34 Replies to “‘Fighting the good fight’: Why free speech has no political party | Jonathan Zimmerman

  1. now we have free speech, sort of, because anybody was says something accurate and intelligent is drowned out by the majority who are part of the Retard orchestra playing diarrhea of the mouth on repeat, drowning us all in a river of shit.

    Now the truth and or speech is powerless.

    look what good it does for me to speak about any of this. Almost nobody reads the comments here so it doesn't fucking matter and of course big stink moderators and the likes of YouTube choose who gets to be discovered by the world. You and your fucking morally Pious Ivory Towers that you sit in. Well, when you shit out the window as you don't have to smell it, it lands on me….

    you expect me to let your Ivory Tower stand? You think I'm not going to sling shit right back in your fucking window? Fucking hypocritical assholes.

  2. Here I am the next generation of historical reference in regards to freedom of speech and social justice, just like Rosa Parks, just like Martin Luther King and big stink here wants to suppress, repress and sensor me. The fucking hypocrisies is disgusting.

    if you could go back in time and interview Martin Luther King or Rosa Parks, would you do it? Well, you're just throwing away that opportunity in the present by not giving me a stage or an interview. You fucking biased one-sided pieces of shit.

  3. At around 4:50. That should set precedence for the terms of service of YouTube or any YouTube channel for that matter. My constitutional rights of freedom of expression and the right to protest your abuse has do not stop through signing your terms of service.

    You'll never have a right to tell me what I can and can't say and if you try I will only speak it louder.

  4. A conservative value? yeah, because they want the right to spread propaganda about white nationalism because they're fake as fuck delusional identity and cuntservative way of life is under threat because reality won't allow anything to stay the same and these pathetic crybabies are now using anything they can as a weapon to protect their right to brainwash the shit out of their children and everybody else's children…

    and of course, people like me who point all of this out are censored through popular opinion and all these justifications in regards to what can or can't be sad or where it can be said or how it can be said. Fucking hypocritical bullshit.

  5. At 3:33. you've got an absolute commitment to freedom of speech? Then why don't you tell big stink that they are being fascist pieces of shit by refusing to promote me because I won't be just what they want me to be or say exactly what they want me to say, how they want me to say it.

    Practice What You Preach asshole. Stand up for what's right. Stand up for the brazen honest intellectuals like myself. A whole world of knowledge is being overlooked and is threatened to be lost in the annals of time.

    Societal Shadow Banning through the arbitrary excuse or justification of NSFW laws IS fascism. It's also shoving Jesus Freak morality down the throats of the majority and by doing so, giving the Next Generation a license to justify abuse, tyranny and fascism just the same as their predecessors have.

    That's what arguing over dumb fuck opinions gets you.

  6. At 3:24. Identity politics of the old and delusional. you don't know what you are, nobody knows what they are. Fucking labels are the epitome of brainwashing divide-and-conquer bullshit. You are playing right into it. This is why we are free to say almost anything these days because whatever the majority speak of is part of the siop brain washing machine, the fortification of The matrix, you speak of your mental prisons and they are by validate other people's mental prisons…

    Yeah you're free to speak of that alright.

    big stink here will give you a stage to do it. Meanwhile, people like me who actually speak of Truth and or reality are vilified for our vernacular or because we're not all sunshine and roses, we aren't fake as fuck conformists, we aren't diplomats so therefore we are the villain.

    Then censorship and book burning comes in the form of societal Shadow Banning and subtle economic terrorism through lack of promotion or endorsement.

    a scant minority read the comment section and an even smaller percentage of those people read long comments. So this isn't freedom of speech, this is pretending we have freedom of speech in just another of many Echo Chambers.

    You know I'm right, you so-called people, so-called intellectuals, so-called arbiters of knowledge that work at big stink.

  7. Yeah, now shouting fire in a theater is completely unacceptable… Which makes sense.

    It does not make sense for vernacular to be grounds to censor someone.

    Additionally, we are allowed to protest Wars because now it doesn't fucking matter what we say, the Sheep will continue to be sheep. The wars will continue. The media will brainwash the masses so that it doesn't matter what the minority think or say, facts don't matter, intelligence doesn't matter.

  8. There's the problem. Arguing over stupid fucking opinions and then agreeing with status quo driven bandwagon bullshit and using everyone's dumb fuck opinions as justification to burn some hypothetical witch that never existed in the first place. Fucking assholes.h that never existed in the first place. Fucking assholes.

  9. If you repress some form of hate speech that you deem dangerous, you make it more dangerous because you're repressing the person who is attempting to express their pain. They hate speech is how the pain is being expressed. You repress it and vilify them, you turn them into a fucking monster.

    Stupid piece of shit. Having fun in your Ivory Tower pretending you know what you're talking about?

    This is why you don't go to college to get your education.

  10. If any speech is arbitrarily deemed as illegal then we still have fascist censorship. I don't give a fuck what your examples are. If someone thinks it, they should be able to say it. If someone gets violent that's where we draw the line. Not words, violence.

  11. The fact that you "invented" let us said "free speech" doesn't make all the ideas of your Ideology good and any that now accepts it, doesn't make it bad automatically. Free speech hurts, but it is principal to be free.

  12. I thought the Constitution was set up similarly to this thought here. Being you give up some of your rights to the Government in order to keep other freedoms free as we as a collective group. This seems like nesting of all that is within the Constitution to sectioning of all articles in a similar manner in order to optimize everyone's freedoms?

  13. You should be able to say whatever you want.

    Though, that doesn’t mean your words won’t have repercussions or will always be right.
    There will always be punishments handed out by society, there will always be regrets in society, there will always be the rebellious ones, and every so often, the rebels shall succeed partially or wholly.

    This is the natural order of things.
    Old ideas out and new ideas in.
    Eventually they shall cycle or clash furiously as to separate the species.

    This is supported by my one postulates.
    1. If it can happen, it will.

    This implies change is necessary and natural.
    It will always happen regardless of which is better or worse.

    This is my philosophy.

    We must be willing to experiment with peoples ideas to truly test their worthiness.
    Whether you look back on history or you look at someplace else or you experiment with it yourself, you have to give every idea a chance to prove itself.

    There will always be new ideas, as there is always new inventions, new discoveries, and news among people.

  14. "I may not agree with what you say, but I'll fight to the death for your right to say it." That is THE central value of western culture.

    If you think it is appropriate to silence those who offend you, or whom you disagree with, you do not hold western values; you are an authoritarian.

  15. Very interesting. "When is speech so intolerant that we can't allow it." I think the answer here lies in how we choose to not allow it. Do we disallow it due to social pressure within the construct of the social contract condemning the offensive speech or do we make laws limiting speech?

  16. been agenst somting dosent mean you are a hater nor a reason to silence them
    go in discussion teach try and change ther minds
    censership wiil only creat extreamist

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *