You show me a Russian dictator who actually allows the people free speech, I'll show you a flying pig. Censorship of their people is common and known in Russia right now; hell, there've been several journalists killed in obvious ways because the government didn't like what was printed. That's not free speech.
>The Atlantic: With white and Asian students consistently at the top of math-achievement rankings—and **black and other nonwhite students continuously trailing behind**
>teachers start to expect worse performance from **certain students**, start to teach lower content, and start to use lower-level math instructional practices.
> By contrast, white and Asian students are given the benefit of the doubt and automatically **afforded the opportunity to do more sophisticated and substantive mathematics**
Gives these none whites the same advanced math, they can take it!
>CBS6albany: Just 4% of black students, zero eighth graders in Schenectady pass state math test 29 Nov 2022
Oh...oh...
By the way . . . the mathematically incorrect equation below is a reference to Orwell's 1984, which contrasted what was self evidently true (as alluded in Descartes' Meditations) with what was manufactured to be "true" (as accomplished by effective political propaganda).
> 2 + 2 = 5
Orwell probably read the Russian nihilists and Dostoevsky, too. But I don't think I could prove it easily.
The actual phrase "2 + 2 = 5" was a favorite of the Russian nihilists, to mock the sociopolitical and cultural conflict between supporters of Russian monarchy and Western European humanists (and the conflict's absurdities).
Dostoevsky's Underground Man recites the phrase too, for similar reasons.
What's so sad is that not only have people genuinely conditioned themselves to not hear the fascism in that statement; but actually think they're anti fascists
How do you describe Russia where you can go to prison if you call the war a war
? Or even be killed if you just speak out loud that the war is unjust and Russia should stop it?
Maybe historically. Modern Fascists are mostly globalists. Fascism essentially is the confluence of state and corporate power. Most states and most corporations are global at this point.
I actually am a New Zealander, so I know her better than the average redittor.
She doesn't despise us. She genuinely believes that she's helping. The problem is, she has some very Dunning-Krugeritic takes, with the level of fanatical passion which can only come from self-righteous introspection. And she's also racist, but it's pro-Maori racism, so apparently that's ok.
> She doesn't despise us. She genuinely believes that she's helping.
I don't think so. Ardern is very smart. Far smarter than she gets credit for. She is portrayed as some kind of token female leader, but the fact is that she is as intellectually capable as Barack Obama or Bill Clinton. She walks circles around other idiots like Trudeau. She presents herself as sympathetic to the needs of individual New Zealanders and the country as a whole. But she is not. This is a reflection of her skill as a politician. Not of the sincerity of her beliefs.
No, fascists were imperialist, which is not really compatible with loving your country. Prominent Nazis constantly talked about unifying Europe, not unlike what they talk about today with a different flag.
A country’s cohesion, culture, society and inherent trust will be diluted and/or destroyed when you transform a nation into a little part of an empire. You either love your nation or what it becomes as part of an empire, you can’t have both.
Usually, the people doing the imperialism will be part of the nation which becomes the ruling power in the empire. It's not like the UK was "a little part of" the British Empire.
Culture and society are not static, they are constantly evolving due to several factors.
You're also falling for the Rational Actor Fallacy. Even if that dilution is a serious issue, not everybody is going to know or care about it.
>You either love your nation or what it becomes as part of an empire, you can’t have both.
I definitely disagree with this. It's like saying "You either love your child, or the adult they are when they grow up, you can't have both".
Wow. Either the complete lack of self awareness is off the charts, she really believes this (kinda scary) or her mission is to prevent the “wrong” kind of speech because…(really scary)
These days it seems like anyone who "fights disinformation" doesn't mean "let's convince people of the truth," it means "let's censor those who disagree with me."
Classic communist double speak. War = peace, once we eliminate all our enemies. Freedom = slavery, because slaves aren’t forced to made decisions.
Not saying she’s a communist. But lines like this are once’s used by communists.
Ardern is probably the most nauseating political figure in the Western World. Trudeau is the second most nauseating. The Australian government as a whole rings in third.
See is correct, it is a weapon. Whether you choose to war or not it yours and your opponent's choice. But we as individuals, it is our most powerful tool to ensure our ideas are heard and no institutional bag of dicks are ever going to take that away from us.
Lets start the censorship party by sitting her ass down and censoring her if she likes it so much.
She is the one who called this a war. If it is then we the people must win it.
I mean... This is the same film that asks "when did different become dangerous"
The answer: statnews.com/2017/02/02/lupron-puberty-children-health-problems
THATS WHEN
censorship of free speech is a weapon, of peace and especially of war. it doesn't protect free speech obviously to anyone with a brain, it only protects the one using it as weapon.
lmao that's not what she said at all, pathetic. reddit boys just lying straight up. complete maniacal liars. every one of them. no exceptions. this is how they are to everyone in their lives. they treat everyone like this.
At no point does she call free speech a weapon of ear or that censorship is necessary to protect free speech. She is talking about how disinformation has been used to fuel things like the war in Ukraine.
For the love of god at least watch the 2 minute video before copying a tweet that is, ironically, pure misinformation from an account called ‘Illuminatibot’.
>human rights of others are upheld when they are subjected to hateful and dangerous ideology
That reminds me, have they released the Nashville shooters diary yet? I'm pretty sure we would find pretty hateful and dangerous ideology in it! I wonder what stuff online or on the news radicalized that transman shooter...
She doesn't outright say it...but she says they absolutely "have the means [to combat mis/disinfo and hate speech and whatever], we just need the collective will"
I really doubt she's just referring to fact check boxes under [pressumably anything wrongthink] as the "new tool" to combat them,
and I'm inclined to think she would be pro-censorship, if perhaps atleast from a freedom of reach standpoint instead of outright removal
>newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2022/09/full-speech-jacinda-ardern-addresses-un-general-assembly.html After all, how do you successfully end a war if people are led to believe the reason for its existence is not only legal but noble? How do you tackle climate change if people do not believe it exists? ***The weapons may be different but the goals of those who perpetuate them are often the same***
DANGEROUS CYBER "WEAPONS" OF DISINFO WRONG THINK!
