Reddit's Censorship of the Great Barrington Declaration (anti-lockdown declaration) 📦

81    08 Oct 2020 15:20 by u/deep_muff_diver_

17 comments

9 u/merton1111 08 Oct 2020 21:57
I don't agree with the strategy, but it's very sad that we reached this level of censorship.
-1 u/GonzoNation * 08 Oct 2020 22:49
I'm all for getting reddit to stop hindering peoples freedom. of speech, and reddit providing a way to re-enter society. Even criminals who have stolen goods have a way to gain parole. But not reddit users who are banned from some sub. So if this is called censorship then also refer to "no you can't post in /r/conservative or /r/politics" as censorship too. The US government sponsored the creation of the Internet. There are a limited number of places where one can voice and share opinions and if we choose to assemble with /r/politics or /r/conservative that is our right that is being tampered with. Moderation "without recourse" is maintained by reddit and it is censorhip delegated in violation of the US Constitution PLUS lack of due process in violation of the US Constitution PLUS loss of privacy in violation of the US Constitution. These are serious problems. If someone wants to stand up for the right of some organization to make stuff up and compare this serious disease to the flu then they also ought to let us be free as American citizens and have a path to return us - to be able to go back into /r/conservative and /r/politics without interference. The American Enterprise Institute has made serious, and grave error that will cost people their lives. We should have the right as reddit users to debate them in whatever forum they are in. They are in error. It's simply a matter of following what the law says. If people here want the Koch brothers to claim that COVID-19 is the flu then they ought to be libertarian enough to support freedom of speech and freedom of assembly.
5 u/[deleted] * 09 Oct 2020 00:07
[deleted]
0 u/GonzoNation 09 Oct 2020 00:12
> I think you’re assuming away facts that need to be debated. Hey. Except we don't get to debate if we're gagged. >precisely how the disease is and the correct public policy approach. Let me put it this way. If we were to follow what the AEI said in April a lot more people would be dead already. They're not medical doctors. And the fact is, medicine has been providing good advice and keeping people from dying as the president almost did himself... This is not something to fool around with. COVID-19 is not "the flu" and some bunch of enterprise advocates who haven't got a hair brain clue probably shouldn't be spattering reddit users with advice that will kill them. So if they get to do that I want to be able to argue with them. Because they're wrong. >Shrieking and using terms like “Koch brothers” i Don't know who is Shrieking >isn’t really a great proxy for thoughtful, Don't know who isn't being thoughtful. but that sounds like a personal tone that I don't use.
2 u/sliplover 09 Oct 2020 15:04
Incorrect. Back in April little was known about the virus, it was assumed that the death toll will be catastrophic, we now know (through the swedish model) that is not the case, so it no longer makes sense to employ a total lockdown, and to ignore the damage the lockdown itself causes. Why punish 100% of people when only 1% are affected?
1 u/GonzoNation 09 Oct 2020 15:23
Nothing I said is incorrect. Yes, people knew less. But it has taken medical knowledge to find out. When people come in contact they spread the virus even if they don't die from it. The argument being made is incorrect. >Why punish 100% of people when only 1% are affected? That's the mistake.
2 u/sliplover 09 Oct 2020 15:59
What you said about following AEI and many more people dying is incorrect. That's a "begging the question" fallacy. There are many instances where this didn't happen, eg BLM/antifa protestors violating lockdown. "Covid is not the flu" is not a valid debate point. I can retort by saying "covid isn't ebola either". We end up getting nowhere.
1 u/sliplover 09 Oct 2020 15:00
I agree with the strategy, but it's also sad that we reached this level of censorship.
1 u/merton1111 09 Oct 2020 21:27
Hehe fair enough. And I'm glad that you had your voice here to disagree with mine. I wish more people could just accept that people will not agree, and that the answer to that is not censorship of opposing opinion.
8 u/deep_muff_diver_ [OP] 08 Oct 2020 15:21
Here is a link to the declaration: https://gbdeclaration.org/
1 u/GonzoNation 08 Oct 2020 22:30
It appears that the website avoids media analysis.
5 u/Farmerbob1 09 Oct 2020 03:58
Slippery Slope. Start censoring one thing, and others are sure to follow.
3 u/mostnormal † 08 Oct 2020 18:20
Gotta maintain those high fear levels.
2 u/sliplover 09 Oct 2020 15:08
When people are scared enough of the bogeyman, they will agree to whatever "solutions" that are proposed, no matter how ridiculous it is. That was how Pol Pot got away with killing a third of the nation.
2 u/Googlebug-1 11 Oct 2020 07:36
Censorship belongs in dictator and communist states. The Western world seems to be sliding into their playbook. Science is all about debate, rebuttal, more research, more debate. There will always be a multitude of opinions and interpretations.
1 u/[deleted] 10 Oct 2020 17:35
[deleted]
1 u/Arcerius_The_Brave 19 Feb 2021 17:55
Ha ha, the horse in the picture looks like a dog. He's smiling :)