Well, it's the left that pushing to cancel Rogan, no question. I am also certainly opposed to right wing censorship in any forms, but that's not really what is being discussed here. This just seems like whataboutism.
Much like your original comment, and it doesn’t change that you targeted a political side that you blatantly disagree with. Your statement would be better made without the needless political slant, which as I point out, the other side have done it far more egregiously and in public institutions, such as libraries and schools.
To call this ‘censorship’ I believe is wrong:
1. It’s scientifically proven to be false. Misinformation, be it intended or otherwise brings its own moral and ethical issues.
2. Private companies have the right to choose what they publish/sell on their platform. Preventing them from doing so is also a suppression of free speech.
3. Everyone has a right to an opinion, and to voice that opinion. No-one has an inalienable right to have that opinion published, agreed with or disseminated by any platform they choose.
If anyone has taken choice away, it’s Rogan. Rogan chose to sell exclusivity to his catalog for a very handsome some. Along with that, he chose to forgo certain rights - one being which podcasts Spotify choose to make available.
I think censorship is morally and ethically wrong. I'm center right, I voted for Biden, I don't have a "team". I find it mostly sad and amusing that you think insulting me for defending Rogan will get you anywhere... on a thread about Rogan. Christ almighty.
And yes, I'm feeling a bit baited that I even bothered responding to your throwaway troll bullshit.
Not necessarily disagreeing with your sentiment but...
One can dispute and critique their own "team". As a matter of fact the inability to self critique is what lead us to this current state of unnecessary tribalism.
If I consider myself "left" I should still be able to criticize the "left". The problem is the mob cancels anyone critical so we're now eating ourselves alive and pushing away anyone that does not toe the party line verbatim. That's a great way to send teammates to another team.
> If I consider myself "left" I should still be able to criticize the "left".
And...most people on the left do that. A lot.
> The problem is the mob cancels anyone critical
“Cancels” is just bullshit. Virtually every person that has supposedly been “cancelled” still has a prominent platform and large and devoted audience; what they've done is been criticized and lost some audience and goodwill because certain of their ideas have competed poorly in the marketplace of ideas.
> That's a great way to send teammates to another team.
Just because you consider yourself on someone else's “team” doesn't mean they see you that way, and just because you see yourself as, e.g., “left”, doesn't mean everyone else on the “left” is part of the same team.
Anarchists and Libertarian Socialists see themselves as on the “left”.
Lenin-/Stalin-/Maoists see themselves as on the “left”.
They aren’t, even approximately, the same team.
And neither is the same team as, say, Social Democrats or Democratic Socialists, also on the “left”, though sometimes people in those groups may have a temporary, transitory, tactical alignment of interests.
If I'm on a team it's team anti-censorship because I think it's morally and ethically wrong. You can feel free to believe me or not believe me, but by my observations it's really only the far left that is defending this censorship.
Alright so this is a tangent from the main conversation, and I want to keep it separate from the censorship talk.
I think by definition you can’t define/identify a side, and then place yourself in opposition to them and not be on a team? You may not have been on a team prior to the issue coming up or you might only be on the team temporarily for that issue, but it’s still two sides and you picked one, right?
Yeah, that's fair. Certainly in terms of debates about specific issues, picking a side amounts to "joining a team". What I was trying to refer to by "not being on a team" was more along the lines that I am not a Democratic or Republican ideologue or spin doctor, I will vote based on the issues rather than blind adherence to a specific party. I suppose a better phrasing would be that I am on a "side" of the debate but I am not on a specific "team" in terms of national party politics.
