoring any social media content.

Press freedom was not, IMO, substantially expanded with social media. If anything, social media degraded mass media to the quality of rumor and hearsay. Limiting that content should not limit press freedom in any way whatsoever.

I say this even as Katie Harbarth and her cohorts gleefully let Marcos worship and pro-murder Facebook posts spread like wildfire, while studiously deleting posts critical of a convicted and infamous dictator. Facebook isn't a force for good.

Demosthenes wrote:

S&S is apparently pretty historied in giving conservative writers and ideologues publication opportunities. If you became an editor there, I'd have to imagine you knew what you signed up for... and with a book like Milo's (given his already rising fame prior), I can't imagine someone working that without having a vested interest in it succeeding.

Is it "for the money"?

Pages