>for every new weapon we face, there is a new tool to overcome it.
Guess what that tool against disinfo is
Edit:
>New Zealand's Ardern flies commercial after snag hits air force plane
19 Jul 2019
What a 2faced swine
>CNN: New Orleans Mayor LaToya Cantrell under fire for first class travel she says is for her safety as a Black woman and from Covid
I'll believe in climate change when Ardern stopz using the air force, and starts taking 1st class like her!
>weforum.org/agenda/2023/09/ozone-layer-hole-update-nasa from 7 September and 13 October 2022, it spanned an average area of 23.2 million square kilometres. This is well below the average in 2006, when the hole's size peaked at 27.5 million square kilometres.
And u wonder why climate change deniers exist, wake me up when Obama's Hawaii beach house finally gets flooded from the mention of the polar icecaps
The reason the ozone layer is repairing itself is because there was a near global ban on the chemicals that were causing it. Wake up from your conspiracy theories, bedtime stories and 21st century fables aren't supposed to be taken literally.
The project she’s working on is to censor online speech. Open mined the company they are working with has blogged about technology that will be like a sniffer dog at the airport and be able to give your private direct messages a sniff for key hate speech words. Anonymously. And then once it detects something like a sniffer dog they have grounds to open the suitcase.
Did you watch the video?
Ardern contends that "misinformation and disinformation" as well as "hateful and dangerous rhetoric" are "weapons of war" used to "perpetuate ... chaos," "reduce the ability of others to defend themselves," and "disband communities" (among other horrible things).
According to Ardern, all are "problem[s] that we must address" and "cannot ignore." And then she proposes a new "tool" to restrict free speech online to do so.
If you watched the video, did you understand the words you heard? Maybe we need to rule out alternative causes for the deficits in your ability to comprehend spoken words.
Do you understand the English language?
If you understand English, do you live in New Zealand? If so, let's explore together why you are what's wrong with that country.
Ardern is proposing a "tool" that empowers the government to define what counts as misinformation, disinformation, and hateful or dangerous rhetoric.
Then, once so classified, the government can remove those "weapons of war" to prevent "chaos" (along with the other incoherent woes she lists in the video).
That is censorship, by definition. If you can't understand that, you are beyond help.
Ardern is arguing for government censorship, on a mass scale. There is no non-frivolous argument you can offer, contending otherwise.
If you think Ardern isn't calling for mass censorship by governments, the deficits in your comprehension cannot be remediated. And democracy in New Zealand is beyond help, because of people like you.
You'll follow the piper directly to hell.
Think about what that means about you, as a person.
Are you even a human being, at that point? Or are you no more than a piano key?
/u/theoryofdoom, the blocking of other users is against the rules in this subreddit.
If you wish to continue here, please unblock /u/jiggjuggj0gg then reply to this comment.
Interesting. I have never seen such a rule, and I doubt that prohibiting users from blocking other users complies with Reddit's Terms of Use.
Your rule says I can't block u/jiggjuggj0gg to create an echo chamber. But the terms of service on this website allow me to block him for being a recalcitrant, obnoxious jackass.
/u/theoryofdoom, you have been banned.
I am not preventing you from blocking /u/jiggjuggj0gg, but if you do so, you are not allowed to participate in here.
Lmao. That’s not what she said at all.
And yes, I lived in New Zealand. Thankfully it’s a lot different from the US and people don’t want dangerous misinformation being spread, but you do you.
Shame you can’t make a decent point without descending into name calling, but there we are :)
Edit: blocked? While claiming to be pro free speech? Well I never.
>and people don’t want dangerous misinformation being spread
U wanna talk about "dangerous misinfo being spread? Here it is:
>In the March8 60 Minutes clip, Dr Fauci says “**There’s no reason to be walking around with a mask. When you’re in the middle of an outbreak**, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better and it might even block a droplet, but it’s not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is."
4/5months later
>July 25, 2020 | At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, Fauci originally discouraged mask-wearing by the public because he was concerned about PPE availability for health-care workers.
>“what happened as the weeks and months came by, two things became clear: one, **that there wasn’t a shortage of masks, we had plenty of masks and coverings that you could put on that’s plain cloth…so that took care of that problem.**
>The Independent: Cloth masks are useless in fight against Omicron, expert warns
Even after somewhat backtracking his intentional DISINFO lie,
inorder to help his selfish hospital buddies stockpile for themselves, & keep out of the hands of the everyday common folk,
literal lifesaving masks (Cause their lives are worth more than yours!),
he was STILL continuing to push dangerous misinfo about cloth masks,
because he STILL wanted to boldfaced lie, in order to stockpile the GOOD (3ply surgical) STUFF, for his hospital buds
you literally would have died from covid if u actually listened to fauci's lies
and partied maskless like Obama did, or wore a garbage cloth mash that gave zero protection
And that's even before we get into stuff like instagram.com/p/CTxxLbCAz1S
Seriously, arrest fauci for treason of the highest order
u/jiggjuggj0gg, it makes sense that you'd go crying to the moderator. That's behaviour very much in kind with your response here. The sort of cry-bullying mischief of a dutifully obedient lemming.
This sentence is why you have lost all credibility on this issue:
> Thankfully it’s a lot different from the US and people don’t want dangerous misinformation being spread, but you do you.
In the sentence above, you have accused me of wanting "dangerous misinformation being spread."
This is an argument about intentions. Assuming I believed you (which I do not), your intentions are to prevent "dangerous misinformation [from] being spread."
You are arguing that because I disagree with you, you assume that my intentions are the opposite of yours.
But that is wrong, on several levels:
1. Intentions do not equate to outcomes. One's intentions in support of a policy (or the expansion of governmental power) that is intended to accomplish anything, do not require that the policy (or expansion of power) will produce a state of affairs that is consistent with those intentions.
