who gets to decide what is acceptable
Jesus this is such a thought terminating cliche. Who gets to decide fucking anything? Who decided murder should be illegal? Who decided dumping toxic waste into reservoirs? Who decided I can't whip my dick out at Taco Bell?
Who decided I can't whip my dick out at Taco Bell?
If you live in America and only in America, its a free country! You can do anything you want! A land of opportunity!
It's also just such a leap from what that question ought to imply which is "this is a hard problem, power like that is ripe for abuse, and so we should think carefully about how to implement something like this." Instead, the suggestion is that just asking the question "who decides" should constitute an argument for "nobody, because it's too hard to even try." I absolutely loathe this all-too-common attitude of thinking that social organization problems are hard, and therefore we should never try to improve anything under any circumstances.
Jesus this is such a thought terminating cliche. Who gets to decide fucking anything? Who decided murder should be illegal? Who decided dumping toxic waste into reservoirs? Who decided I can't whip my dick out at Taco Bell?
It's all dressed up and fancy "DON'T TELL ME WHAT TO DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO" thinking.
What a fucking coward.
These libs are the folks who say that they'd stand up to the nazis if they were in 1940s. They won't even fight back against nazis on an internet forum.
I mean scratch a liberal and you'll see why.
I mean theyve spent the last week defending ss members in 2023.
"the problem with moderation is that someone has to do the moderating" we got a fuckin genius over here folks
"Because something has arbitrary and difficult characteristics and the goal is continuous, it's best not to even try lol" 
"The problem with reducing poverty is what if there are still poor people? Huh? Have you thought about that, liberal?"
The problem with laws is someone has to enforce it. No more laws
okay wait you got a point there
a small group of people or single person deciding what's acceptable
Agreed that that's a problem in bourgeois democracy, but a proper Whole-Process People's Democracy would have the masses involved at every step of appointing representatives, forming the censorship beureau, and constantly updating and revising the rules. Believing that this process can't be democratic smacks of capitalist realism.
The thing is none of these fucking libs actually believe in free speech, they're just too dumb to realize it.
1000% chance they believe in laws against insider trading, false advertising, perjury, death threats, sedition, leaking classified intelligence, libel and copyright violation.
they all wanted to de-fed from us for being "pro-Russia"
Many of them did
"Free Speech" my ass, they like pedophiles more than they like communists
laws against insider trading, false advertising, perjury, death threats, sedition, leaking classified intelligence, libel and copyright violation
With exceptions for Adults In The Room that Make Hard Decisions to Get Shit Done like in their treats. 
CW: murder, CSE, abuse
Libel, slander, false advertising, blackmail, scamming, identity theft, death threats, terrorist threats, fraud, unregulated claims regarding health or nutrition, perjury, extortion, child grooming, verbal abuse, (I know this one probably doesn't apply to you Nakoichi but...) treason.
Show me a true believer in free speech absolutism and I'll show you a hypocrite.
The only person who would be okay with this stuff is either a blind ideologue or someone who wants get away with doing this stuff themselves.
goddammit, it really always comes down to "how do you know bad things are bad actually??? that's what i thought, tankie fascist" 
Why do these  dipshits always say it's bad when Nazis are forced into echo chambers? Seems pretty obvious that when they were on their own pathetic sites like Stormfront (original, not ), there were a hell of a lot fewer Nazis around. It's when they got onto more widespread spaces like 4chan and Reddit thanks to lax moderation and muh peach freedom we saw a marked increase in Nazis because they were able to actively recruit.
you can always find people who agree with you
Where can you find nazis and pedos agreeing with nazis and pedos? 
Where can you find nazis and pedos agreeing with nazis and pedos? 
Lemmy.world
@flashgnash@lemm.ee come on in here and defend your bullshit in your precious free marketplace of ideas. Stop addressing the other people that are being more generous than you deserve show your ass.
SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP 
oops forgot to post the link it's there now, this person deserves to be bullied.
small group of people deciding what's acceptable
In a community that refuses to do anything about Nazis, that small group of people is the Nazis. There's a reason that nobody with the barest minimum of compassion can be found in any communities that allow them. Freedom to express yourself as a minority does not meaningfully exist if you're likely to encounter genocidal rhetoric in response.
In the 1950s, these same people would be saying that segregation isn't oppressive because it counts as the exercise of voluntary association.
There is no slippery slope. You can actually quite easily define what is and isn't acceptable speech. When there's an edge case, simply debate and edit the law for next time. Don't these nerds like democracy and the rule of law??
We already had multiple supreme court cases about this. There's several memorable phrases related to it. "you know it when you see it". "Fire in a crowded theater". They threw  in jail for protesting WWI. America has never had true free speech for all, it's always free until you have enough influence to affect the levers of power
 "nazis and pedos should be silenced"
 "nazis and pedos should be shot"
How about we compromise? Nazis and pedos should be shot with a silencer
as a centrist, i can get behind this kind of bipartisanship 
yeah, definitely we should just do the current system where you can say whatever you want, so long as you have a billionaire patron to platform you and ensure the state protects you from any consequences.
the free speech absolutist weirdos remind me of the bit in the yellow parenti lecture where he mockingly complains about the insistence on perfection for socialist state projects.... "what about civil rights for the fascists? why won't the revolution let them have their newspapers?" because that is 100% really what these people want. socialists are deplatformed as a rule and experience retaliation in the workplace constantly. state constitutions have rules about communists being allowed to be civil servants. somehow none of that rises to the level of criticism.
but stopping a rich white psychopath from trying to incite violence against marginalized people by claiming they are subhuman is somehow the literal destruction of a soul's right to breathe and the first step of government overreach.
who gets to decide whats acceptable and whats not
me mf
That entire reply has massive "DON'T TELL ME WHAT TO DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO"  and of course the conclusion to "something is difficult and ambiguous" is "therefore do nothing and Get Schwifty" 
yes, the red terror is a never ending battle, long live the red terror
Wow, looked at his history and he's super active. Thanks, blocking him should make the fediverse a smarter place
Who gets to decide what's acceptable?
We do: a vanguard of Hexbear posters get to decide what's acceptable discourse; to think that it's only the forum that's being actively moderated is to completely misunderstand the dynamics of modern cultural power
South Africa and Brazil have anti hate speech laws and they seem to work well when someone is actually caught being a hateful bastard.
The question of “free press” and “free speech” is not separable from the question of the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie versus the dictatorship of the proletariat. The idea of “political plurality” as such turns out to be the negation of the possibility of achieving any kind of truth in the realm of politics, it reduces all historical and value claims to the rank of mere opinion. And of course, so long as someone’s political convictions are mere opinion, they won’t rise to defend them. And so the liberal state remains the dictatorial organ of the bourgeoisie, with roads being built or legislation being passed only as commanded by the interests of capital, completely disregarding the interests of workers. Under regimes where political plurality is falsely upheld as a supreme virtue, the very notion of asserting oneself as possessing a truth appears aggressive and “authoritarian.”
Since we've never had ratings boards for movies or television that get to decide what is acceptable and what is not we could never figure it out for the internet. Children are just allowed to buy and watch and be influenced by whatever.
Would it be perfect? Nah. Would it be better than nothing? Absolutely yes.
If children can't give consent then pedos don't get to object when I tell them to shut the fuck up. Goddamn this is not a hard concept.
Pretty sure you just posted this because of how hard you dunked them, but I'm here for it 
You're not wrong but I felt like everyone else deserved an opportunity to shit on this person.
It was a good dunk. 
Nazis should be killed
And people who are dumb enough to defend nazis should be put into laogai
flashgnash belongs in laogai
Surely doing something about pedophiles and Nazis is better than doing nothing? Right? Right?
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
