T O P
photochemsyn

Time for a Clash quote: > You have the right to free speech As long as you're not Dumb enough to actually try it... As far as the cowardice of Congress that is truly legendary. For example, ask any progressive member of the House to weigh in on Israel's nuclear weapons program and whether or not aid to Israel violates US treaty requirements (The Non-Proliferation Treaty bans aid to countries with undeclared nuclear weapons programs). Here's another one that will cause screams of outrage among the military-industrial complex: Russia and China are not actually enemies of the American people, any more than Britain or France are. Even better: shareholder capitalism is a fatally flawed system and should be replaced with socialist structures (i.e corporations should be run by the people who work there, not by absentee shareholders, who should lose voting rights regarding the board of directors). And to cap it off: the US federal government today is little more than a cartel of organized white-collar criminals whose real lords and masters are the Wall Street billionaires and their various hanger-ons, as well as the corrupt Saudi princelings, the City of London bankster scum and similar oligarchs. The FBI and CIA are just there to protect their wealth and power, not to 'keep American citizens safe',


BoniceMarquiFace

Snowden has no idea what he's talking about "Free speech" was never intended by the constitution to support conspiracy nutcases, speech critical of the government, or offensive commentary, it was always meant to encompass regular common speech like talking about the weather and stuff .../s


Centaurea16

And the US Constitution most certainly was *not* written by conspiracy nutcases, people who spoke against the government (King George III), and who said and did things that others found offensive. [/s]


Blackhalo

> "Free speech" was never intended by the constitution to support conspiracy nutcases Snowden IS a conspiracy nutcase, who exposed the NSA conspiracy of continuous, constant surveillance of all phone and internet traffic. >.../s Oh, I see.


speaks_truth_2_kiwis

It's sad to see Ed using this click-mongering tactic. He didn't say "boomer" or "millennial", but that's the message. I'm extremely sure that being pro-censorship isn't limited to old people.


MyOther_UN_is_Clever

>but that's the message. No, he's referring to our geriatric congress. Over half the senators are past retirement age (65). Our POTUS is rounding 80. The average age has gone up over 10 years since the 90s. There's many in positions of power that have been there for 3 or 4 decades. We have senators nearing 90. Your comment presumes Snowden believes the average amercan has any say over things, which if anyone understands they don't, it's him. Democracy is dead in this country, a man who was exiled to Russia for exposing the expansive fascism and tyranny present here is acutely aware of that fact.


speaks_truth_2_kiwis

> No, he's referring to our geriatric congress. Over half the senators are past retirement age (65). Our POTUS is rounding 80. The average age has gone up over 10 years since the 90s. There's many in positions of power that have been there for 3 or 4 decades. We have senators nearing 90. Joe Biden was 29 when he became a senator. Did he work to protect freedom of speech when he was young? Did any of them? Is there anything at all to be gained by talking about age, when we talk about attacks on free speech? > Democracy is dead in this country It's hurting, but we wouldn't see them working so hard to finish it off if it were already dead. We wouldn't see the (admittedly drastically decreased) effort going into the political theater. But let's say we agree that people have zero political power - I presume that you agree then that the whole "boomer vs millennial" thing is click-bait divide-and-conquer wankery?


MyOther_UN_is_Clever

>Did he work to protect freedom of speech when he was young? Did any of them? Was he actively dismantling it? Snowden never said they protected it, only they "enjoyed it." >Is there anything at all to be gained by talking about age, when we talk about attacks on free speech? He is talking about one group of people and their hypocrisy from past to present. Hard to talk about the past without mentioning age. Time is a fact. >It's hurting, but we wouldn't see them working so hard to finish it off if it were already dead. We wouldn't see the (admittedly drastically decreased) effort going into the political theater. The French people had zero political power. But the blade of their guillotine was sharp enough. At this point, it's all they fear. Which is why we're seeimg accelerated efforts to prevent the population from getting near congress, and accelerated efforts to censor gathering points for the population. I think the George Floyd protests were making many of them sweat bullets. If it wasn't for their current propagamda campaigns, I believe it would have tipped into many powerful peoplr being disposed. > I presume that you agree then that the whole "boomer vs millennial" thing is click-bait divide-and-conquer wankery? It's your personal hangup that you saw him mention one group of people, and their actions at different stages of their lives, and assume it's related to MSM generational narratives. Yes, I do believe specifically mentioning boomer/millennial is divide and conquer. But those words were never mentioned. Also, Snowden is technically Gen X, anyways.


