Reframing "free speech" and "censorship" complaints

[CBradSmith]

Censoring and squashing of conversation is happening in many public arenas. (It's why the hell this board exists.) But in conversation, complaints about "censorship" and "taking away my right to free speech" don't resonate *at all* with a good chunk of viewers/readers. For many, once they see those words, they not only disregard anything else said by that speaker, but they are ALSO enlivened to bash the speaker with more energy. After all, that's terminology (censorship, free speech) is used by the "bad guys."

I'm certain that when we address the concerns of censorship and free speech infringement, there needs to be a sizable chunk of that energy used to reframe the conversation toward shining a light on the root cause of the censorship: ***people do not want to be in a position where they might have to think***

Very little actual "hate speech" is in the public spaces, and most of it is easily recognizable and shunned by everybody, regardless of political leaning. However, there are a ton of policy points of view that are countervailing to what is currently being mainlined by MSM and "protected" by Big Tech. <--- And that is the real threat: the squashing of dialogue in the daily, nationwide conversation discussing how we fix our problems, debate our values, and work toward a more perfect union/society.

A lot of ammo is being lost in online cries of "censorship," bc a good chunk of the audience simply doesn't care. Our vectors of attack must expand to *rightly* point out that they are running from dialogue and debate.

People need to be made aware that they are "thinking-averse" and challenged on their reliance of platitudes.

 

[shiv]

No shit man, I have gained a ton of perspective into this in the last few months (obviously). People on all sides have seriously been brain washed into think that free speech is a bad thing or dangerous thing.

Interestingly, the biggest proponents of our site have come from the legal crowd - they are about the only ones that really understand the protections we have under the constitution.

We have made sure to build a relationship (and investment) with an attorney office with the highest reputation in town, and feel very confident in our rights, direction and legal protection with this site.

But yeah - people have been massively psyoped/brainwashed on this issue - I haven't been able to put my finger on the source yet though

 

[shiv]

I’ve noted this before, but one of the ways I’ve come up with to push back on these people is to tell them “I’m worried about you - you’ve been acting strange lately”. Do not even get into any specifics or discussion (because it validates them) just saw something like “things seem off with you”.

And when someone posts some retarded troll shit just respond with something like this:

 

[JordanPetersHorn]

Censoring and squashing of conversation is happening in many public arenas. (It's why the hell this board exists.) But in conversation, complaints about "censorship" and "taking away my right to free speech" don't resonate *at all* with a good chunk of viewers/readers. For many, once they see those words, they not only disregard anything else said by that speaker, but they are ALSO enlivened to bash the speaker with more energy. After all, that's terminology (censorship, free speech) is used by the "bad guys."

I'm certain that when we address the concerns of censorship and free speech infringement, there needs to be a sizable chunk of that energy used to reframe the conversation toward shining a light on the root cause of the censorship: ***people do not want to be in a position where they might have to think***

Very little actual "hate speech" is in the public spaces, and most of it is easily recognizable and shunned the entire political spectrum. But there are a ton of policy points of view that are countervailing to what is currently being mainlined by MSM and "protected" by Big Tech. <--- And that is the real threat: the squashing of dialogue in the daily, nationwide conversation discussing how we fix our problems, debate our values, and work toward a more perfect union/society.

A lot of ammo is being lost in online cries of "censorship," but a good chunk of the audience simply doesn't care. Our vectors of attack must expand to *rightly* point out (show them) that they are running from dialogue and debate.

People need to be made aware that they are "thinking-averse."

Incredibly well put. My vote for simple solution is to bring the term “coward” back

 

[quickfeet]

Incredibly well put. My vote for simple solution is to bring the term “coward” back

I love it - simple things like this are the solution. Shame them - don’t even argue. @Croot_Overlord is right in that reason is not a mechanism to push back on these people - you have to fill them with shame, guilt and fear. That’s the same thing that “they” have been doing to us. Problem for them though is that some other folks have started to learn the playbook