Let's clarify once again, Jimmy.
My problem was only ever with the distortion of "free speech", the waving the banner of it, by unscrupulous website operators like 'Dan' and 'Hans' to facilitate anonymous besmirching of other communities, while protecting the anonymous turds subscribing to their websites from any personal consequences, even a well deserved lambasting from myself.
I didn't like the way they protected anonymous individual member posters from consequences, from examination and exposure of their ethos, at the same time glibly dismissing consequences that might bear on society at large, and for minority groups, that potentially followed from the lies, incitements, conspiracies, stupid beliefs, and bigoted world-views they promoted om their websites.
I saw and see it as a misuse of administrative and moderator powers that internet technology put in their grubby fat hands.
Another observation was that the common denominator of these fora was quite destructive to "free speech" - basically, believing oneself oppressed and victimised by the granting of equality to the "other".
By all means, have the users of these fora blather away all day around this US syndicated white supremacism, pseudo-libertarianism, racist nationalism, conspiracy theories, or what have you. Let you spew your discriminatory political gibberish that is neither verifiable nor falsifiable, stripped of context, distorted, disjointed, always misleading, and always seeking to impose a particular narrative.
Seethe away in your online mobs distorting logic to your own ends, appealing to stereotypes, stooping to any device to promote your racist world view.
What matter is it to me that there are bands of toxic angry fellow failures who commiserate in echo chambers and tell each other all day long say how blacks are violent, indigent, stupid, or how Israelis are racist", "savage", "greedy", "profiteering", "scheming", "child murderers" etc?
If you see that as your "free speech", go ahead and knock yourself out.
But the nub of my complaint has been about those who "conduct the orchestra" of these forums, who have the decks stacked all in their favour by dint of their administrative and "moderation" control, who have unbelievable editorial power over everything that is published, who publish anything and everything that can be used to play to the fears of people, and justify their failures.
So for example I thought there should be transparency of media ownership, including of these websites - acknowledged as an essential component of any media system, and crucial for media pluralism and democracy. The public knowledge of media owners' identities is key to preventing abuses of media power, undue influence, and other abuses of their position as administrators and owners of these websites.
So that's what I'm against. That's what I'm complaining about. All of the above not doing actual "free speech" many favours either
www.thejournal.ie
Declan in drag on the left, and his bum-boy supreme Wilfy on the right.
