re: Query this on Nikki Haley's comment about verifying all internet users....

quote:

---

Is there a link? First I’ve heard of this. She can move to China

---

Next up, a social credit score.

quote:

---

She should just wear a Raytheon hat in all public appearances at this poin

---

Vivek deep dicked her on this during last weeks debate.

She didnt like it.

The Founding Fathers themselves often used pseudonyms when publishing editorials in papers in the Revolutionary Era. Anonymity was crucial to the founding spirit of our nation.

Apparently, some people view the spirit of freedom as a threat to them.

Former appointed UN Ambassador Haley said that? Shocked...

quote:

---

I'm torn, man. We probably all prefer to be anonymous. But anonymity brings out the nutjobs on the far ends of the spectrum and amplifies their voices. (including some on droppings)

---

You’ve undoubtedly heard the saying that the road to hell is paved with good intentions?

WELL, this is one of those roads, and its never to achieve it’s stated aim, even though it starts out that way, but ends up with people using it to silence THEIR OPPOSITION, and silence voices that do not align themselves with the voice of the collective thought, resulting in a loss of job, or threats to the person that happens to not toe the line with the current whim of the day. All in all, the one person that it doesn’t serve is YOU. You’re the one that it does harm to.

Please stop surrendering yourselves to these people under the guise of it being “for your own good.” They don’t care about your good. They care about themselves, their money, and their power, same as the rest. Use your head and quit falling prey to them.

quote:

---

So some liberal whacko can harass me and my family if I say the wrong thing that triggers a microaggression fueled meltdown? No thanks.

---

OR

So some right wing wacko can harass me if I say something that offends their delicate religious or racist sensibilities?

I think the open exchange of ideas is a net positive for humanity. The benefits of people feeling more free to share their ideas to the public sphere far outweigh the bad.

While it's an easily pierced veneer of anonymity - I do think it's important to preserve it having seen how quickly the pitchfork mob can organize these days with social media. Fear of being ostracized, humiliated, doxed, boycotted, or persecuted will force people to self -censor their ideas if they are outside of what the ruling/entertainment class considers mainstream.

And mainstream ideas should only be mainstream because they've survived challenges and appeals by normal, every day people. Not because people are afraid to challenge them. Look at the people who saw the earlier studies on the origins of the Covid-19 virus and voiced their suspicion that the virus originated in a lab - they were censored and sometimes "canceled".

Do let's not pretend that there isn't an effort to control speech. There are dozens of high profile examples of this just in the past decade in the US. Haley is sharing what has become a very anti-liberal but ironically a very Democrat-focused policy stance. That's odd because Haley considers herself a republican.

We all KNOW the ruling class like Haley only wants to unveil and unmask everyone because it is easier to control public discourse - that's a massive problem IMO. They claim this is for public safety, but that's not what they will use this for.

I don't like Haley. But I like her even less after she's said that. She's basically Hillary Clinton to me. If she were president, we'd have troops on the ground in Ukraine and civil liberties would take a step back in the US.

quote:

---

Should not even be a question. Anonymity is crucial to spreading the truth on the internet.

---

Yep.

The ruling class are using the "public safety" argument to sell something that will force us to self censor. It's abhorrent and disgusting. And yeah, there are benefits to seeing who exactly is taking extremist stances or planning to do something dangerous - but we have to figure out another way to protect citizens against what can become a real threat.

I can't believe this, but somehow the democrats became the antithesis of liberalism when it comes to the freedom of exchanging ideas, speech, and challenging authority. I don't know when it happened, but I didn't really notice it until the last few years of the Obama regime.

Haley is basically a Democrat when it comes to her stance on free speech, which is not good for society at all. She has foreign policy chops, but she should not make it past Secretary of State - and even that is only if she works under a president that can make his or her own decisions and challenge Haley's warhawk stances. She'd be the de-facto president under an empty suit like Biden and she'd dominate foreign policy decisions under a domestic-focused leader like Bush. But she'd be more useful in State if under a stronger POTUS that can actually make their own decisions like Trump, Clinton, or Obama (although Obama would probably be fully aligned with her most of the time).

The right leader will chose someone like Haley for State if she openly disagrees with them or fills an knowledge/experience gap. That's as far as she should ever go in government. What she's saying here is more than a little scary and that should raise a lot of red flags to Americans that value civil liberties.

quote:

---

Freedom is more important than improving society.

---

.

Freedom is paramount.

But also - the free flow of ideas that challenge mainstream thought is very important to advance society though. It's up to all of us to recognize bad aspects of some ideas and appreciate the good - and allowing that to shape our opinions and world views. The veneer of anonymity is what often allows counter-cultural ideas to bubble and influence the mainstream. It requires less courage and presents less risk to speak your mind in a society obsessed with cancel culture and persecuting people who don't agree with modern progressive ideals.

And Haley should know this - We have the technology available today to provide a reasonable level of public safety without undermining the rights of citizens in the digital age.