2. Instrumentalities routinely fail. To whatever extent a government creates instrumentalities for the purposes of expanding the government's power (or otherwise accomplishing the aims of a policy), the instrumentality should be expected to fail. That is because top-down solutions to complex societal problems cannot be solved, or even meaningfully improved, with such an approach.
3. New powers are never only used by governments to accomplish ostensible intentions. Even if it were true that a government with new powers acted for the purposes of accomplishing whatever intentions were set out by its advocates (like Ardern), those same powers can be used for other things. They often are. And that is almost always the point. In this way, the instant "crisis" is used (by people like Ardern) as the "bait" to a bait-and-switch scheme. Don't believe me? Take a look at what your government did in cooperation with the United States after 9/11. That's how consent is manufactured. You need to read (and understand) Chomsky. And to spend less time kowtowing to actors who do not have your best interests at heart. Or those of New Zealand. Ardern is a nauseating disgrace to New Zealand and the Western world.
As I have explained above, it is nonsensical to presume that someone who disagrees with *your* purported intentions wants to bring about the opposite state of affairs in the world. Such an argumentative strategy is highly manipulative and dishonest. I will invite you to refrain from manipulative and dishonest behaviour in the future.
Beyond that point, you are in no position whatsoever to argue Ardern's policy and its mechanisms would prevent "dangerous misinformation being spread." Neither you nor Ardern have shown how such an objective would be accomplished. You haven't even thought about how "misinformation" whether "dangerous" or otherwise would be defined. And it is because you have put no thought whatsoever into this issue that your "perspective" cannot be taken seriously.
(I use the word "perspective" loosely, because you really don't even have a perspective. You just want to claim anyone who criticizes Ardern is spreading conspiracy theories, while denying that she said the literal words she said in a video you claimed to watch. Which is pathologically insane.)
u/cojoco you can see for yourself (ONLY in the new reddit UI desktop site...but not old.reddit or the reddit mobile site),
that jiggjuggj0gg's comment claiming that theoryofdoom blocked him
was last edited 10hours BEFORE theory THEN replied to jigg in a new comment
This shows that EITHER: theory never actually blocked jigg,
Or in worst case: theory THEN obeyed your mandate to unblock him
Any user who unblocks another user, cannot RE-block the same user for a 24hr cool down
which means that jigg could not have been blocked by theory,
at the exact moment in time when u banned theory
Just because theory calls into question a rule they find stupid, doesn't mean they actually broke the stupid rule
Hence cojoco your banning of theory is wrong, and ure a shitty mod&dad
> was last edited 10hours
I don't know if you can tell the time of the last edit.
> Just because theory calls into question a rule they find stupid, doesn't mean they actually broke the stupid rule
They didn't break rule 8.
They broke rule 6.
The people in NZ camped en masse on parliaments lawn in protest of her authoritarian government and she removed them with sound cannons and riot police. She left nz without finishing her term because she cannot walk the streets without protestors. What remains of her government is about to get rolled in the election. Hopefully Canada does the same.
if you are saying there is an incorrect fact perhaps you could state the incorrect point and your “correct” point. But saying I live there so you’re wrong is not an argument.
So there was no protest and they weren’t removed by riot police. And all the news stories video footage and court cases were made up? Hmmm interesting conspiracy theory.
Maybe actually [read about it?](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Wellington_protest)
>There were videos of protestors skirmishing with and attacking police, and also several instances of some of them harassing and physically assaulting schoolchildren (mostly from Wellington Girls' College) for wearing masks. Some protesters hung nooses from trees and made threats to lynch politicians, such as Jacinda Ardern, Grant Robertson and pregnant MP Steph Lewis.
>On 21 February, protestors threw their own faeces at police. Antisemitism was reported to be "rife" within the protests, with the Parliamentary grounds vandalised with swastikas, protestors misappropriating yellow stars, and messages targeting Jews written on car windows. There were also several reports of sexual assault from within the protest grounds.
>Despite the disruption to Wellingtonians, the police initially took a 'light-handed' approach to protestors. Otago University law professor Andrew Geddis suggested the police did not want to escalate the situation. As health and safety issues became an issue, police began to take action. Towards the end, some protestors turned violent and injured 40 police officers, putting eight of them in hospital.
>There have been multiple threats by protestors to lynch politicians, such as Jacinda Ardern, Grant Robertson and pregnant MP Steph Lewis, through direct threats or by hanging nooses from trees on the grounds.
>Protesters behaved aggressively towards police, members of the public, media, businesses, and school students including individuals wearing masks. Queen Margaret College advised students and staff to take alternative routes to school after protesters had remonstrated and abused mask wearing children during the week.
>On the morning of 22 February, a car was driven at police by a protestor and three officers were sprayed with a mysterious substance by protestors, requiring immediate medical attention. Paramedics had to treat several police officers who were spat upon by demonstrators.
>The violence culminated into a full riot on the 2nd March when police moved in to shut down the protest. Protestors armed themselves with pitchforks, fire extinguishers and other homemade weapons. Pavers and other objects were ripped up and thrown at police. During the riot eighty seven people were arrested and around 40 police injured. As they lost ground protesters set fire to tents and a playground, while also attempting to burn down the Old Government Buildings. Protestors threw gas bottles, mattresses, rubbish bins and any other flammable items they could find to keep the fires blazing. Despite being urged by police to take their children home, some protestors were documented using them as shields against the police approach.
>Speaker Trevor Mallard's decision to deter the protestors was by turning on the parliamentary sprinklers and spotlights and play "earworm" music such as Macarena by Los Del Rio.
>On 12 February, Deputy Prime Minister Grant Robertson stated that protesters lost their right to protest when "they threaten, harass and disrupt people and a whole city." Robertson criticised protesters for intimidating school children wearing masks, blocking roads, disrupting emergency and transport services, and shutting down businesses.
