- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/35786937
Free Speech Goes Only One Way
You must log in or register to comment.
There are no major news outlets that actually are actually liberal. There was A point maybe 20+ years where several outlets had a slight liberal bias, but America was a more accepting place in general, so it could have been a reflection of that.
But since then journalism has been decimated, and media outlets have been consolidating, and they are all owned by a handful of billionaires. Adelson, bezos, Murdoch, Zuckerberg, Musk. 90% or more of what you see, hear and are told is truth, comes curated through their outlets.
Every single one of them is a conservative, who’s given millions to billions to get trump elected.
The idea that the current US media landscape is in ANY way liberal, is so fucking laughable, it’s probably the best litmus test to see how programmed someone has become. By calling it the liberal media, someone has to be living in a land of pure fantasy
“The liberal media” is just what the Nazis keep calling conservative media in order to move the conversation continuously to the far right
Pretty sure it was BS 20 years ago too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Liberal_Media%3F
“The liberal media” is just the result of effective propaganda.
There are no major news outlets that actually are actually liberal
That’s not true. Modern liberalism is Neoliberalism, a center right to right wing and pro-capital, pro-cop ideology that sometimes allows pretending to be left wing but never actually BEING or ACTING in accordance with left wing ideology.
MSNBC, CNN, CBS News, Politico, Huffpo, and the NYT are all examples of Neoliberal major news outlets.
American liberalism hasn’t been left wing or progressive since before Bill Clinton became the Dem nominee in 1992.
After Gaza, liberals have nowhere to go except full Hitler.
I guess holding your employees to a higher standard than other news outlets makes you literally Hitler.
You really don’t get it lmao
I do get it. Basically saying, “they had it coming,” publicly, at work, to millions of people about someone who was just killed is generally frowned upon.
All of the other people who did it for slain Democrats should have been fired as well.
I agree with his sentiment; Kirk did have it coming. But I’m not dumb enough to say it at work because I know there would be consequences.
No, you don’t get it. The point is the media bends over backwards to protect fascists and their images, but the same courtesy is never extended towards anyone who chooses not to submit to the fascist party line. The entire system is built to defend and amplify the most vile of pro-capitalist, pro-fascist voices and silences anyone who speaks out against them. There will never be consequences for slandering anyone they declare to be an enemy.
Word.
Cause I keep hearing that Hamas has a base under that hospital therefore those kids had it coming. Looking forward to all the firings coming.
I don’t understand why you think that’s related to the discussion at all.
I think it’s funny how liberals think that their worldview is all disconnected pieces of random data floating in an abstract space. Don’t ever relate anything to anything else. It’s not like your way of thinking can affect how you think of two different things at once. Everything’s just random and individual, apparently.
Thinking that it’s appropriate for people to be fired for inappropriate remarks on air and thinking Israel did nothing wrong are two very different things.
The fact that you think they are mutually inclusive speaks a lot to your knowledge of liberals (here’s a hint, it’s not much).
I agree with his sentiment; Kirk did have it coming. But I’m not dumb enough to say it at work because I know there would be consequences.
But you’re dumb enough to normalize firing people for saying shit you claim to agree with by saying they “hold their employees to a higher standard,” directly supporting fascism as it continues to ruin people who say good things while showing favoritism towards people who have actual fascist opinions.
No, it makes you a doormat to fascists.
Were you born this fucking stupid or did you just wake up this morning and choose to insult the world with your existence?
When did MSNBC become “liberal”? Has the definition of liberal changed again? I’m tired and I can’t keep up with this shit.
Liberalism in general is a center right ideology. It’s just the furthest left you can be in America without being demonized.
I fail to get why USians cannot make a real left government
because we did once, and so the wealthy and powerful spent ludicrous amounts of money taking over the country to ensure it never, ever happens again.
They did, somewhat, back in the early 20th century. There was a massive labor movement, direct engagement into political life by a whole lot of ordinary people, and a big effort to turn the awesome power of the central government into working to address ordinary (white) people’s problems.
It’s part of what made it into a superpower by the 1950s. Before that it was just farms and racism. Then we got lazy, and let the assholes take over as the decades rolled by. But we can recover again, it just takes a ton of work.
Because we’re an Oligarchy and liberal ideals are the last thing they want to encourage.
Manifest destiny.
“Liberal,” at least on Lemmy, has become more or less a meaningless word. Any word that has so many definitions, different depending on who you talk to, it becomes sort of corrupted and useless.
I’ve literally seen several times a conversation generally of the format “You support Israel!” “wtf no I don’t” “Yes you do because you’re a liberal and I know that because (whatever)! You’re lying, you support Israel! All liberals support Israel!” I’m exaggerating slightly but that’s the basic core of it.
