Censorship?

[NotWise]

Last year the hospital where I lived decided that they wanted everyone that worked there to get flu shots.

If you live in a hospital, then that might explain why you don't get it.

 

[HandsInTheDark]

I'm sorry. You're off in a cloud somewhere.

But on what you posted--no, having a majority on something--especially in the moment--doesn't automatically make it legal or happen. George Bush the lesser got elected president without the majority of votes for one, and we just had another attempt at gun control legislation deep sixed when all the polls say there's a clear majority in favor of some greater form of gun control then we have.

But, sorry. This has nothing to do with censorship or a private business' right to choose what it's products are going to be (which are two different slices at the "withholding" concept). You're just wandering around in a wilderness on this, and I don't really see that you've clearly stated your question or your beef. So, just going to have to leave you hanging--plus your post to Hands indicated you've got a very short fuse.

I tend to hang with a younger crowd, both at work and socially to some extent, and something I've been noticing in the mid-20s and younger group is a creeping belief in conspiracy. Maybe it got started in the rumor (patently false) that Senator Sanders was being denied airtime in the current election. (He wasn't. He bought the time he could afford and he wasn't as interesting as Trump, for irrational values of interesting, so he didn't score a lot of free press.) Younger folk, especially on campuses, don't realise how much of an echo chamber they live in and have trouble grasping that everyone doesn't think like they do, and if they don't hear their views echoed back by the media it must be a conspiracy, etc.. They also tend to believe in the vast right wing conspiracy (one of the funniest things Clinton has ever said; given that the right wing has all but lost the ability to tie their own shoes, let alone agree on much, it's safe to say there isn't one.)

This thread has the same smell. THEY are controlling access to TRUTH. THEY are facebook, parents, religion, government, news organisations, the Illuminati, and anything else you don't get a say in. It's the mirror image of the "I don't believe the liberal media" bumper stickers I still see around. Same paranoia, different worldview.

People grow out of it, mostly; eventually folk realise that capitalism is about making money and people are willing to distort facts to make money (that's almost entirely what advertising is), and that simple fact pretty much explains all the inept and immoral decisionmaking you see. If there IS a conspiracy, it's run by dollar bills, not people. Why don't we have better gun control in this country? Because these matters aren't decided by majorities, or by ethics, or by common sense. They're decided by the flow of dollar bills. Period. Why didn't Bernie get the nomination? Because lots and lots of people are afraid to change the status quo because they recognise that as bad as things are for them, change is likely to be worse. (Free college education means more taxes on the middle class, sweetie. The middle class isn't having it, especially the over 40s who already put their kids through college and have no interest in subsidising anyone else's kids.) Most decisions, like layoffs, or what facebook allows, or what Amazon sells, have nothing to do with repression and a lot to do with economics. It may be class warfare but the one thing it isn't is ideology. People running businesses often aren't too concerned with ideology. Ideology doesn't help them meet payroll.

If people want to discuss *specific instances* of censorship, I'm all in. But no one's mentioned one yet, probably because it's quite uncommon.

 

[Tio_Narratore]

Last year the hospital where I lived decided that they wanted everyone that worked there to get flu shots. Many of the staff were up in arms and no one wanted to be forced to immunize.
Well, the staff all got together, from all three locations of this hospital, in three different cities and voted and signed against it and for the right to chose. It became a public debate and the story was updated daily by the local news. Well, even though the majority of the staff was totally against it, the board of directors of this corporation pushed it through and they were fired if they didn't take the shot. So even if it was against your religious or against what you thought was right for your own body, you had to find a new job. I truly believe that there were many that didn't give a rats ass if they had to take the shot or not... But they voted to support their coworkers.

But consider your own argument - that the majority should have the authority. Who should decide if workers in a hospital - a place where people go when they are sick - should be immunized against a disease that could be fatal to the people they are supposed to be helping. Yes, freedom is a difficult thing, and the rights of all have to be weighed against the rights of the individual. Do I have no right to safe medical care? You know, there were doctors up into the 1950s who didn't accept the germ theory of disease. They didn't need to wash their hands between patients, they maintained, but we do know that women didn't die of "childbed fever" after doctors started cleaning up.

If you live in a hospital, then that might explain why you don't get it.

It doesn't help to pick on awkward constructions; this is a discussion of meaning, not syntax.

 

[HandsInTheDark]

If you live in a hospital, then that might explain why you don't get it.

Um... cheap. And probably unfair.

 

[Magickalgirl]

I'm surprised that someone who could pass the "over 18" rule on this site would ask such a question.

Let's start more-or-less locally with the suppression of African-Americans in the US southeast. It was express. It was intentional. And really, it's still going on, though it's more subtle than it used to be.