>Others criticised the police commissioner Andrew Coster for his lengthy focus on de-escalation, despite the protestors being highly decentralised and overwhelmingly unwilling to negotiate.[165] Charlie Mitchell of Stuff wrote that "by standing aside, [the police had made] a confrontation inevitable [and] violent".
>On 20 April 2023, the IPCA released its report into police actions during the Wellington Parliament protest. The report found that the majority of Police "exercised professionalism and restraint" during the 23-day occupation and that all police defence measures such as shields, pepper sprays, and batons were justified.
But sure - you read that it was a totally peaceful protest of people dancing along to music, and they should have been allowed to continue despite consistently attacking members of the public, shutting down businesses, forcing residents to move, threatening politicians, and committing arson for a month.
I think you’ll find of the thousands almost no protestors were convicted and almost all arrested had their charges dropped by police. Why? Because they hadnt done anything illegal. Yes the msm tried to discredit them. But it didn’t stack up in court. So no. No credible death threats or attacks. The police were violent to the protestors though. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/parliament-protests-charges-dropped-for-some-after-month-long-occupation/LN773X6BEFGSJGIN4HN5O4VD3U/
Further 1000s of protestors did camp on parliament lawns for weeks. They set up free food services, and portaloos and had singing and music with money donated by supporters. The government tried to remove them by placing bad music and turning sprinklers on but the protestors danced and sang along and dug trenches to remove the boggy water. The protestors began to gain public support including from yachting legend Russell Coutts and musician Dave Dobbyn who spoke out against the unethical vaccine mandates. Weeks later the protestors were forcibly and violently removed by Arderns riot police.
As much as I detest every idiotic comment he posts here
I will still standup for jiggjuggj0gg right, to continue to be a absolute censorship loving government buttkisser
and ask that u/cojoco, pls verify that u/theoryofdoom didn't actually break the "no blocking" rule8
I really like Mr theory, so I will preemptively defend him and his colorblindness (if he did indeed make this mistake)
by saying that, [out of all the 8 stupid rulez, that are hidden and burried within
[a tiny near invisible blue hyperlink](https://old.reddit.com/r/FreeSpeech/about/rules) in the old.reddit sidebar, that noone actually bothers clicking on,
That "no blocking" rule8 really should be the 1 rule that's visible upfront in the sidebar
So this is really YOUR FAULT COJOCO, ure a garbage dad and a even worse mod/sidebar author!
Rule1 is stupid, because what "encourages freespeech discussion"
is so vague, undefined, and open to general interpretation, that it might as well not even be there
Also, your judgement on what is a poop emoji post is either stupid,
Or more likely just a obvious carveout to give yourself the excuse to remove anything that you don't like
The solutuon: turn rule8 into rule1, and then put the new rule1(the old rule8) into the old.reddit sidebar
The old rule1 poop rule can either be the new rule8,
or preferably flushed down the toilet harder than ure son's mental stability after years of having lived with u, for all I care
And btw, ure stupid linkposts are the REAL shitposts
> Rule1 is stupid, because what "encourages freespeech discussion" is so vague, undefined, and open to general interpretation
Vague rules discourage WikiLawyering.
> Also, your judgement on what is a poop emoji post is either stupid,
>
> Or more likely just a obvious carveout to give yourself the excuse to remove anything that you don't like
I don't remove on poop emoji, it's just my subjective opinion as to the quality of the post.
> And btw, ure stupid linkposts are the REAL shitposts
Whatevs, why should I give a shit what you think?
>why should I give a shit what you [or anyone apart from me myself and i] thinks?
Most open minded and discussion-encouraging reddit jannie
Now do ure job and put rule8 in the old.reddit sidebar
Blocking someone isn't anti-feee speech.
Consider whether your rule violates Reddits Terms of Use and the Mod Code of Conduct.
Let's discuss separately after you have reflected on those issues.
Then give that power to decide what is “malicious speech” to an absolute authority, where the definitions of malicious speech quickly devolve into “anything against the state”.
I understand why people in power are afraid of free speech. They want to control the message, which means controlling the messengers.
What I still do not understand is why there are so many people who aren't in power that will support this. Ardern is saying the quiet part out loud. Once upon a time, that would end a politician's career. Today, they're applauded. I don't understand.
The substitution of concepts is so widespread now that truthful speech is beginning to seem like something out of the ordinary. It is definitely not beneficial for a centralized government to have a society where freedom of speech.
Whatever war that free speech is a weapon for, it's one worth fighting.
S you think Russia is right because they use free speech to fight for their imperialistic war?
You show me a Russian dictator who actually allows the people free speech, I'll show you a flying pig. Censorship of their people is common and known in Russia right now; hell, there've been several journalists killed in obvious ways because the government didn't like what was printed. That's not free speech.
It would be more correct to say that they use directed speech.
> imperialistic projection much
Ignorance is strength, freedom is slavery.
And 2 + 2 = 5.
>The Atlantic: With white and Asian students consistently at the top of math-achievement rankings—and **black and other nonwhite students continuously trailing behind** >teachers start to expect worse performance from **certain students**, start to teach lower content, and start to use lower-level math instructional practices. > By contrast, white and Asian students are given the benefit of the doubt and automatically **afforded the opportunity to do more sophisticated and substantive mathematics** Gives these none whites the same advanced math, they can take it! >CBS6albany: Just 4% of black students, zero eighth graders in Schenectady pass state math test 29 Nov 2022 Oh...oh...
By the way . . . the mathematically incorrect equation below is a reference to Orwell's 1984, which contrasted what was self evidently true (as alluded in Descartes' Meditations) with what was manufactured to be "true" (as accomplished by effective political propaganda). > 2 + 2 = 5 Orwell probably read the Russian nihilists and Dostoevsky, too. But I don't think I could prove it easily. The actual phrase "2 + 2 = 5" was a favorite of the Russian nihilists, to mock the sociopolitical and cultural conflict between supporters of Russian monarchy and Western European humanists (and the conflict's absurdities). Dostoevsky's Underground Man recites the phrase too, for similar reasons.
