Why didn't you join the new "far right" social network?

>Why didn't you join the new "far right" social network?
Because I'm not an 14 year old edge lord.

wow you're so mature user.

Thank you, user.

kek

No one here remembers that website which I forgot which did the same thing as this?

Wait so anti censorship/ free speech is far right? Isn't that classical liberalism?

in 2019 being far right means you're a classic liberal who hates jews and niggers

if I can't control it it's far right.

The the right are more tolerant considering they're open to have a debate kek

I am already logged in but it isn't logging me in to the addon. lol
Yes, I clicked the log in button on it.

Attached: file.png (1018x213, 20K)

being "open to debate" isn't tolerance when "debate" is just the tool you use to tear down other people

click it again

kek
libtards BTFO

Attached: file.png (740x465, 37K)

Yes. "Classical" liberalism.

Modern left-wing fagheaps have zero to little to do with classical liberalism.
Or left-wing for that matter, how the fuck can they call themselves socialists when their parties are led by capitalists and they post "smash capitalism" from an iPhone to Twitter/Facebook?

>Do you describe Twitter as "an ISIS social network"
I unironically do, after they kicked off a bunch of conservatives for innocent flaming and trolling, when they let muslims post videos of beheadings without doing anything about that.

Attached: isis.jpg (960x486, 39K)

Disqus?

"Tearing down other people" is accomplished by silencing them, not arguing with them.

reminder this dumb bitch willingly went to isis

Yeah no shit, when they're losing control of the media now they're listening.

Stumbleupon! Fuck I finally remember

If you are a white male you are not diverse and your opinion is not tolerated.

there is a reason why we call the left, NPCs.

stop shilling on Jow Forums polfag

MSNPC

Honeypot

Actually yes

Theres different conservative thoughts on things like taxes, the border, etc

>anti censorship/ free speech
>gab
>no laws against lolicon but i don't like it so fuck off

this + they remove anything against kikes from their website

>debate your thoughts
>gets BTFO every time
>"omg intolerance!"

Unironically a cool concept, but it's probably a botnet.

Why doesn't this thing work for me?

Attached: borked.png (648x257, 16K)

I've never been much of one for Twitter (or a knockoff of it), but Dissenter is one hell of an extension. I really enjoy being able to say whatever I want without wondering if the comment will be deleted or I'll be banned.

yeah it doesn't work for me either, it was working yesterday so it's p weird

Progressives are no longer liberal. They're puritanical.

Can you please put the name of the app in the title next time!

You can comment on most fucking websites, if they want to limit what you can say that has nothing to do with free speech.

I never thought the right wing would be arguing that private companies need to be held to the same standards as public ones.

The left now is authoritarian socialism and according to them everything else is literally Hitler.

>you can't compare us with that other right group! we disagree on how you should place jews in an oven for maximum capacity!
>fighting against the monolith group called "lefties"

I think they had to do an update because the Washington post tried to circumvent it by giving each viewer a unique address, so that nobody could see the Dissenter comments from anyone else.

Attached: wiw4rh121ul11.jpg (640x640, 71K)

I argue that when judges start calling private companies "public forums," then those "public forums" need to be treated as such.

That's a title that cuts both ways. You can't prohibit Trump from blocking people on twitter due to its "public forum" status while also allowing twitter to ban people, as that is denying individuals to the public forum.

Yes, absolutely, the right will even spend hours discussing those opinions. The left will just ban you.

if I go to a resturant then I'm at a public place
but that resturant can still kick me out and refuse me service
same thing

CNNPC

No, when you go to a restaurant, you are in a private business that services the public. Furthermore, a restaurant is not a public forum. A town square is a public forum. A city hall meeting is a public forum.

go tell someone on the right that maybe you should judge a person on their character instead of their race or beliefs

tell it to that Christian baker couple who got sued by faggots for not baking them a faggot dildo cake

Most people on the right are fine doing that. It's the left that's so obsessed with gender, race, and sexual orientation.

Do the same to the left LMAO.

>wanted a wedding cake from a wedding cake decorator
The baker won though.

did the law actually act in their favor tho

"No matter how unsavory the message. All dissident voices are important"

>everyone has to think that trannys are really women
its hard to once you realize they are not even humans

>you should judge a person on their character instead of their race or beliefs
Stereotypes are made for a reason. They are generally correct. It is a defense mechanism of all living things, even plants.
For example relaxing around blacks and trusting jews and muslims will be a bad news for you and your loved ones. It is not up for a debate, it is a simple truth to protect yourself and your loved ones.

yes, privately owned organizations that service the public is what we're talking about

He didn't refuse the service to them, he refused to make that particular cake.

nope, most of them are obssessed with jews

exactly, libtards have double standard for everything. This is why nobody takes them seriously.
Thank fuck for that. Otherwise there would have been a faggot holocaust.

>"debate" is just the tool you use to tear down other people

shit like this happens when you present facts that the opposing party cant discard

Not according to a federal judge's ruling. He classified Twitter as a public forum in order to prevent Trump from blocking anyone from his twitter feed.

