#freeze peach

[loving-n0t-heyting]

If it were not already disturbing enough columbia is firing deans over private text messages, the content of these "antisemitic" remarks is as anodyne as you can get without being fawningly deferential. "This is difficult to listen to but I'm trying to keep an open mind to learn about this point of view" (at a panel on alleged on campus antisemitism after oct 7). Imagine being butthurt to the point of terminating someones employment about that! Skin so thin you can see the raw muscle

[forgottenbones]

[roisheep]

every time a tumblr mobile ad pauses my music I kill another hostage

[dontmean2bepoliticalbut]

[wildmonkeysects]

One more reason to despise Elon Musk

Suppose you are witnessing a schoolyard bully attacking the skinny kid next door, in the skinny kid’s own front yard. Against all odds the skinny kid is holding his own against the much larger bully.

And just as the skinny kid is about to land a devastating blow that would neutralize the bully, you jump in and hold back the skinny kid because you are either in cahoots with or are afraid of the bully.

The unanswered questions are:

How was Mr. Freeze Peach Musk privy to real time top secret military info about Ukraine?

Is Starlink not so secure?

Does Musk have a back door?

Or is Musk in the loop with Russian military spy agencies?

[you-are-all-weirdos]

Let "fire in a crowded theater" die. It's a glib line from a bad ruling in a case that should never have survived long enough to reach the supreme court. It's almost universally used by people who don't know the facts of the case or the context in which it was uttered. And they sure don't know the way the man who authored those words changed his mind later on.

Instead, let's remember when Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said this:

“Persecution for the expression of opinions seems to me perfectly logical. If you have no doubt of your premises or your power and want a certain result with all your heart you naturally express your wishes in law and sweep away all opposition. To allow opposition by speech seems to indicate that you think the speech impotent, as when a man says that he has squared the circle, or that you do not care whole heartedly for the result, or that you doubt either your power or your premises.

But when men have realized that time has upset many fighting faiths, they may come to believe even more than they believe the very foundations of their own conduct that the ultimate good desired is better reached by free trade in ideas-that the best test of truth is the power of the thought to get itself accepted in the competition of the market, and that truth is the only ground upon which their wishes safely can be carried out.

That at any rate is the theory of our Constitution. It is an experiment, as all life is an experiment. Every year if not every day we have to wager our salvation upon some prophecy based upon imperfect knowledge. While that experiment is part of our system I think that we should be eternally vigilant against attempts to check the expression of opinions that we loathe and believe to be fraught with death, unless they so imminently threaten immediate interference with the lawful and pressing purposes of the law that an immediate check is required to save the country."

[loving-n0t-heyting]

the use of rude language as a criminal offence in brazil has no statute of limitations. absolutely bonkers. imagine being 40yo and getting charged with using an ill-considered slur at 18. madness that anyone would think to celebrate expanding the scope of this law as a victory for anything worthwhile

[loving-n0t-heyting]

if you look at the insane shit staff pulled with predstrogen on the idiotic and unsystematisable grounds (leaving plenty of room in plenty of ways for run-of-the-mill bigotry to filter into that assessment) of preventing "death threats" and "sexual content" and yr first impulse is to get angry about how little staff does to stamp out the even more nebulous and hijacking-prone category of "hate speech" i think you are being kinda silly

[forgottenbones]

I Investigated Australia's Worst Journalists

[sparecrew]

not getting the immorality of not caring about work tbh

I'm not sure I'd classify it as "immoral," so I'd like to clarify that at the outset. I do tie these things directly to human purpose, and thus loosely to faith, I guess. The broader point is that it's good to seek excellence in all that you do, all the time. That is a good. And so for me, personally, in my position at work (if we're going to use work as an example - this holds true for every aspect of life), I am going to strive to do well at everything. I'm going to follow policy; I'm going to care about the company's interests while I'm on company time; I'm going to instruct to the best of my ability; if I'm on a truck, I'm providing the best care to the best of my ability. And then when I'm off the clock, that's it. Work stays at work, and I'm now the best at whatever it is I'm doing off the clock. My interests don't matter when I'm in a position that calls for me to be a different person, so to speak. I'm not an individual. Or rather, my individuality is about supporting the broader community as a whole. This applies to work, it applies to church, it applies to family, it applies to any group that is a part of your life. We lost that in a societal breakdown, and I find that to be immoral.

I struggle to respect or trust anyone who doesn't know how to make that kind of switch. It shows a lack of both intellect and maturity. Even a spiritual deficit. There has to be a baseline, a throughline, and it has to be of higher ideals - not just "I am who I am, based on my wants and desires, and I should get to 'be me' at all times." That's childish thinking from an adult. Put away childish things.

[loving-n0t-heyting]

hate speech laws are evil

If you ever needed proof that the new hate crimes laws are a good thing lmao

[loving-n0t-heyting]

Man. I hate to be THAT guy because we have this conversation every other week in this website and I genuinely think there’s no malice involved and you guys can’t really change the fact you’ve been raised in a very self-contained culture, but… I’m afraid you forgot the laws of Russia don’t apply to the rest of the world. But hey, you weren’t the only one to make this mistake: so did Edward Snowden! In fact, that’s what got him in this situation in the first place.

You see, the people involved in orchestrating the leak of the Five Eyes surveillance regime are not, in fact, protected by whistleblower laws. They waived that right the very second they started disseminating secrets vital to the global protection of freedom. That’s because, that even though the right of whistleblowing is a human right, enforced in most nations of the world as law, each country has their own constitution and exactly what will be protected under whistleblower laws and what won’t be varies depending on where you’re from. Under the laws of the United States, letting the public know the NSA reads their sexts is not protected as whistleblowing, and is, in fact, considered a crime.

[forgottenbones]

The Two Worst Guys Had An Awful Conversation

[greersarchive]

Also worth pointing out the inherent double standard here. David Tennant telling a TERF to shut up is supposedly a freedom of speech issue... But telling David Tennant to stop doing that magically isn't. Funny how it only works one way, huh?

this is about david tennant telling a transphobic politician to “shut up” btw:

[lilithsaintcrow]

"But as many scholars have pointed out, it requires some selective reading of Areopagitica — a sort of censorship, even — to make Milton into an unproblematic mouthpiece for free speech."

[wildmonkeysects]

A grandiose narcissist walks into a bar...

Cluster B personality disorders, as Musk is a textbook example of, almost always blame everything and everyone except themselves for the chaos they create and spread.