This is how some people lost their jobs for having their real names on Facebook or Twitter and if somebody didn’t like something they said they were called racist and privilege.
Huckabee is a fool and possibly an establishment hacks, a Republican who isn't a RINO but is serving the interests of powerful special interests and not the people. He's talked a good game but so has the Republican party and yet even when they're in charge the Left is able to push their agenda ahead. Trump was the first real road block to what was the status quo which is why establishment Republicans were ready to help the Democrats get rid of him.
I do not trust Huckabee. He's either a fool to not ser the dangers of forcing everyone to expose themselves to speak or he knows and wants to get rid of anonymity in order to get people who challenge the narratives from either party to shut up out of fear of reprisal
I like Huckabee and understand where he's coming from because so much of the viciousness of social media is perpetrated behind a veneer of anonymity, but we would lose a massively valuable segment of the discourse if everyone had to expose themselves that way. Its kind of a balancing act, I'd say. Since I comment pseudonymously, I suppose you could guess where I come down on this. Much of the arguing and debate about the American Revolution was done anonymously. In the marketplace of ideas, its the power of the message that should count, and not the messenger. Many people discount ideas because of who says them. Also, radical ideas (which often end up being adopted after decades of debate) will put a target on people's backs. They would never be heard for fear of reprisal. Can you imagine being a dissenter to Hitler, Stalin, or Mao, trying to persuade people that their ideas are bad, but not being able to do it anonymously? It would be suicide. Look at how they try to destroy Rogan, Malone, Trump, etc. Everyone should welcome spirited debate. That said, I tend to agree that there is little accountability for abusiveness. There should be some way to purge abusers and bullies from these platforms, or at least limit their destructive abilities. But that can go both ways, depending on context and judgement. No easy answers on this.
This is how some people lost their jobs for having their real names on Facebook or Twitter and if somebody didn’t like something they said they were called racist and privilege.
Huckabee is a fool and possibly an establishment hacks, a Republican who isn't a RINO but is serving the interests of powerful special interests and not the people. He's talked a good game but so has the Republican party and yet even when they're in charge the Left is able to push their agenda ahead. Trump was the first real road block to what was the status quo which is why establishment Republicans were ready to help the Democrats get rid of him.
I do not trust Huckabee. He's either a fool to not ser the dangers of forcing everyone to expose themselves to speak or he knows and wants to get rid of anonymity in order to get people who challenge the narratives from either party to shut up out of fear of reprisal
What about Catturd!?! 😂
I like Huckabee and understand where he's coming from because so much of the viciousness of social media is perpetrated behind a veneer of anonymity, but we would lose a massively valuable segment of the discourse if everyone had to expose themselves that way. Its kind of a balancing act, I'd say. Since I comment pseudonymously, I suppose you could guess where I come down on this. Much of the arguing and debate about the American Revolution was done anonymously. In the marketplace of ideas, its the power of the message that should count, and not the messenger. Many people discount ideas because of who says them. Also, radical ideas (which often end up being adopted after decades of debate) will put a target on people's backs. They would never be heard for fear of reprisal. Can you imagine being a dissenter to Hitler, Stalin, or Mao, trying to persuade people that their ideas are bad, but not being able to do it anonymously? It would be suicide. Look at how they try to destroy Rogan, Malone, Trump, etc. Everyone should welcome spirited debate. That said, I tend to agree that there is little accountability for abusiveness. There should be some way to purge abusers and bullies from these platforms, or at least limit their destructive abilities. But that can go both ways, depending on context and judgement. No easy answers on this.