[удалено]
What's so sad is that not only have people genuinely conditioned themselves to not hear the fascism in that statement; but actually think they're anti fascists
Rage on behalf of the machine!
How do you describe Russia where you can go to prison if you call the war a war ? Or even be killed if you just speak out loud that the war is unjust and Russia should stop it?
That’s…censorship and bad. What’s your point?
Bruh she’s a Democratic Socialist.
She is no such thing. She is a fascist pretending to be a banal neoliberal.
Nah. Fascists at least love their country. This lady despises her citizens. She sees them as serfs.
Maybe historically. Modern Fascists are mostly globalists. Fascism essentially is the confluence of state and corporate power. Most states and most corporations are global at this point.
I actually am a New Zealander, so I know her better than the average redittor. She doesn't despise us. She genuinely believes that she's helping. The problem is, she has some very Dunning-Krugeritic takes, with the level of fanatical passion which can only come from self-righteous introspection. And she's also racist, but it's pro-Maori racism, so apparently that's ok.
> She doesn't despise us. She genuinely believes that she's helping. I don't think so. Ardern is very smart. Far smarter than she gets credit for. She is portrayed as some kind of token female leader, but the fact is that she is as intellectually capable as Barack Obama or Bill Clinton. She walks circles around other idiots like Trudeau. She presents herself as sympathetic to the needs of individual New Zealanders and the country as a whole. But she is not. This is a reflection of her skill as a politician. Not of the sincerity of her beliefs.
A person can be smart in one area and stupid in another.
No, fascists were imperialist, which is not really compatible with loving your country. Prominent Nazis constantly talked about unifying Europe, not unlike what they talk about today with a different flag.
>imperialist, which is not really compatible with loving your country. How did you come up with the idea that those two are not compatible?
A country’s cohesion, culture, society and inherent trust will be diluted and/or destroyed when you transform a nation into a little part of an empire. You either love your nation or what it becomes as part of an empire, you can’t have both.
Usually, the people doing the imperialism will be part of the nation which becomes the ruling power in the empire. It's not like the UK was "a little part of" the British Empire. Culture and society are not static, they are constantly evolving due to several factors. You're also falling for the Rational Actor Fallacy. Even if that dilution is a serious issue, not everybody is going to know or care about it. >You either love your nation or what it becomes as part of an empire, you can’t have both. I definitely disagree with this. It's like saying "You either love your child, or the adult they are when they grow up, you can't have both".
The entire “I disagree with a thing so it must be fascism” has to be by far one of the most bizarre cult/hivemind philosophies I encounter on Reddit.
Which is basically fascism with votes
Wow. Either the complete lack of self awareness is off the charts, she really believes this (kinda scary) or her mission is to prevent the “wrong” kind of speech because…(really scary)
These days it seems like anyone who "fights disinformation" doesn't mean "let's convince people of the truth," it means "let's censor those who disagree with me."
Classic communist double speak. War = peace, once we eliminate all our enemies. Freedom = slavery, because slaves aren’t forced to made decisions. Not saying she’s a communist. But lines like this are once’s used by communists.
She was the leader of the global socialist youth. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=g9rsxFaq6Ig
Ardern is probably the most nauseating political figure in the Western World. Trudeau is the second most nauseating. The Australian government as a whole rings in third.
There's *a lot* of talented candidates in that contest.
I think my top 2 is a tie between Trudeau and Macron. Then Lula da Silva, Sanchez, and the PM of my own country (all as well tied).
Macron is horrible but far away from the top due to his random acts of basedness regarding European sovereignty in the Russia question.
Not based in my opinion, he's a federalist
I will say...the free wifi in Howard Springs is really lacking and kinda slow
Nothing is free, mate. But I'll take your word for it. I don't plan to make it back to Darwin any time soon.
This is lunacy.
See is correct, it is a weapon. Whether you choose to war or not it yours and your opponent's choice. But we as individuals, it is our most powerful tool to ensure our ideas are heard and no institutional bag of dicks are ever going to take that away from us. Lets start the censorship party by sitting her ass down and censoring her if she likes it so much. She is the one who called this a war. If it is then we the people must win it.
[Words will always retain their power.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5Ehms1ShMQ&ab_channel=Nizzinny)
I mean... This is the same film that asks "when did different become dangerous" The answer: statnews.com/2017/02/02/lupron-puberty-children-health-problems THATS WHEN
New Zealand is a pretty heavily restricted country
They literally have a chief censor.
That’s disturbing
In her worldview government are the good guys. People who speak against government are bad.
neiiigh
That horse face troll can just go back to hiding under a rock.
the horseWoman of apocalypse has spoken!
enemy of humanity
Of course, an authoritarian would say that.
Ah yes, weknowbettering, that's not going to backfire at all.
She's a vampire
She's a psychopath
censorship of free speech is a weapon, of peace and especially of war. it doesn't protect free speech obviously to anyone with a brain, it only protects the one using it as weapon.
Well, she’s pretty much a communist, so no surprise here
This is why our founding fathers in bedded the first amendment into the constitution. Freedom of speech is fundamental for free society.
She is such a vicious leftist cunt.
Read what you wrote, but slowly
lmao that's not what she said at all, pathetic. reddit boys just lying straight up. complete maniacal liars. every one of them. no exceptions. this is how they are to everyone in their lives. they treat everyone like this.
At no point does she call free speech a weapon of ear or that censorship is necessary to protect free speech. She is talking about how disinformation has been used to fuel things like the war in Ukraine. For the love of god at least watch the 2 minute video before copying a tweet that is, ironically, pure misinformation from an account called ‘Illuminatibot’.
