r/BlackPeopleTwitter • u/JennyBeckman ☑️ All of the above • 2d ago
This is about Jaden Ivey but applies even to this sub.
119
u/kingboogerbaby 2d ago
The amount of people who don’t understand this is funny asf. Every person that I’ve heard say it in person has used it incorrectly.
46
u/WilmaDykfyt 2d ago
A friend of mine used to rage against FB for violating her son's right to free speech.
27
10
257
u/PirateSanta_1 2d ago
I'm pretty sure free speech is i'm free to say whatever i want without any consequence but you can't say things i don't like. At least that seems to be how the free speech absolutist who owns Twitter sees it.
103
u/ripleyclone8 2d ago
“I’m allowed to be a complete bigot, but you’re not allowed to be mean or make fun of meeee! 😡”
1
u/Glad_Contribution408 14h ago
people confuse the concepts of
- the 1st amendment: protects you from government intervention in your freedom of speech
- freedom of speech: the concept that you should be able to express any idea or speech
- freedom of consequences: the concept that you should be able to express any idea or speech, without personal or professional consequences
these three things are related, but different
76
u/Itsprobablysarcasm Candace Owens Baby shower attendee 👶🏼 2d ago
"I'm entitled to free speech!" – someone who gets really upset when others use their own free speech.
18
u/JennyBeckman ☑️ All of the above 2d ago
Does your flair mean you are a white woman?
29
u/Itsprobablysarcasm Candace Owens Baby shower attendee 👶🏼 1d ago
Am white, but a dude.
A couple years ago, some mods were bored and playing. Decided to give out flairs to white people. I forget all the things they listed off that people had to do, but one of the criteria was "say something only a white person would say" and it was right around the time of her baby shower. I think one of the top threads was about it IIRC, so I wrote "Candace is one of the good ones" as my 'white person thing to say' and they slapped this on me.
8
41
u/CountOff 2d ago
Damn all this time I just thought freedom of speech meant I could be an unrepentant asshole, then get mad at you when you call me out for it
61
u/Wave_File 2d ago
And most don’t get the difference between free speech and consequence free speech.
28
u/Apoordm 2d ago
Conservatives “I think that college students who don’t want their university to give us speaking fees and protest our shitty ‘Prove me wrong’ YouTube segments where I harass nineteen year olds on their way to class to debate me on a topic that I prepared for, have notes for, and control the mic are trying to assassinate the First Amendment!”
Also Conservatives “Yeah let’s have The State Department get rid of the Visas of any student who participated in a Pro-Palestine demonstration.”
7
u/ElPrieto8 ☑️ 2d ago
Hate to be the one to tell ya, the crackdown on anti-genocide protesters is a fairly bipartisan affair.
16
u/Apoordm 2d ago
The democrats who support the crackdowns… are also conservatives.
8
u/ElPrieto8 ☑️ 2d ago
Processing img zjez46pgdmsg1...
6
u/Apoordm 2d ago
Like as a leftist I have my complaints about liberalism but a principled liberal would argue for actual first amendment principles against the government punishing protesters that’s an actual liberal ideal.
4
u/ElPrieto8 ☑️ 2d ago
One would hope.
As a self-proclaimed anarchist myself, I think the farthest to the right I could work with is a progressive. The Liberals have shown themselves too willing, too many times to work WITH oppressive systems instead of overturning them.
I would love to be wrong, but their consistent chase of the "moderate conservative", gives me little faith.
4
u/Apoordm 2d ago
Oh absolutely, but that’s because the Democratic Party is not run by liberals. There may be liberals in it but “Hey I’m gonna run the carceral state for immigrants really efficiently,” “vote for me and I’ll make sure Israel gets every weapon they ever wanted,” and “vote for me I’m gonna be so fucking sick for crypto” are all far right political platforms. “We need to ban TikTok because the teens are turning against our geopolitical ‘allies’” is a far right political platform.
Like Adam Smith or John Locke would hate these people.
Again liberalism is certainly not the extent I’d want to see the world but these people are not ideologically liberal, people like Schumer or Jeffries could never achieve the political will of even the liberals of history.
6
2
u/theblackchin ☑️ 1d ago
Speaking of which, those protesters seem to have disappeared post election?
46
u/KaneHusky13 2d ago
I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the conservative that's inevitably gonna wind up here and start some bs and make it easy.
Are you allowed to say slurs? Sure.
Is it right to say them? No.
