Do you have an actual opinion that you would like to express?Well, that's me told. I will remember to only express pre-approved opinions in line with those of the moderators, and those of the baying mob!
Like I said earlier if people think it is just the 'lefties' doing this they couldn't be more wrong both sides are exactly the same but depending on which side of the fence people sit on usually determines whether it is offensive or not.And therein lies the problem. There is no debate to be had. If you have the temerity to speak out against the established view point of the right on lefties, you will be vilified,shouted down and made an “enemy” and possibly get your collar felt by the cops as someone might think you may have upset someone somewhere.
The genie is out of the bottle, and I don’t see it being pushed back on any time soon.
Do you have an actual opinion that you would like to express?
Bearing in mind that you claim the opinion you presented wasn't an actual opinion, just an example
Even YouTube contributors who post videos of scale models have been threathened with having their videos pulled for example; because of putting a swastika decal on the tail of a model aircraft.Not just political stuff, YouTube has demonetised or removed a lot of firearm related videos and channels.
Even historical stuff about 18th and 19th century weapons.
You are still claiming to be opressed, have only posted one example of opinion that ‘isn’t allowed’, and when I mention that it could be the way of making a statement as opposed to being open to debate, you then claimed it’s just an example, not actual opinionJeesus H Christ.
This house feels that people should be allowed to express opinions, even if they are contrary to the beliefs of the media in question. It is a mark of a healthy society where discussion and debate are accepted, even encouraged, and represents an every-day example of what our Grandfathers fought for. For example, a person should be able to post pro-Brexit comments on a Grauniad article, or anti-Brexit comments on a DM article, without being moderated out or banned.
In accepting this we must understand that, from time to time, we will hear ideas and opinions that we disagree with, however we will have the chance to voice our own opinions and counter-arguements. One party may change a perspective, or we may agree to disagree, or we have the option to meet on a street corner to duke it out- but we have those choices, that is the crucial element here.
A society that discourages discussion and stiffles debate will simply split into polarized factions where matters are only discussed in 'echo chamber' forums. Additionally, such a non-permissive society is at risk of mob rule, as I said, 'who guards the guards' (don't say the MPGS), who decides what an acceptable opinion is?
Recommended reading- Ninteen Eighty Four, George Orwell.
‘Should’ - a flick through the Daily Mail and the Guardian shows comments, the majority are of the persuasion slanting to agreeing or or being triggered by the outrage on the general political persuasion of the particular media and their intended audience.This house feels that people should be allowed to express opinions, even if they are contrary to the beliefs of the media in question.
I think Instagram is great too. There are many social media that are trended even more than Facebook in small zones or cities. Asian for example use local social media apps just for them.