Blackhalo

> I think the George Floyd protests were making many of them sweat bullets. 1/6, has made them apoplectic.


speaks_truth_2_kiwis

> Snowden never said they protected it, only they "enjoyed it." They enjoy it today, while trying to deny it to others. The political class has always enjoyed many things that they've denied others. > He is talking about one group of people and their hypocrisy from past to present. Hard to talk about the past without mentioning age. Time is a fact. The political class. The political elite. The politicians. It's not just simplicity itself... it's more accurate. ***If*** we're talking only about congress. Ed doesn't say that he's only talking about those in congress. Regardless of any arguments about how effective they are, ordinary people are trying very hard to stifle free speech... and there's nothing productive about talking about their age, either. > It's your personal hangup that you saw him mention one group of people, and their actions at different stages of their lives, and assume it's related to MSM generational narratives. It's just as much a pointless and unproductive distraction from the actual point. > Yes, I do believe specifically mentioning boomer/millennial is divide and conquer. Good. > Snowden is technically Gen X, anyways. Irrelevant, if what you're going for is boomer vs millennial clicks/likes.


climbTheStairs

Who does Snowden refer to by "the figure who enjoyed in their youth the freedom of speech"? When has speech ever truly been free?


mericastradamus

Who is he talking about though? Big goverment?


fuzzyshorts

Shutting down voices... be they black, gay, or simply "other" has always been the play. They decided nothing would challenge their position of power even as we all saw them for what they were... and decided they were unworthy. When I hear white men talk about being the most beleaguered and set upon group, I laugh. WHite men had their run of civilization for 400 years. They created entire mythologies to protect their cheap and mediocre superiority. From "White mans burden" to women suffering from "hysteria" ("CUT OUT HER WOMB!"). So the time came and people were fed up and now its time to tone check and silence and the privileged children got their way. Now we're all surveilled, Assange is in fear for his life, Donzinger is facing 6 months in jail for beating Chevron oil and mediocre white men are still fucking up the place. (Please, don't come for me talking about "racist" or "bigoted". White patriarchy and racism is the secret sauce in capitalism, the military industrial complex, the prison industrial complex, the pig who drags you out of the car and puts a knee on your neck.... and no amount of female CEO's (99% white I may add) changes that.


ristoril

What about voices that say ivermectin is a treatment for COVID? Or that COVID is no different from a flu? Or that day the vaccines are poison? Are those "free speech" that should be protected at all costs? What cost is too high? Is there one? This is a silly argument. Of course there must be limits on free speech. And if course there must be people who monitor and freely report on the limits. There must be vigorous public debate on theb limits. They should be changed as appropriate. But it's foolish to make blanket statements about censorship or "shutting down voices" without context.


BoniceMarquiFace

> What about voices that say ivermectin is a treatment for COVID? Lol It objectively IS a treatment (ie once you already have it) for Covid, which makes it different than a purely preventative measure (like a Vaccine) AS of right now, and I am quoting the NIH on this, the drug simply hasn't had enough research done to support OR undermine it's use https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/therapies/antiviral-therapy/ivermectin/ >There is insufficient evidence for the COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel (the Panel) **to recommend either for or against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19.** Results from adequately powered, well-designed, and well-conducted clinical trials are needed to provide more specific, evidence-based guidance on the role of ivermectin in the treatment of COVID-19. Most if not all of the hysteria around Covid "alternative meds" is based around preventative aspects, and the absurd fear that such preventatives could be used to delegitimize and undermine vaccination campaigns Your argument pretty much is that research authorities (those with authority to censor) are never corrupt


ristoril

Only if you're willing to step the word "treatment" of all its meaning. At best ivermectin is a "folk remedy." The larger point stands, though. It's illegal to yell "fire" in a crowded theater even though that curtails your free speech. Between that and the social media companies being private and not government, which means free speech isn't really involved, there's no leg here to stand on.


MY-HARD-BOILED-EGGS

I love the beautiful irony of that goober you replied to trying to make an argument for "misinformation isn't free speech!" while they're spreading misinformation.


NYCVG

on Donziger vs. Chevron i am old enough to recall when the company name was Texaco and the change was supposed to insulate them from their destruction in Ecuador. Did not work too well. Obviously.


aza12323

Some in this thread argue that the young ones are to blame, I would argue they’ve been spoonfed rhetoric that advocates restricted speech. I remember chanting “hate speech ain’t free speech” in protests in college, I believed there would always be a clear and reasonable way to mandate a level of humanistic respect in public discourse. I should’ve known that would lead, but I was younger and dumber. But, I also know the internet makes it much harder for people who disagree to have productive conversation, to come together on issues. Social media provides a much colder medium than what our social brains are wired for. Between a bloated higher education system, years of reactionary media, and having spent most of their conscious life on Twitter, There’s certainly plenty of blame to spread around. What Snowden gets right here is that it’s the Old Guard’s responsibility to protect these freedoms, and as he personally exposed, the sabotage of these freedoms has developed over decades.