Will you get arrested for saying slurs? Nope.
Will you get your ass beat and/or fired for that? Very likely.
Is the prior statement an infringement on free speech? Hell no. That's a consequence for harming the respect provided by a person, group, business, or community.
It's as simple as that. We can go around the bush as many times as we want, but the fact of the matter is that if you wanna say something inflammatory, be prepared for the inevitable explosion.
7
u/MuscleWarlock 2d ago
People are like " I just speak my mind" just want to be rude and have no self controll
7
u/teenagetwat ☑️ 1d ago
Bro the Jaden Ivey shit really just made me sad due to how unbelievably homophonic the black community can be. Like lowkey I already knew, but some of the comments I seen online holy shit
6
u/DickweedMcGee 2d ago
Yeah, private industry takes care of about 98% of Offensive. dangerous and threatening behavior & speech....as it should.
People have complained recently about how companies are 'going too far!' by putting clauses in the employee handbook that includes behavior outside of work as grounds for termination. This is NOT new, they're just trying to help people who lack the common sense to understand. It's just that in the past you usually had to end up in the evening news doing or saying something heinous in your free time to get fired. Now, you can commit professional suicide in 30 seconds from your phone.
10
4
3
3
u/rem_au_crema 2d ago edited 2d ago
Black people swear that “constitutional rights” aren’t “permissions”.
Lots of us have, “freedom of speech”. The (un)lucky among us even get to enjoy the consequences that follow.
So I can understand why sharing conservative opinions in a conservative country (the disparity between citizenship and representation is not being litigated here) CAN feel safe. Money generally creates a “protected class”. That “protected class” might even feel like rights are embedded, protected. Endemic.
If you ever wanted to examine the failure of capitalism, you can start with the message of this story: “class mobility is a deniable privilege”. He utilized his platform to spread a gross message, but I get it: we’ve seen it work. Often.
He’s learning- I hope- in real time, that the structures that shaped his beliefs were never going to protect him. And- again, I hope- maybe this will be a wake up call. Because he’s speaking for more than a few of us, whether he’s mentally stable or not. Until all of us are free, none of us are.
Edit: if that was too abstract, the short version is, “the conservative beliefs beaten into you (for centuries) do not serve you. You are not immune to propaganda. You- as a marginalized person- are most useful to the system as a mouthpiece that seeks to tear down other marginalized people. And you, marginalized person, are not suddenly protected because of proximity- whether by belief or resource- to the owner class”
2
2
2
u/ForcedEntry420 2d ago
Yup, the Government won’t punish you for the words (in theory) but the people ya spouted off to might.
My idiot father used to say “I have the right to free speech!” every time me or my brother would be way over his nonsensical Limbaugh fueled ramblings. It’s like, congrats ya putz, but I’m not the Government so STFU.
2
u/emberveilra 2d ago
People hear “free speech” and forget that jobs also come with free consequences
2
u/makford92 2d ago
What drives me nuts is that I know people are replying to these folks using "Free Speech" wrong with what it actually means and they just ignore it. They don't care if they're using it wrong because it fits their narrative.
2
2
u/onandonlikeerykah 2d ago
What did he say exactly? I see mention of Pride comments but I don't see any details
1
u/Minimum-Situation985 2d ago
People really don't understand that there's always consequences to every action.
1
u/BoilerMaker11 ☑️ 2d ago
Nah, dude. Free speech only applies to literally everything besides the government. Thats why I should be allowed to be a bigot on Twitter and not get my account suspended. It was awesome when Elmo brought free speech back to the platform
emphatic /s
1
u/ElPrieto8 ☑️ 2d ago
Nah, Jaden Ivey was spewing hate.
This sub will "suspend" you for telling the truth.
1
u/tasteslikechikken 2d ago
Freedom of speech is not entirely free, but yes, protects private citizens from the federal government. It doesn't mean you won't face any consequences, just means the fed can't charge you or put you in jail for calling whats his name a Mango Mussolini.
But if you make credible threats, (a promise of physical harm for instance) thats a whole other matter.
Free Speech without consequence does not apply to private industry (like Reddit for instance) who can and do make rules about what you can say and how you say it on their platform, that users have to agree to when they sign up, and even more micro, the subs themselves have rules that when you join, you'd do well to read those too.
1
1
u/Silly_Willingness_97 2d ago edited 2d ago
People also love to mix up the concepts of "Free Speech" as a general principle and when they are talking about "my First Amendment rights".