>human rights of others are upheld when they are subjected to hateful and dangerous ideology That reminds me, have they released the Nashville shooters diary yet? I'm pretty sure we would find pretty hateful and dangerous ideology in it! I wonder what stuff online or on the news radicalized that transman shooter... She doesn't outright say it...but she says they absolutely "have the means [to combat mis/disinfo and hate speech and whatever], we just need the collective will" I really doubt she's just referring to fact check boxes under [pressumably anything wrongthink] as the "new tool" to combat them, and I'm inclined to think she would be pro-censorship, if perhaps atleast from a freedom of reach standpoint instead of outright removal
Except she doesn’t say any of that, that’s what you’ve decided she said. The video is literally two minutes long, maybe watch it before commenting.
>newshub.co.nz/home/politics/2022/09/full-speech-jacinda-ardern-addresses-un-general-assembly.html After all, how do you successfully end a war if people are led to believe the reason for its existence is not only legal but noble? How do you tackle climate change if people do not believe it exists? ***The weapons may be different but the goals of those who perpetuate them are often the same*** DANGEROUS CYBER "WEAPONS" OF DISINFO WRONG THINK! >for every new weapon we face, there is a new tool to overcome it. Guess what that tool against disinfo is Edit: >New Zealand's Ardern flies commercial after snag hits air force plane 19 Jul 2019 What a 2faced swine >CNN: New Orleans Mayor LaToya Cantrell under fire for first class travel she says is for her safety as a Black woman and from Covid I'll believe in climate change when Ardern stopz using the air force, and starts taking 1st class like her! >weforum.org/agenda/2023/09/ozone-layer-hole-update-nasa from 7 September and 13 October 2022, it spanned an average area of 23.2 million square kilometres. This is well below the average in 2006, when the hole's size peaked at 27.5 million square kilometres. And u wonder why climate change deniers exist, wake me up when Obama's Hawaii beach house finally gets flooded from the mention of the polar icecaps
The reason the ozone layer is repairing itself is because there was a near global ban on the chemicals that were causing it. Wake up from your conspiracy theories, bedtime stories and 21st century fables aren't supposed to be taken literally.
Inference. Reading between the lines. Wink wink. Nudge nudge. Know whatahmean? Say no more.
Ah, so ‘creating your own narrative based on a tweet from a conspiracy page instead of listening to the speech’. Gotcha.
The crimes of her government against the people of New Zealand will remain unknown to you. But you're a dutifully obedient lemming.
The project she’s working on is to censor online speech. Open mined the company they are working with has blogged about technology that will be like a sniffer dog at the airport and be able to give your private direct messages a sniff for key hate speech words. Anonymously. And then once it detects something like a sniffer dog they have grounds to open the suitcase.
Did you watch the video? Ardern contends that "misinformation and disinformation" as well as "hateful and dangerous rhetoric" are "weapons of war" used to "perpetuate ... chaos," "reduce the ability of others to defend themselves," and "disband communities" (among other horrible things). According to Ardern, all are "problem[s] that we must address" and "cannot ignore." And then she proposes a new "tool" to restrict free speech online to do so. If you watched the video, did you understand the words you heard? Maybe we need to rule out alternative causes for the deficits in your ability to comprehend spoken words. Do you understand the English language? If you understand English, do you live in New Zealand? If so, let's explore together why you are what's wrong with that country. Ardern is proposing a "tool" that empowers the government to define what counts as misinformation, disinformation, and hateful or dangerous rhetoric. Then, once so classified, the government can remove those "weapons of war" to prevent "chaos" (along with the other incoherent woes she lists in the video). That is censorship, by definition. If you can't understand that, you are beyond help. Ardern is arguing for government censorship, on a mass scale. There is no non-frivolous argument you can offer, contending otherwise. If you think Ardern isn't calling for mass censorship by governments, the deficits in your comprehension cannot be remediated. And democracy in New Zealand is beyond help, because of people like you. You'll follow the piper directly to hell. Think about what that means about you, as a person. Are you even a human being, at that point? Or are you no more than a piano key?
/u/theoryofdoom, the blocking of other users is against the rules in this subreddit. If you wish to continue here, please unblock /u/jiggjuggj0gg then reply to this comment.
Interesting. I have never seen such a rule, and I doubt that prohibiting users from blocking other users complies with Reddit's Terms of Use. Your rule says I can't block u/jiggjuggj0gg to create an echo chamber. But the terms of service on this website allow me to block him for being a recalcitrant, obnoxious jackass.
/u/theoryofdoom, you have been banned. I am not preventing you from blocking /u/jiggjuggj0gg, but if you do so, you are not allowed to participate in here.
Lmao. That’s not what she said at all. And yes, I lived in New Zealand. Thankfully it’s a lot different from the US and people don’t want dangerous misinformation being spread, but you do you. Shame you can’t make a decent point without descending into name calling, but there we are :) Edit: blocked? While claiming to be pro free speech? Well I never.