I don't know if you realize it, but the Holocaust in Germany during WW II was a policy supported by the majority -- the Nazi's were an elected party and racial cleansing was a public policy.

Then there's the relatively recent genocide of Muslims in the former Yugoslavian states.

Do I even need to talk about recent African history?

***When you begin your post with an insult, I'm sorry, but I think less of you and the information you share right off the bat. It speaks volumes to me. Just saying.

I believe there was a certain psychology to slavery, it was worldwide and many sociologists have studied and written books on it. It was around from the beginning of time. Hopefully, we are close to conquering it for good.

There was also psychology to the allowance of the genocide of Native Americans. There was an agenda pushed and misinformation told.

As far as the Holocaust, I am not a historian, I have a Bachelors degree in Sociology, so of course it was touched on thru college. I have NEVER heard that racial cleansing was PUBLIC policy! In fact I saw a film in one class that showed the reactions of the German people when our President made them walk through the camps after the liberation... They were shocked, passing out, sobbing, falling to their knees! They never knew what exactly was happening. Also, I don't think Hitler was elected by a majority, his party was and then he happened.

 

[sr71plt]

Last year the hospital where I lived decided that they wanted everyone that worked there to get flu shots. Many of the staff were up in arms and no one wanted to be forced to immunize.
Well, the staff all got together, from all three locations of this hospital, in three different cities and voted and signed against it and for the right to chose. It became a public debate and the story was updated daily by the local news. Well, even though the majority of the staff was totally against it, the board of directors of this corporation pushed it through and they were fired if they didn't take the shot. So even if it was against your religious or against what you thought was right for your own body, you had to find a new job. I truly believe that there were many that didn't give a rats ass if they had to take the shot or not... But they voted to support their coworkers.

A hospital isn't a country and you a citizen with full citizen rights of that country. A hospital is a business and you (and everyone else you mentioned) are a contracted employee. You don't have an inherent right to a vote in what that business does; nor do a majority of its employees. You don't like what the hospital has decided needs to be done, you can walk away and get another job. That doesn't mean you have any vote in the hospital's decisions--unless it decides to give you one.

And, again, this has nothing to do with censorship.

I'm sorry, but confused seems not to be the only problem you have going for you on this thread. Done with you.

 

[Magickalgirl]

If you live in a hospital, then that might explain why you don't get it.

Lol Not Wise! I'm so tired I had to read it twice to get it tho!

 

[Ldy_Sea]

I know I never forgot that shit. Utube was a great reminder going back a watching the senate trial with Dee Schneider of Twisted Sister on the stand testifying. Sure he made an ass outta himself, but no one else in a band had the fucking guts to stand up and say a word in defense when it came to music, bands, and lyrics.

I remember when Tipper Gore had 2 Live Crew Arrested for performing their music at an event where everyone was 21 and over right here in Florida.

That's the Democrats for you. Anything they don't like needs to be banned while claiming to be tolerant and open minded.

To this day I still have 2 Live Crews album Nasty as They Wanna Be, because I bought it during the three week period it was illegal to sell any of their merchandise.

I am in favor of warning labels. Informing is not banning.

I believe in free speech. No one should be denied the ability to speak their opinion. They do have to put up with the repercussions of what they say, be it losing a job, or whatever.

Just because you are allowed to say it doesn't mean you should say it.

There is no idea so dangerous that it will make things worse by talking about it. Polite discourse of any topic is a sign of a mature and reasonable society. Too bad soo many special cupcakes can't handle words written in chalk, or the fact that someone mught disagree with them so they need to go to preschool to feel better.

Then people wonder why this country is falling apart.

 

[sr71plt]

I remember when Tipper Gore had 2 Live Crew Arrested for performing their music at an event where everyone was 21 and over right here in Florida.

That's the Democrats for you.

Wow, that's a giant leap. Since when did Tipper Gore become all Democrats?

And at this point, you probably should take this crazy nonsense to the political board.

 

[NotWise]

If people want to discuss *specific instances* of censorship, I'm all in. But no one's mentioned one yet, probably because it's quite uncommon.

Okay. Valerie Plame. She and her husband worked for the CIA and were outed by "someone" in the Bush administration so that they could no longer work.

She published a book about the experience that was so heavily redacted by the government that parts of it were essentially unreadable. We have a copy of the book here somewhere. I'm sure I could post photos of the pages if you really don't believe it.

 

[Tio_Narratore]

***When you begin your post with an insult, I'm sorry, but I think less of you and the information you share right off the bat. It speaks volumes to me. Just saying.

I believe there was a certain psychology to slavery, it was worldwide and many sociologists have studied and written books on it. It was around from the beginning of time. Hopefully, we are close to conquering it for good.

There was also psychology to the allowance of the genocide of Native Americans. There was an agenda pushed and misinformation told.