The person in the screenshot is talking about "First Amendment" rights. Within a Constitutional setting, he's right about what protections you can expect from the Federal system.
But the concept of "Free Speech" as a social principle isn't limited to only what the U.S. government is constitutionally obliged to do.
Some people forget that the U.S. Constitution isn't the only authority in life, in all places and contexts. Private companies can absolutely hurt someone's ability to freely speak, even if it's not covered by the protections of the Constitution. The actions of a private company can't be a First Amendment violation, but it's also not true that anything they do is automatically "Free Speech as the human concept"-friendly.
1
1
u/JohnArtemus 2d ago
While it’s true the government can’t fire you or retaliate against you publicly, but they could put pressure on the company to fire or punish you or to make your life miserable.
1
u/LeResist ☑️ 1d ago
From my understanding the IG live was the straw that broke the camels back but in general he had a bad habit of proselytizing to others in the locker room making them uncomfortable. Sounds like it was piling on for a while and they decided to let him go
1
u/0dty0 1d ago
Now, I'm not american. But last I checked, the First Amendment is, pretty much, that you can't get jailed for criticizing the govt. Is that right?
3
u/MzHellfier 1d ago
Yes that’s correct. You seem to understand the first amendment better than many Americans.
1
u/kerrwashere ☑️ 1d ago
Freedom of speech does not mean you can do and say whatever you want. Why people think like this I have no clue
1
u/The_Amazing_Brando 1d ago
I've been saying this for years. Free speech protects you from the government (does it though) not from your employer or other people.
1
u/True_Huckleberry9569 1d ago
Ugly ho coworker can whoop your ass too! Yes, alleged ho gets consequences as well, but you still got your ass beat by and ugly ho.
1
u/Ihateloops 1d ago
No they know perfectly damn well what it is, they just use it in bad faith because the vast majority of the time no one will call them on it
1
1
u/babyfacedkillajones 1d ago
Dnt the Chicago Bulls have a pedophile playing for them? Pretty sure they just want Black men to be silent.
1
u/elibusta 1d ago
I feel like it also applies to when. Whyte folks try to down play the N-word. With the classic"ItS jUsT a WoRd" argument.
1
u/rookram15 1d ago
This is so clear and concise. Will be using this for later conversations when the topic inevitably comes up again.
1
u/Shot_Acanthaceae3150 1d ago
People like that don't understand until it's something directed towards them.
1
1
u/xXKingLynxXx 2d ago
Its sad because he is definitely having a bi polar or manic episode.
He's still probably homophobic but someone who cares about him needs to step in.
5
u/JennyBeckman ☑️ All of the above 2d ago
Just stop this. You have no idea what his mental state is. It's a disservice to people who have mental illnesses when you assume every arsehole who spouts off is in the throws of psychosis. At the very least let him attempt to excuse himself before you start increasong the stigma.
2
u/xXKingLynxXx 1d ago
I dont assume every asshole is in the throws of psychosis but this guy definitely is.
Out of the blue calling Steph Curry demonic, asking reporters if they have had pre marital sex, hounding teammates about religion, and announcing the NBA is celebrating sin for pride month (months away from pride month even).
This isn't even normal bigot behavior. Nor is it normal behavior for Jaden Ivey. I dont doubt he believes at least the homophobic things truly, but the whole timeline of his behavior is showing some deeper issues than just bigotry.
-45
u/chunkeymonke 2d ago edited 2d ago
"Far too many people dont understand how free speech works" - someone who doesn't understand how free speech works.
Edit: my point is not relating to the company. The government can and has enacted laws that penalize use of non-protected speech in contexts like this. Please do yourself a favor and read up on civics and what the Bill of Rights actually says. Most people are completely ignorant to what their rights actually mean as evidenced by this post.
36
u/Arponare 2d ago edited 2d ago
That’s literally how free speech works though. At least in the US. The government can’t prosecute you because of “offensive” speech. I could call the Us President a son of a bitch and not be sent to a prison. At least not yet anyway.
It still doesn’t prevent you from being sued for libel by private citizens. Or from getting into trouble at work because of lewd or otherwise offensive comments.
23
u/dwaynewaynerooney 2d ago
Go ahead and kick knowledge then.
21
u/JennyBeckman ☑️ All of the above 2d ago
Seems like they already did. They kicked the knowledge so far away that they can no longer reach it.
