You need a foundation in what freedom of speech is and then pair that with the complicated reality we are facing. Your definition of freedom of speech is nonsensical at best.
Freedom of speech refers to government action in public space to suppress speech it does not agree with.
For instance, in our colleges there was some pro-palestine demonstrations. In Florida the government issued a decree to disband SJC. This is classic suppression of free speech because it involves a government action in a public space.
Because we live in a fascist oligarchy though it becomes complicated because corporations simultaneously are controlled and control the government. This merger of the state and corporations complicates the simple definition of freedom of speech.
It’s freedom from legal (or government) sanction, censorship, or retaliation for expressing opinions or ideas.
Because we live in a fascist oligarchy
corporations simultaneously are controlled and control the government
That’s a stretch.
Where was that government control of private companies during the Biden administration or previous administrations dating back to the beginning of the Epstein crimes?
Is the government controlling MSNBC, New York Times, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS?
Private companies aren’t legal authorities, and they aren’t legally obligated to repeat or broadcast anyone’s speech: that’s how social media nowadays defends deplatforming.
Would your claim mean that deplatforming suppresses free speech?
Trump supporters saying STFU doesn’t amount to legal sanctions.
I’ve only seen the Trump administration evade, deny, or deflect.
Where are the legal sanctions suppressing the speech of Epstein victims?
Telling them to STFU obligates them not to exercise their free speech? I don’t see where that gags anyone.
Again, maybe not explicitly. They’re covering for pedophiles. I’m sure you’re ok with that
I guarantee you missed any nuance in this comic. It’s ok, adults are talking
Consequentialist fallacy: outcomes have no bearing on whether a conclusion logically follows from premises.
Circular reasoning: the outcome assumes your conclusion (that STFU can suppress freedom of speech, which is unsupported) is true.
Freedom of speech means you can tell anyone to STFU, and they’re free to speak regardless.
Moreover, as widely reported in the press, the communities who promoted rightwing conspiracy theories about Jeffery Epstein (extracted from more general conspiracy theories that a shadowy cabal of deep state elites runs pedophile rings to harvest adrenochrome) are the Trump voters. They’re the Trump supporters with a longer record than anyone of pushing for the release of those files. Top officials like Kash Patel & Dan Bondingo sprang right out of that community.
Condescension, and we should expect adults to respect logic. Are you an adult? If so, that’s unfortunate.
You need a foundation in what freedom of speech is and then pair that with the complicated reality we are facing. Your definition of freedom of speech is nonsensical at best.
Define freedom of speech. This is not a hard question.
Freedom of speech refers to government action in public space to suppress speech it does not agree with.
For instance, in our colleges there was some pro-palestine demonstrations. In Florida the government issued a decree to disband SJC. This is classic suppression of free speech because it involves a government action in a public space.
Because we live in a fascist oligarchy though it becomes complicated because corporations simultaneously are controlled and control the government. This merger of the state and corporations complicates the simple definition of freedom of speech.
It’s freedom from legal (or government) sanction, censorship, or retaliation for expressing opinions or ideas.
That’s a stretch. Where was that government control of private companies during the Biden administration or previous administrations dating back to the beginning of the Epstein crimes? Is the government controlling MSNBC, New York Times, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS? Private companies aren’t legal authorities, and they aren’t legally obligated to repeat or broadcast anyone’s speech: that’s how social media nowadays defends deplatforming. Would your claim mean that deplatforming suppresses free speech?
Trump supporters saying STFU doesn’t amount to legal sanctions. I’ve only seen the Trump administration evade, deny, or deflect. Where are the legal sanctions suppressing the speech of Epstein victims?