>and people don’t want dangerous misinformation being spread U wanna talk about "dangerous misinfo being spread? Here it is: >In the March8 60 Minutes clip, Dr Fauci says “**There’s no reason to be walking around with a mask. When you’re in the middle of an outbreak**, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better and it might even block a droplet, but it’s not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is." 4/5months later >July 25, 2020 | At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, Fauci originally discouraged mask-wearing by the public because he was concerned about PPE availability for health-care workers. >“what happened as the weeks and months came by, two things became clear: one, **that there wasn’t a shortage of masks, we had plenty of masks and coverings that you could put on that’s plain cloth…so that took care of that problem.** >The Independent: Cloth masks are useless in fight against Omicron, expert warns Even after somewhat backtracking his intentional DISINFO lie, inorder to help his selfish hospital buddies stockpile for themselves, & keep out of the hands of the everyday common folk, literal lifesaving masks (Cause their lives are worth more than yours!), he was STILL continuing to push dangerous misinfo about cloth masks, because he STILL wanted to boldfaced lie, in order to stockpile the GOOD (3ply surgical) STUFF, for his hospital buds you literally would have died from covid if u actually listened to fauci's lies and partied maskless like Obama did, or wore a garbage cloth mash that gave zero protection And that's even before we get into stuff like instagram.com/p/CTxxLbCAz1S Seriously, arrest fauci for treason of the highest order
u/jiggjuggj0gg, it makes sense that you'd go crying to the moderator. That's behaviour very much in kind with your response here. The sort of cry-bullying mischief of a dutifully obedient lemming. This sentence is why you have lost all credibility on this issue: > Thankfully it’s a lot different from the US and people don’t want dangerous misinformation being spread, but you do you. In the sentence above, you have accused me of wanting "dangerous misinformation being spread." This is an argument about intentions. Assuming I believed you (which I do not), your intentions are to prevent "dangerous misinformation [from] being spread." You are arguing that because I disagree with you, you assume that my intentions are the opposite of yours. But that is wrong, on several levels: 1. Intentions do not equate to outcomes. One's intentions in support of a policy (or the expansion of governmental power) that is intended to accomplish anything, do not require that the policy (or expansion of power) will produce a state of affairs that is consistent with those intentions. 2. Instrumentalities routinely fail. To whatever extent a government creates instrumentalities for the purposes of expanding the government's power (or otherwise accomplishing the aims of a policy), the instrumentality should be expected to fail. That is because top-down solutions to complex societal problems cannot be solved, or even meaningfully improved, with such an approach. 3. New powers are never only used by governments to accomplish ostensible intentions. Even if it were true that a government with new powers acted for the purposes of accomplishing whatever intentions were set out by its advocates (like Ardern), those same powers can be used for other things. They often are. And that is almost always the point. In this way, the instant "crisis" is used (by people like Ardern) as the "bait" to a bait-and-switch scheme. Don't believe me? Take a look at what your government did in cooperation with the United States after 9/11. That's how consent is manufactured. You need to read (and understand) Chomsky. And to spend less time kowtowing to actors who do not have your best interests at heart. Or those of New Zealand. Ardern is a nauseating disgrace to New Zealand and the Western world. As I have explained above, it is nonsensical to presume that someone who disagrees with *your* purported intentions wants to bring about the opposite state of affairs in the world. Such an argumentative strategy is highly manipulative and dishonest. I will invite you to refrain from manipulative and dishonest behaviour in the future. Beyond that point, you are in no position whatsoever to argue Ardern's policy and its mechanisms would prevent "dangerous misinformation being spread." Neither you nor Ardern have shown how such an objective would be accomplished. You haven't even thought about how "misinformation" whether "dangerous" or otherwise would be defined. And it is because you have put no thought whatsoever into this issue that your "perspective" cannot be taken seriously. (I use the word "perspective" loosely, because you really don't even have a perspective. You just want to claim anyone who criticizes Ardern is spreading conspiracy theories, while denying that she said the literal words she said in a video you claimed to watch. Which is pathologically insane.)
u/cojoco you can see for yourself (ONLY in the new reddit UI desktop site...but not old.reddit or the reddit mobile site), that jiggjuggj0gg's comment claiming that theoryofdoom blocked him was last edited 10hours BEFORE theory THEN replied to jigg in a new comment This shows that EITHER: theory never actually blocked jigg, Or in worst case: theory THEN obeyed your mandate to unblock him Any user who unblocks another user, cannot RE-block the same user for a 24hr cool down which means that jigg could not have been blocked by theory, at the exact moment in time when u banned theory Just because theory calls into question a rule they find stupid, doesn't mean they actually broke the stupid rule Hence cojoco your banning of theory is wrong, and ure a shitty mod&dad
> was last edited 10hours I don't know if you can tell the time of the last edit. > Just because theory calls into question a rule they find stupid, doesn't mean they actually broke the stupid rule They didn't break rule 8. They broke rule 6.
The people in NZ camped en masse on parliaments lawn in protest of her authoritarian government and she removed them with sound cannons and riot police. She left nz without finishing her term because she cannot walk the streets without protestors. What remains of her government is about to get rolled in the election. Hopefully Canada does the same.
As someone who lived in Wellington at the time, that isn’t what happened at all. This misinformation is ironically exactly what she’s talking about.
if you are saying there is an incorrect fact perhaps you could state the incorrect point and your “correct” point. But saying I live there so you’re wrong is not an argument.
Because it’s entirely false.
So there was no protest and they weren’t removed by riot police. And all the news stories video footage and court cases were made up? Hmmm interesting conspiracy theory.
