There are many sides fighting to influence our world view
We need to listen to all of them (free speech)
Including what the mainstream media refuses to cover
The rest of us are entitled to our perspectives:
Shia Muslims, socialists, etc.
Amphiist is a Greek word meaning looking at both sides
Amphiist (51)
Editor: Jaclyn Holland-Strauss Worldview @ jaclynhollandstrauss.com
Facebook: Jaclyn Holland-Strauss Twitter: @JaclynHStrauss
March 1, 2018 Today in the…
Natural Aristocrat, Emotionally Intelligent, Woke, Self-Actualized
Mainstream Media
There is a lot of brouhaha on Twitter today because of the strikes that have been levied against a variety of far-right individuals on YouTube. The mainstream media suggests that lately it has made a conscious effort to clamp down on such accounts due to their offensive NRA propaganda, their championing of anti-Semitic causes, and insistence that white people are superior to everyone else. Hillary Clinton has stated that censorship to a limited extent, especially in these cases, is necessary so as to avoid another catastrophe where someone like Trump is elected, making the world a significantly more unstable place.
(Turn over page for other perspective)
The Other Side
There is a First Amendment right in the United States to freedom of speech. However, responsible people in power will judge the effects of said speech. If mentally ill people will take the information presented to them and perform acts of unthinkable violence, then the speech should not be permitted. After all, you can’t yell ‘fire’ in a crowded theatre, as it is a threat to everyone else in the theatre. And an important note: Including the person who yells ‘fire.’
People should be banned from YouTube if they call David Hogg a crisis actor, because there will be crazy people, egged on by alleged con artists like Alex Jones, who will incite violence against people like Hogg.
They have a new thing on YouTube called Trusted Flaggers, where such a person can report a video and without any questions asked, a strike is levied. This is definitely a step in the right direction. But we always need to remember the fundamental question associated with this topic: These far right people are creating an ever-building fear of those in power in government, media, etc. The consequences of such disaffection should be obvious: civil war, with potentially millions of lives lost. A few nuts on YouTube losing their right to stream doesn’t seem so bad.
If you would like to see this newspaper in print, so that the average person is exposed to these alternative perspectives, then please consider donating to my Paypal account at jaclyncarter2005@gmail.com.
Arcticstormer
It seems both perspectives you’ve given are for limiting speech. A mentally ill person could read this article and go out and commit violent acts against right wing people since you seem to think right wing people are a threat. So, by your standard, you shouldn’t be allowed to publish this article.
Jaclyn Holland-Strauss
I always say I am anti-violence. I should be allowed to publish my world view because I disavow violence, racism, etc