[stainablesteel]

even if this is true, whatever

you know what isn't banned now? having centrist, or even right wing opinions

you can also see the violence and terrorism that the mainstream media refuses to report on

there's a lot of political voices that are being allowed to speak finally, whereas before they've been stifled due to political persecution coupled with insane deplatforming. X as a free speech platform is doing a great job at showing how widespread political gaslighting has become.

[lolbase]

Can you please name some right wing opinions that used to be banned, and is no longer banned?

Be specific.

[stainablesteel]

right wing or oppositional, you decide

that covid came out of a chinese lab, or showing that the lockdowns didn't work as was shown by Jay Bhattacharya early on

accounts that were censored, shadowbanned, and massively decreased in exposure. just look up the twitter files.

since being owned by elon there's also been a rush of psychometricians into twitter, people who want to share and talk about their scientific data, which was banned before. you couldn't talk about IQ.

there were also people banned for challenging immigration narratives or gender ideology. this was prevalent and obvious. lauren southern was constantly accused of shooting a gun at an immigrant ngo ship that was actually just a flare - incapable of hitting or hurting anyone.

all of this was blatant and widespread on more than just twitter, did you not notice?

[lolbase]

Thank you for answering.

I'll agree he changed the (flawed) covid misinformation policy; though there were absolutely people discussing Chinese lab leak theories or the effectiveness of lockdown without getting banned.

I don't know what you're talking about regarding psychometrician... there were always people talking about how some races are categorically dumber than others and drawing broad conclusions; they received social judgment but not bans.

Your comment about Southern is really telling though. You're clearly upset that people are _not_ banned for stating something true. You agree she shot blazing hot fiery incendiary devices at immigrants using a flare gun, and you think people should be muzzled from saying that, simply because you (very wrongly) believe that flares can't start fires or hurt people.

This last part makes clear that you don't actually have any love of free speech; but rather you simply want speech restricted in the way you personally prefer. It's refreshing that you don't bother pretend to have principles beyond a desire for power, and a love of oppressing those you hate.

[Izkata]

> You agree she shot blazing hot fiery incendiary devices at immigrants using a flare gun

Not a flare gun, a flare. She held it in her hand, it couldn't even be fired: https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=357&v=yFxAlx6hy2M&feature=yout...

[lolbase]

Your pedantry misses the point.

Even if all she did was sing happy birthday to the immigrants and then welcome them to Greece, Stainablesteel is still advocating for speech he doesn't like to be restrained.

In hindsight, I should've realized that his post was unreliable and untrustworthy. I should not have used a proven liar as a source, and I won't do so again.

[Izkata]

You're the one who turned "not a gun, just a flare" into "shooting a flare gun" after he corrected it. His post is more trustworthy than yours.