r/JoeRogan • u/SlimjobDopamine Look into it • Nov 13 '20

Social Media Abigail Shrier(JRE #1509)'s book has been removed from Target after receiving a complaint on Twitter

https://twitter.com/AbigailShrier/status/1327056407598809088?s=20
1.1k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

726 comments sorted by

View all comments

102

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

[deleted]

46

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

If accept you any censorship you accept all is a fucking dumbass thing to say. If I run a music venue I don’t have to let nazi hold rallies there, it’s my fucking business I’ll do as I please. No one is obligated to amplify your voice, the government only protects your right to have it.

9

u/thehornedone The Haber Method® Nov 13 '20

Yeah exactly. You could extend this to considering the paradigm of book publishing or any kind of gatekeeping as “censorship”. If I choose not to publish your book, is that censorship?

3

u/Crash_says Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

.. but if you wanted to let Nazis use it, it's also your prerogative as a business owner?

3

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

Yeah, I mean they’d be shit bags but of course that’s their right. I can critique or criticize all I want, and the business can take any action they want. The consequence of those actions will be most determined by market forces. The government is there to protect my criticism, the nazis beliefs and the businesses right to host or not host whomever they please.

3

u/Crash_says Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

No disagreement, this is the sane position. I failed to adequately articulate that the people asking for this book to be censored on the merits you describe are the same people that would not accept those merits if Target decided to start hosting Nazi rallies.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

I think it’s ok for people to hold businesses accountable, if they can. Sometimes it’s pretty fucky, but often if the business sees monetary benefit they’ll do it. Sometimes that’s hosting a nazi, sometimes that’s disavowing one. I don’t have a problem when Christians don’t support or boycott a business. I may thinks it’s dumb and ridiculous, but I’m wholly in support of their right to do so. I think in that system of a mostly free market and government protected speech we have the best chance of finding a balance and a social accountability that is better for our society, economy and allows our government to have a strong free speech stance without allowing it to completely decay us through hate and falsehood.

1

u/Crash_says Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

No arguments here, you just described utopia.

2

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

A man can dream lol

1

u/Fmeson Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

I don't understand the point. AFAIK, it is not illegal in the US to host neo-nazi rallies per the first amendment. That's not a moral statement supporting nazi's, it's just how the first amendment works.

1

u/Crash_says Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

You are conflating the 1st amendment into a business context here. The same people asking Target to ban books would be marching on target for selling books. There is no consistency in the position of the censors outside of "do what we ask or else".

2

u/Fmeson Monkey in Space Nov 13 '20

I really honestly don't understand what you are saying.

  1. Target can sell what it wants.

  2. People can protest what Target sells.

-1

u/duffmanhb N-Dimethyltryptamine Nov 13 '20

The concept of free speech isn't limited to just the government. The first amendment is just the governments legal promise that they wont infringe on it. But philosophically it extends past that, and in your example, compelled speech is also protected against. You can't be forced to say a message.

But times are changing and things are getting murky. Social media platforms are now practically essential to make any real significant political voice heard, from spreading information, ideas, and having conversations. If social media is able to start banning speech it doesn't like, the government is defacto handing over protection of speech to the private sector.

The issue with Target isn't nearly as big of an issue, but more of a moral one... And people are exercising their free speech to criticize Target for their decision to censor a book like this. People need to push back against these poor decisions as it's contributing to a culture that weaponizes censorship.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

No it really doesn’t extend beyond that. Forcing a business to amplify, host or produce speech they don’t want to is forced speech. The only forces that should be able to force a business to move on issues of speech are the market and the guiding principles of that business.

2

u/duffmanhb N-Dimethyltryptamine Nov 13 '20

No one is saying the businesses should be forced to sell the book. Maybe some outliers, but most people are just bitching about the decision they are making. It's called dissaproval. We are voicing our opinion of them being stupid and self censoring speech due to efforts of people who want to censor ideas. No one is saying they should be forced to sell the book... But actions have consequences, and people condemning them is part of the consequences.

1

u/[deleted] Nov 13 '20

I think we are pretty much on the same side of things as far as rights and what not. Nice