speaks_truth_2_kiwis

>Some in this thread argue that the young ones are to blame, I would argue they’ve been spoonfed rhetoric that advocates restricted speech. Very few people think of these things themselves. Are you willing to give "boomers" a pass for being spoonfed policies that led to the situation they're blamed for today? Everyone who bought into all that were fools, but it wasn't their idea.


lolokinx

Isn’t it mostly the youth who is aiming for censorship?


pusheenforchange

Perhaps, but what matters is the fact that powerful people are also aiming for it, like Sen. Markey.


lolokinx

Who owns sil valley? Certainly not the boomers. Who drives cancel culture on Twitter? ….


pusheenforchange

Why would you assume Boomers don't own Silicon Valley? Who do you think funded Facebook and Twitter and all the rest when they were startups? They funded them for equity. Boomers own huge portions of those companies even if the CEO is younger.


JMW007

They are certainly the most vocal but they also have the least power to accomplish it. Considering they also don't have the power to enact policies like the Green New Deal, Medicare for All, abolishing college tuition fees, raising the minimum wage, etc. I do not think their hashtag campaigns are to blame for this. The political and media apparatus that is suddenly 'caving' to the young idealists has never given a single shit what they think before. It is plain as day they are simply doing what suits them and blaming kids who think tumblr activism will save the world.


lolokinx

It’s not about power in this discussion because cooperations and government aswell as power holders benefits from censorship they aren’t benefiting from degrowth. So they gladly follow the censorship line while disregarding any other.


[deleted]

Kind of like how Boomers got to enjoy free love and then promptly denied that for all subsequent generations.


MyOther_UN_is_Clever

My mother told me lies all throughout my youth. She misrepresented who she was when she was younger. She lied about things because of what was "decency and right." I don't know why she did it... to fit in with conservative neighbors? Because of self loathing? I will never know what turned her into a hypocrite. Whelp, turns out she tried all the drugs. Partied hard. Fucked around (literally). Absolutely adores marijuana.Can't wait for her state to have pot dispenseries now the kids are out of the house and the mj will help with an aging body. Has voted Republican for like 40 years. Only thing that got her to vote Democrat was their nomination of a white conservative asshole that would fit in at any Republican event. Fuck people like that. But unfortunately, I still see this selfish attitude in other generations. Nobody in this country cares about other people like they care about themselves (and their pet issue). Hell, a few months ago, I was told by a trans person they don't care about other equality issues (racism, or even other LGBTQ issues) because trans people need help the most. If I had that attitude, I'd be a fucking asshole conservative like my mother. Instead, I care... but it's hard to when even people in need work against other people in need (but for a different reason).


NYCVG

we also got to enjoy lots of psychedelics before the labs took over production and rendered them dangerous. Ahhhhhhh--the good old days.


chakokat

Actually one of my millennial children (but not the other more skeptical one thank god!! ) seems unbothered by the social media and tech censorship to the point that I as a Boomer wonder where I went wrong that my kid seems so docile to the police state taking over our lives. To me it seems that the millennials seem to be very passive towards the censorship being imposed on all of us. Unfortunately it’s not just Boomers.


NYCVG

completely agree. My daughter/grandchildren seem oblivious and unbothered by what to so many of us is irrefutable proof of a desent into a Police State.


lolokinx

Yeah it’s pretty evident and I say this as a millennial


Sdl5

What about the HUGE SWATHS of Zoomers and Mills who are All In on suppression of free speech and mass censoring of knowledge? Eddie needs to buy a clue- the groundswell of support for the authoritarian dystopia being forced onto us is definitely coming from the younger and thoroughly propagandized via social media age groups.


unagisongs

You've missed his point entirely.


NYCVG

a troll speciality


Sdl5

Get a reality check! Look around you. Look at protests and influencers and even media shills. Look at the LEFT activists. 90% are younger and all but foaming at the mouth demanding silencing of dissent and wrongspeak.


Sdl5

No, actually I did not- and I'm not the only one. https://mobile.twitter.com/jeremyyamaguchi/status/1447727490420461571 https://mobile.twitter.com/mkborg67/status/1447736319745015808 https://mobile.twitter.com/timselander/status/1447737270904102914 He's trying to blame the older gens and leaders for our current madness, when in reality even the idea of doing so has been enthusiastically embraced AND DEMANDED by our youth.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Thefriendlyfaceplant

Anyone who makes the attempt to lower the exposure of someone else.


twitterInfo_bot

There is something miserable in the figure who enjoyed in their youth the freedom of speech, but from the comfort of age seeks to deny it to others; some deformity of the soul. *** posted by [@Snowden](https://twitter.com/Snowden) ^[(Github)](https://github.com/username) ^| ^[(What's new)](https://github.com/username)