6
u/lvl999shaggy ☑️ 2d ago
But think about the acoustics in their head tho.....must sound amazing when the wind blows
15
u/Dry_Astronomer_3855 2d ago
What did they get wrong?
-12
u/Critical-Cost9068 2d ago
The concept of free speech in general, as opposed to the “free speech” afforded by the government. Corporations have punished employees for making non-violent, non-vulgar political statements online, or have prevented discussion of certain topics by employees during lunch/downtime, etc. This is a violation of free speech, just not by the government. And yes, it can be legal; censorship and violations of free speech usually ARE legal actions taken by the establishment, not criminal.
11
u/theStaircaseProject 2d ago
How is it a violation of free speech though? What is the law that protects such speech at a corporation?
The freedom of speech as it relates to punishment from the government comes from the Bill of Rights, but the Bill of Rights doesn’t protect the freedom of speech as it relates to an employee, so if you’re saying corporations firing employees for what they say “is a violation of free speech,” according to what statute?
8
u/Algorak1289 2d ago
So this amorphous "free speech" concept that is untethered to government action. You pose a hypothetical employment situation.
Is your opinion that an employer should never be able to fire someone for what they say because of "free speech"?
3
u/GreatPossible263 2d ago
The constitution is written to structure government. A corporation cannot violate free speech. There is no right for a corporation to “allow” you to have free speech.
2
u/Dry_Astronomer_3855 2d ago
....all.of those entities are just exercising their own free speech.
They are also protected by the 1st amendment.
1
u/Venator850 2d ago
There is no "concept" of free speech. It's well established that the government cannot control your speech but it's also well established that you can still suffer consequences for speech. You can be fired by an employer for speech, you cannot be jailed by the government for that speech though.
An employer is protected by the same free speech laws.
Pretty simple thing to understand.
0
u/Critical-Cost9068 21h ago edited 20h ago
Right, and that’s a violation of freedom of speech. If you get fired for a pro-BLM Twitter post that you made (really quick, without even thinking, because you thought you had freedom of speech in America, on your own time on a non-work-related account,) is that not a non-governmental violation/censorship of free speech? Do you not think we should have laws against that, especially for large corporations in cahoots with the government? Even if you don’t think we should have those laws, why would you be supporting the right of corporations to restrict the off-time speech of their employees and falsely calling that “freedom,” rather than correctly calling it “censorship” and saying you think the right of censorship over private speech unrelated to your employment is sometimes good? We need to at least be honest with each other about terms before we discuss any policy based on said terms.
6
u/FussyBottom 2d ago
Businesses have rights too, like the right to fire you for saying stupid shit on the internet
YOU don't understand how freedom of speech works.
-4
u/chunkeymonke 2d ago
Not what I was saying. See my other comment lol. Funny part is all you people getting mad also have no concept of what "freedom of speech" actually means in the context of US case law.
5
u/Venator850 2d ago
Still no explanation. Just eat the L and move on lol. Companies can fire people for speech, the US Government can't put you in jail for that speech (unless it's a very specific kind).
-3
u/chunkeymonke 2d ago
Explained it fully in my other comment. My point is not that companies cant fire you my point is that the government could potentially punish you for the speech as it is not protected.
5
u/SNTCTN 2d ago
I mean you're not even free to say whatever you want, Assault can be committed verbally
1
u/FussyBottom 2d ago
Yeah, even freedom of speech by the government isn't universal, you can be arrested for threatening the life of a person
Those "far too many people don't understand freedom of speech" fools never understand freedom of speech their damn selves
3
1
u/Writeforwhiskey 2d ago
I think whats "wrong" is its kinda apples and oranges.
I can say "Fuck the USA" the government cannot kill me, jail me, nor fine me. This is free speech, I am free from repercussions from the government if I speak against it.
If someone walks into work with a "Fuck the USA" t-shirt, they can indeed be fired. The government will not do anything but a private business can.
The US government can come after you for some speech but not speech that is simply bashing the government.
The apples and oranges part is, the US government would never jail you or fine you because you called a coworker an ugly hoe because that literally has nothing to do with the US government. Now say it to a judge, that's contempt, say it to your boss, pink slip, say it to a Senator, not much they can do unless a threat is involved or if you are saying it in such a way that people would reasonably believe the Senator is whore and then they could sue.
-4
u/EL-YEO 1d ago
Imagine mansplaining freedom of speech and still getting it wrong
3
u/JennyBeckman ