PLPlum
Captain21,007 posts
13 Oct 2022, 16:28#6
Jones is a strange character.
Unfortunately, he’s been correct on stories and done so long before anybody else, on many occasions.
Take the Epstein story.
Twelve years back, Jones was talking about Epstein, his island and the fact that elites were being taxied to the island and likely abusing under age girls there.
Was he right? Yes, he was. Did people listen? No they didn’t.
Here’s the tricky part.
Had you heard him talking about it back then, would you have considered it a wild conspiracy? Probably, right?
But what would you have based that assessment on?
Jones is to blame for adding to the misery of parents that lost their children in that shooting.
But who is to blame for not listening to Jones RE Epstein, calling him a conspiracy nut case, and in so doing helping to allow the abject misery that girls on that island suffered?
It’s easy to say “let’s get rid of conspiracy theorists”. It’s much harder to know what should be gotten rid of and even harder to figure out who should be the judge and jury deciding such things.
PLPlum
Captain21,007 posts
13 Oct 2022, 17:19#9
Sader, Jones has been right about a bunch of stuff.
He’s probably been wrong about more though.
…and very out there about even more.
But the question remains, who gets to decide what is conspiratorial nonsense and what isn’t?
PLPlum
Captain21,007 posts
14 Oct 2022, 09:08#25
“ So in today’s world it’s up to the consumer to make some critical judgements. That means even if the message is music to your ears, coincides with your own biases, you have to force yourself to be critical. ”
Yea, i agree 100%. People should be able to decide for themselves.
For me, the place to start is by reclassifying social media companies. They are either publishers or they aren’t.
Their current status basically makes them the perfect vehicle for sponsored disinformation and the suppression of factual and valuable information.
Let’s look at just the last two years. They censored qualified practitioners and logical people raising concerns over different aspects of the COVID narrative. Same with the Biden laptop story. They’re also censoring discussions around gender and global warming. If you say that Africa is struggling because Africans currently are of low IQ, that’s deemed racist and ban worthy…despite it being very obviously true.
So, not only are they affecting election results, economies and healthcare…they’re also acting as moral arbiters in deciding what truths are allowed to be spoken.
And how often are they wrong? Well, they were wrong about Hunter’s laptop and it ended up affecting an election. They appear to have been very wrong about COVID. Their moral stance of Africans is very clearly doing Africans now favours.
If we want to get rid of conspiracies, they’re likely the ones who’re going to be in charge of doing so and it seems to me that when social media declare something as disinformation or conspiracy…it’s all to often true.
I agree that everyone should be in charge of their own decisions on what to believe. That thinking should be followed to conclusion.
Discussion shouldn’t be suppressed, it should be promoted. Allow ideas to run the gauntlet of open and free discussion and we shouldn’t be seduced by the ease of having somebody else decide what is true and what isn’t.
As with Jones, libel and defamation laws are already in place. So too are their laws against incitement, threats of violence, illegal capture and sharing of data etc etc. That’s what the police and courts are for.
Conspiracy theories of all types should be 100% allowed and if the law is broken then it’s up to the courts to dish out orders and punishment.
Conspiracy theories, in my opinion, aren’t remotely as dangerous as what social media in its current form is.
PLPlum
Captain21,007 posts
14 Oct 2022, 22:52#27
Lol Numbnuts
A perfect example right there.
You don’t disagree that lack of intelligence is Africa’s main problem.
But you’re happy with people getting banned for saying it…why? Because you feel it’s inappropriate and wouldn’t help.
Think about that for a moment.
Now ask yourself, is Africa making progress? SA isn’t, it very very clearly isn’t. The place is failing at virtually every level.
Why?
Well, if you ask the average African, he’ll tell you that Africa isn’t making progress because of colonialism, white monopoly capital and, as Zuma’s ex recently explained, municipalities are failing today because of apartheid.
So instead of attacking the route cause, which is very clearly education, the focus is still on white boogeyman. And it’s only because Africa is treated with kid gloves that this is allowed to continue. TO AFRICA’S DETRIMENT.
Would you say that whites are holding Africa back? Are whites, in Europe, the US and Africa, the cause of it’s woes…of which there are many?
How often have you seen the claims that perpetuate this cycle being labelled as disinformation, which it is?
Starting to see the light yet, numb nuts?
On the one side you have someone saying that intelligence is the problem, but it’s fixable. Advocating for directly attacking the clear cause of the problem, but to start by unfortunately admitting a hard truth…that person is banned.
On the other hand you have people perpetuating a clearly destructive victimhood mentality that any fool can tell is moving people further away from rising to the modern world. Infecting young people’s minds with a mental virus that won’t ever help them achieve anything. And give African politicians ever more leeway to plunder as they go because when all else fails they can always blame whites.
In summary, your argument is…ban and censor hard truths.
I guess the difference between you and I is that i don’t give a shyte about “nice” because being nice isn’t gonna get Africa anywhere. I actually want Africa to succeed, as soon as possible. You would rather see them struggle for many decades to come rather than risk your neck and be honest about what the problem is.
Sure, fishnuts…it’s me that lives in an alternate reality ;)
PLPlum
Captain21,007 posts
15 Oct 2022, 07:18#30
VisKop
Let me summarise.
“African’s problems are because of whites because Africans are equally intelligent to people on other continents.”
That is straight-up disinformation. And the perpetuation of it will only prolong Africa’s suffering.
It is a promoted narrative while being factually incorrect.
So, i’ll ask again…who gets to decide what should be censored and are we sure that censoring people does more good than harm?
Are we sure of how extensive the consequences are?
PLPlum
Captain21,007 posts
15 Oct 2022, 09:36#32
VisKop, as usual, requires things spelled out to him.
What i’m trying, and failing to get into your tiny peanut, is that censorship is already beyond what is factual and what is not and is now in “moral” territory.
…and i’m completely sure that you can’t extrapolate the consequences from there.
I don’t know why i bother.