As far as the Holocaust, I am not a historian, I have a Bachelors degree in Sociology, so of course it was touched on thru college. I have NEVER heard that racial cleansing was PUBLIC policy! In fact I saw a film in one class that showed the reactions of the German people when our President made them walk through the camps after the liberation... They were shocked, passing out, sobbing, falling to their knees! They never knew what exactly was happening. Also, I don't think Hitler was elected by a majority, his party was and then he happened.

But you do need to study these things a good bit more deeply. A film does not tell you everything about what happened. Consider your own position again - did the film show a majority of German citizens viewing Dachau? (and it wasn't the US President (Remember him - he set up concentration camps for Japanese-Americans, and was elected four time. A nice liberal, too, Franklin Delano Roosevelt in case your courses didn't cover that) it was an American General.

Again, you seem to have the conspiracy of the powerful underlying you interpretation of the world. It really isn't like that. A majority of Americans still believe that the 9/11 hijackers got into the US through Canada. It is completely false; none were ever in Canada. Does the fact that a majority believes a lie make it true?

 

[Magickalgirl]

A hospital isn't a country and you a citizen with full citizen rights of that country. A hospital is a business and you (and everyone else you mentioned) are a contracted employee. You don't have an inherent right to a vote in what that business does; nor do a majority of its employees. You don't like what the hospital has decided needs to be done, you can walk away and get another job. That doesn't mean you have any vote in the hospital's decisions--unless it decides to give you one.

And, again, this has nothing to do with censorship.

I'm sorry, but confused seems not to be the only problem you have going for you on this thread. Done with you.

I was only using the business as an isolated example, but you're right, I don't know how we got here, or I got here from Cencorship! I also don't know why you're so angry with me! I didn't feel I went off on hands, I felt I was defending myself from assumptions and accusations that were unwarranted.

I didn't mean to offend anyone and if I did I apologize. By your responses I can see that I obviously didn't make my point, got totally off point and only seemed to fuel burning fires.

Good night all

 

[sr71plt]

Okay. Valerie Plame. She and her husband worked for the CIA and were outed by "someone" in the Bush administration so that they could no longer work.

She published a book about the experience that was so heavily redacted by the government that parts of it were essentially unreadable. We have a copy of the book here somewhere. I'm sure I could post photos of the pages if you really don't believe it.

The current case of AG Lynch excising references to Islam from the Orlando shooter's manifesto (which I gather was done--I've only seen references to reports on it) seems to fit the bill too. In this case, it's sort of a stupid form of censorship, as we all know he was claiming to be acting in the name of Islam (even if Islam itself wasn't in on that deal).

But, yes, redacting manuscripts is a form of censorship (it's being done by governmental authority), but if the material is genuinely still classified, it's legitimately being censored. I've gotten into a bit of that with publishers (reviewed manuscripts submitted to publishers on intelligence matters and suggesting what should be checked out for possible redacting). And I've had to submit six of my own mainstream novels for clearance. (Luckily, I'd kept open-source media files that backed up that everything I was covering had been reported in public media.)

 

[sr71plt]

I was only using the business as an isolated example, but you're right, I don't know how we got here, or I got here from Cencorship! I also don't know why you're so angry with me! I didn't feel I went off on hands, I felt I was defending myself from assumptions and accusations that were unwarranted.

I didn't mean to offend anyone and if I did I apologize. By your responses I can see that I obviously didn't make my point, got totally off point and only seemed to fuel burning fires.

Good night all

You went off on more posters than Hands.

Being frustrated with you isn't the same thing as being angry with you. You made comments--toward more than one poster on the thread--that directly reflected your anger and combativeness.

 

[HandsInTheDark]

Okay. Valerie Plame. She and her husband worked for the CIA and were outed by "someone" in the Bush administration so that they could no longer work.

She published a book about the experience that was so heavily redacted by the government that parts of it were essentially unreadable. We have a copy of the book here somewhere. I'm sure I could post photos of the pages if you really don't believe it.

Yes, that's a real case. She got retaliated against, and then evidence of the retaliation got held back by the government. (Note that there are legal grounds for redacting text, for example if secret information is revealed. On the other hand, a friend of mine has noted "The government would classify fire if they could get away with it," and there's ample evidence that information that's embarrassing to decision-makers gets classified so it can be buried.)

Censorship like that is rare because it tends to backfire. The Plame case made the government look very, very bad, and a lot of people, especially in the intelligence community, have not forgotten. That's not a group of people a government wants to piss off...

I'm not saying censorship doesn't happen. I'm saying it's rare, and the cases of it have very little to do with what either the OP or Magickal was going on about.

 

[Ldy_Sea]

Wow, that's a giant leap. Since when did Tipper Gore become all Democrats?

And at this point, you probably should take this crazy nonsense to the political board.