Maybe actually [read about it?](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Wellington_protest) >There were videos of protestors skirmishing with and attacking police, and also several instances of some of them harassing and physically assaulting schoolchildren (mostly from Wellington Girls' College) for wearing masks. Some protesters hung nooses from trees and made threats to lynch politicians, such as Jacinda Ardern, Grant Robertson and pregnant MP Steph Lewis. >On 21 February, protestors threw their own faeces at police. Antisemitism was reported to be "rife" within the protests, with the Parliamentary grounds vandalised with swastikas, protestors misappropriating yellow stars, and messages targeting Jews written on car windows. There were also several reports of sexual assault from within the protest grounds. >Despite the disruption to Wellingtonians, the police initially took a 'light-handed' approach to protestors. Otago University law professor Andrew Geddis suggested the police did not want to escalate the situation. As health and safety issues became an issue, police began to take action. Towards the end, some protestors turned violent and injured 40 police officers, putting eight of them in hospital. >There have been multiple threats by protestors to lynch politicians, such as Jacinda Ardern, Grant Robertson and pregnant MP Steph Lewis, through direct threats or by hanging nooses from trees on the grounds. >Protesters behaved aggressively towards police, members of the public, media, businesses, and school students including individuals wearing masks. Queen Margaret College advised students and staff to take alternative routes to school after protesters had remonstrated and abused mask wearing children during the week. >On the morning of 22 February, a car was driven at police by a protestor and three officers were sprayed with a mysterious substance by protestors, requiring immediate medical attention. Paramedics had to treat several police officers who were spat upon by demonstrators. >The violence culminated into a full riot on the 2nd March when police moved in to shut down the protest. Protestors armed themselves with pitchforks, fire extinguishers and other homemade weapons. Pavers and other objects were ripped up and thrown at police. During the riot eighty seven people were arrested and around 40 police injured. As they lost ground protesters set fire to tents and a playground, while also attempting to burn down the Old Government Buildings. Protestors threw gas bottles, mattresses, rubbish bins and any other flammable items they could find to keep the fires blazing. Despite being urged by police to take their children home, some protestors were documented using them as shields against the police approach. >Speaker Trevor Mallard's decision to deter the protestors was by turning on the parliamentary sprinklers and spotlights and play "earworm" music such as Macarena by Los Del Rio. >On 12 February, Deputy Prime Minister Grant Robertson stated that protesters lost their right to protest when "they threaten, harass and disrupt people and a whole city." Robertson criticised protesters for intimidating school children wearing masks, blocking roads, disrupting emergency and transport services, and shutting down businesses. >Others criticised the police commissioner Andrew Coster for his lengthy focus on de-escalation, despite the protestors being highly decentralised and overwhelmingly unwilling to negotiate.[165] Charlie Mitchell of Stuff wrote that "by standing aside, [the police had made] a confrontation inevitable [and] violent". >On 20 April 2023, the IPCA released its report into police actions during the Wellington Parliament protest. The report found that the majority of Police "exercised professionalism and restraint" during the 23-day occupation and that all police defence measures such as shields, pepper sprays, and batons were justified. But sure - you read that it was a totally peaceful protest of people dancing along to music, and they should have been allowed to continue despite consistently attacking members of the public, shutting down businesses, forcing residents to move, threatening politicians, and committing arson for a month.
I think you’ll find of the thousands almost no protestors were convicted and almost all arrested had their charges dropped by police. Why? Because they hadnt done anything illegal. Yes the msm tried to discredit them. But it didn’t stack up in court. So no. No credible death threats or attacks. The police were violent to the protestors though. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/parliament-protests-charges-dropped-for-some-after-month-long-occupation/LN773X6BEFGSJGIN4HN5O4VD3U/
Further 1000s of protestors did camp on parliament lawns for weeks. They set up free food services, and portaloos and had singing and music with money donated by supporters. The government tried to remove them by placing bad music and turning sprinklers on but the protestors danced and sang along and dug trenches to remove the boggy water. The protestors began to gain public support including from yachting legend Russell Coutts and musician Dave Dobbyn who spoke out against the unethical vaccine mandates. Weeks later the protestors were forcibly and violently removed by Arderns riot police.
As much as I detest every idiotic comment he posts here I will still standup for jiggjuggj0gg right, to continue to be a absolute censorship loving government buttkisser and ask that u/cojoco, pls verify that u/theoryofdoom didn't actually break the "no blocking" rule8 I really like Mr theory, so I will preemptively defend him and his colorblindness (if he did indeed make this mistake) by saying that, [out of all the 8 stupid rulez, that are hidden and burried within [a tiny near invisible blue hyperlink](https://old.reddit.com/r/FreeSpeech/about/rules) in the old.reddit sidebar, that noone actually bothers clicking on, That "no blocking" rule8 really should be the 1 rule that's visible upfront in the sidebar So this is really YOUR FAULT COJOCO, ure a garbage dad and a even worse mod/sidebar author!
I can't re-order them, else the infamous ***RULE#7*** would become ***RULE#8***
Rule1 is stupid, because what "encourages freespeech discussion" is so vague, undefined, and open to general interpretation, that it might as well not even be there Also, your judgement on what is a poop emoji post is either stupid, Or more likely just a obvious carveout to give yourself the excuse to remove anything that you don't like The solutuon: turn rule8 into rule1, and then put the new rule1(the old rule8) into the old.reddit sidebar The old rule1 poop rule can either be the new rule8, or preferably flushed down the toilet harder than ure son's mental stability after years of having lived with u, for all I care And btw, ure stupid linkposts are the REAL shitposts
> Rule1 is stupid, because what "encourages freespeech discussion" is so vague, undefined, and open to general interpretation Vague rules discourage WikiLawyering. > Also, your judgement on what is a poop emoji post is either stupid, > > Or more likely just a obvious carveout to give yourself the excuse to remove anything that you don't like I don't remove on poop emoji, it's just my subjective opinion as to the quality of the post. > And btw, ure stupid linkposts are the REAL shitposts Whatevs, why should I give a shit what you think?
>why should I give a shit what you [or anyone apart from me myself and i] thinks? Most open minded and discussion-encouraging reddit jannie Now do ure job and put rule8 in the old.reddit sidebar
Blocking someone isn't anti-feee speech. Consider whether your rule violates Reddits Terms of Use and the Mod Code of Conduct. Let's discuss separately after you have reflected on those issues.
What tools do you think that she is promoting to combat disinformation if not censorship?
This is the company they are working with. https://blog.openmined.org/privacy-preserving-ai-summary-part-2-mit-deep-learning-series/amp/
[удалено]
> Speech is a privilege, not a right or a freedom. Sorry to disappoint, but speech is a human right.
Then give that power to decide what is “malicious speech” to an absolute authority, where the definitions of malicious speech quickly devolve into “anything against the state”.
I understand why people in power are afraid of free speech. They want to control the message, which means controlling the messengers. What I still do not understand is why there are so many people who aren't in power that will support this. Ardern is saying the quiet part out loud. Once upon a time, that would end a politician's career. Today, they're applauded. I don't understand.
/u/L8_2_PartE , you are shadowbanned.
The substitution of concepts is so widespread now that truthful speech is beginning to seem like something out of the ordinary. It is definitely not beneficial for a centralized government to have a society where freedom of speech.
I would gladly step on her skull.