Interestingly enough, the proto-MAGA movement was trying for years to turn “liberal” into a slur before the internet turbo-leftists got in on it. It basically fulfills exactly the same function in both cases: Just a checkbox that means “enemy” which can be used to shut down critical engagement, because humans have an instinctual category for “enemy of the tribe” for which engagement is meaningless, and you just need to attack.
IDK what word you could use to refer to news like MSNBC. I actually don’t see a problem with saying “liberal” to mean news like MSNBC / The Atlantic / similar points on the spectrum, but on Lemmy, you’re going to really get people confused. The word in general is just best left avoided I think.
Leftists have always hated liberals. Mao has an entire book about how evil and hypocritical liberalism. It’s not my fault that you were raised to think “liberal”= left
Thank you for providing an excellent example of how people react once that “enemy” box that I was talking about gets triggered. “It’s not my fault you were raised” etc is a perfect example of how people talk when they think they’re talking to an “enemy,” and attacking is more important than anything else.
(Mao also thought that killing all the birds would help the agriculture, I don’t really take him as any kind of authority on how stuff works. MLK Jr. would have been a better example.)
“liberal” has a very specific academic definition that most people use. It’s not my fault if you don’t understand that.
very specific academic definition that most people use
Definitely not lol. Almost nothing in political philosophy works this way, where everyone generally agrees on what the big and heavy loaded words mean, that have been in use worldwide and for centuries in all kinds of situations.
Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on the rights of the individual, liberty, consent of the governed, political equality, the right to private property, and equality before the law.[1][2] Liberals espouse various and sometimes conflicting views depending on their understanding of these principles but generally support private property, market economies, individual rights (including civil rights and human rights), liberal democracy, secularism, rule of law, economic and political freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom of religion.[3] Liberalism is frequently cited as the dominant ideology of modern history.[4][5]: 11
So that’s the definition that everyone agrees on – so any liberal would strongly oppose Israel, because they’re violating any number of those principles (basically all of them), right? You’d agree with that? Or no? I have a feeling you’re about to educate me again.
It’s called the Overton Window … where you subtly over time shift the political landscape from one extreme to another without anyone noticing
When did MSNBC become “liberal"
🧑🚀🔫🧑🚀
Has the definition of liberal changed again?
Depends on your definition of “again”. American liberalism has been Neoliberalism since 1992.
You may be thinking of Leftism or Progressivism, neither of which is liberalism.
Get a load of that dorkus over in the lemmyworld comments doing the whole:
“Um, actually, freedom of speech only applies to the government censoring you. When the government makes a private company censor you it’s cool and good!!”Get Snowgraved, nerd.
yeah which is why we dont debate fascists. they dont believe in free speech. they believe in using it to spread hate then taking it away from the rest of us once they’re in the position to do it
any liberal dumb enough to believe charlie kirk gave a shit about free speech is choosing to believe that because they want to believe it because at the end of the day they agree with him and are just too weak to say it. shoot a fascist in the throat and a liberal bleeds
Prologue: I do not disagree with this post one bit.
Notably, “free speech” has both a constitutional and colloquial usage.
Constitutionally, your First Amendment right to Free Speech (in the US) is a guard against the state interfering with your speech, even if it is offensive. Still, that’s not universal; consider libel and slander, gag orders, for example. The Constitutional free speech protection does not shield you from consequences of your speech handed down by non-governmental persons or organizations.
Colloquially, “free speech” is often used to refer to situations like the one posted here: where a non-state actor takes a retributive action against a speaker. This usage is leveraged by people across the political spectrum.
Counterpoint: fascism doesn’t get included in free speech. But everyone else is allowed to voice an opinion.
Yeah the fash like to use “free speech” to mean “I can say whatever I want whenever I want and no one is allowed to criticize me for it” which mysteriously does not apply to anyone who isn’t also a fash
Liberal media? You’re on it. Reddit was always waaaay left just because it started out being populated mostly by people who were way above average in intelligence. It’s pretty enshitified and censored these days though so it will probably switch over to a funded far right propaganda machine soon enough.
The bots in /r/conservative are really fuckwd right now.
“What? The land of the free? Whoever told you that is your enemy.”
A reddit screengrab of a twitter post. Nice.
Let’s get this post on imagr too, really widen the ocean of posts.A Reddit screengrab of an Imgur screengrab of a Twitter screengrab of an encarta screengrab of an amiga screengrab of a punch hole screengrab
They’re the biggest fucking hypocrites