Because that is what all Liberals do.

What was it 4-5 years ago when a democrat introduced a bill to force conservative talk radio to give equal time to liberal views because there were no liberal talk radio.

How about when Mayor Bloomberg banned Sodas over a certain size. No one needs a large capacity beverage.

Liberals have also tried to pass legislation to make it a hate crime for religious leaders to say that homosexuality is a sin.

Conservative pro gun protest no one gets injured. Libneral protest against banks, or police turn into riots.

How many HRC or Bernie Sanders rally's have been the site of assaults by conservatives? None.

How many Trump supporters have been attacked by liberals?

But liberals are the tolerant ones. Conservatives are violent and hateful.

Only the brainwashed would believe anything the left says anymnore.

BTW Pilot I didn't put this thread here and since I'm not a mod I can't move it.

 

[HandsInTheDark]

You went off on more posters than Hands.

Besides, this is the Author's Forum. Attack dogs wander the place pretty freely, though it used to be much worse. I'm not likely to be insulted by someone like Magickal, who I don't think is fully aware of how antagonistically she writes, how easily she takes insult, and how paranoid she's coming across. There are people here who are older, fully aware of their own anger management failures and a great deal more insulting, and if they can't get to me (that's what Ignore is for), she certainly won't.

 

[sr71plt]

*redacted*

 

[sr71plt]

Because that is what all Liberals do.

Again, too way over the top and sweeping for an intelligent person to be spouting. And, again, this belongs on the political board, not here.

 

[NotWise]

But, yes, redacting manuscripts is a form of censorship (it's being done by governmental authority), but if the material is genuinely still classified, it's legitimately being censored.

I don't recall that the redactions of Ms. Plame's books were ever reviewed by judicial authority. It's a matter of trust (which I don't have a lot of) whether the redactions were really a matter of security or whether they were primarily political. Honestly, they could chose to redact a huge amount of material just to obscure a few statements that they didn't want released.

 

[Ldy_Sea]

This book would also be a real eyeopener on the early years of radical Islam and the U.S. government response to that.

The early years of Radical Islam long predate the US or even the Birth of Jesus.

Islam is as old as Judaism and the radicals ran it from day one.

 

[sr71plt]

I don't recall that the redactions of Ms. Plame's books were ever reviewed by judicial authority. It's a matter of trust (which I don't have a lot of) whether the redactions were really a matter of security or whether they were primarily political. Honestly, they could chose to redact a huge amount of material just to obscure a few statements that they didn't want released.

The intelligence community has an "independent" manuscript clearance office that does all of the clearances and redaction. If redactions are challenged (which Plame did), an inspector general with top secret clearances but not currently in the intelligence community is brought in to review all challenged redactions.

And, no, I'm not saying that all redactions are strictly kosher--or that everything redacted in the Plame manuscript remained redacted after the inspector general had reviewed it. I will say that Ms. Plame took a "take this and this and stick it" approach to what she put in her book (and I cheered her on).

 

[sr71plt]

The early years of Radical Islam long predate the US or even the Birth of Jesus.

Islam is as old as Judaism and the radicals ran it from day one.

Again, take it to the political board. (But, no--as an example of your outrageous overstatements--Radical Islam doesn't predate the birth of Jesus. Islam came 500 years after Jesus died).

Please just take your extremist political shit to the political board.

 

[NotWise]

***When you begin your post with an insult, I'm sorry, but I think less of you and the information you share right off the bat. It speaks volumes to me. Just saying.

Say what you want.

I believe there was a certain psychology to slavery,

I wasn't talking about slavery. I was talking about the relatively recent history of the US Southeast. Try reading about the American Civil Rights Movement and the backlash against it. Try going there and figuring out the political dynamic.

And incidentally, we are nowhere near conquering slavery. My daughter and her husband spent a few weeks in Nicaragua last year, where children are pretty regularly kidnapped into slavery as prostitutes.

As far as the Holocaust, I am not a historian,

An evident gap in your education.

 

[Ldy_Sea]

Again, take it to the political board. (But, no--as an example of your outrageous overstatements--Radical Islam doesn't predate the birth of Jesus. Islam came 500 years after Jesus died).

Please just take your extremist political shit to the political board.

Islam did not come about after Jesus. Ishmael, who was the son of Abraham and Hagar (Abrahams servant). Ishmael and Hagar were cast out of Abrahams house when Sarah, Abrahams wife became pregnant.

Ishmael and Abraham built Mecca and Ishmael founded Islam. Ishmael-Islam.

This is why Christianity, Islam and Judaism are called "Abrahamic" religions. Abrahams off spring founded both Islam and Judaism and the hate between the two groups stems from Ishmael not being recognized as a son of Abraham while Isaac and Jacob are.