If you're going to legally classify something as a public forum, then it needs to be legally treated as a public forum. Sucks for twitter, as they never claimed that they were, but the judge forced it on them, and now they either need to fight the title or live with it.

>Most of them
On Jow Forums, maybe. I don't think too many people from either side give a shit about the Israel/Palestine horse shit, let alone Jews in general.

Imagine being so stupid that dumb things suddenly make sense.

Attached: 1550988282440.jpg (394x406, 41K)

pws no tweading senpai uwu

Blaming the Jews for everything bad that has happened on the planet is the hallmark of being alt-right

You need to ask yourself why so many "news" sites got rid of their comment sections.

I wasnt aware of that

debate is an essential part of democracy if liberals cant handle it they can always claim their true nature

being facists

Isn't it sad that you've only read one dystopian novel?

We aren't talking about the alt-right. See: Specifically:
>go tell someone on the right that maybe you should judge a person on their character instead of their race or beliefs

Followed by: Specifically:
>Most people on the right are fine doing that.

The alt-right is actually very small. Much smaller than a group like Antifa, which is still very much a minority of the left.

>"stations jams" during civil right movement coverage
>hays code
>comics code
>television's seal of good practice
>suppression of teaching evolution in schools, when they failed, they slapped a fucking content warning on it. those are the same fucking people who would bitch about trigger warnings later
Except all the times they have control over communication. Then the right will ban you.

>The alt-right is actually very small.
I wish

>can still kick me out and refuse me service
Not in EU ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

>Q: How do you destroy free speech?
>A: Call people enjoing it alt-right and what they do hate speech.

I don't use gab had no idea they banned lolis, I love lolis. Was there any reason behind it or just the admins being fags?

Attached: d8d4c4640a12dedbcb696fbd726e9789.jpg (1000x750, 510K)

Using a reddit source who identifies as a white nationalist, they estimate their number at 200k worldwide, based on podcast downloads, etc.

reddit.com/r/DebateAltRight/comments/5p8ukq/how_big_is_the_altright/

>Ideas of the Alt-Right are common in other movements around the world, but as to the Alt-Right proper, I'd say about 200,000 or so, judging from view counts of various podcasts, youtube view and subscriber counts, twitter presence, and the online presence in general. Of course, this is a ball park figure, and much depends on what you include as being "Alt-Right."

But let's assume 100% of their estimation resides in the US. That's still less than 1% of the US population, sitting at over 330 million.

>they estimate their number at 200k worldwide
how the fuck do you estimate the number of people with a political belief on the internet? you can't, not with a fucking podcast download
they're all over the place here

Janitorial staff will delete this thread because you need to pay for advertising on 4 channel 4channel.org/advertise

Where is "here?"

Jow Forums

gab.ai/gab/posts/39090858

Are you retarded? If people turn up to a debate and get btfo because they're making stupid arguments that doesn't mean they're being torn down it means they're being exposed as having stupid views which can be refuted

>limit what you can say that has nothing to do with free speech
????????

kill yourself lmao

Oh, well no shit. That's Jow Forums spillover. You might as well estimate the percentage of the population that is "alt-right" by visiting the Daily Stormer.

According to the LA times, they estimate the alt-right to be pretty small as well:
latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-main-alt-right-audience-20170822-story.html

>From September 2016 to May 2017, I analyzed visits and unique visitors to scores of political web magazines of various political orientations. (One person accessing a site five times in a month represents five visits but only one unique visitor). Through interviews and using the site Media Bias / Fact Check, I identified nine alt-right sites, 53 sites associated with the mainstream right, and 63 with the mainstream left. I excluded left- or right-leaning general-interest publications, such as BuzzFeed, the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal. Data were obtained from SimilarWeb, a well-known provider of web-marketing information. All audience figures given here are monthly averages for the nine-month period I studied.

>The total audience for alt-right political sites is much smaller than the audiences for mainstream left and right sites. The nine alt-right sites combined received nearly 3 million visits and 839,000 unique visitors, compared with 236 million visits and 102 million unique visitors for the mainstream left, and 264 million visits and 111 million unique visitors for the mainstream right.

You'll have to post a screenshot, I block (((Cloudflare))).

If you beat someone in a "debate" they'll just slink away and return the next day with a different argument to represent the same viewpoint. Their views are grounded in what they want to believe and debate is only a weapon used to try and force it on others

Except comments aren't debates. They're groups of mobs that are susceptible to mob behaviors.

how is this literally any different from having a discussion board with topics on said articles

Basically something about US federal law that bans interstate transport of obscene material and the SCOTUS quote "I'll know it when I see it"

So what the Kavanagh hearing, with a group of people literally trying to ram open doors and dressing up like bitches from The Handmaiden's Tale. Yet that was tolerated. Internet comments can't deal out anywhere near the kind of damage real mobs can, so I'm not seeing the argument to squash comments.

Well, is it the left that is trying to establish a free speech platform that can't be censored? How come all free speech websites are right wing while all left wing forums are strictly moderated?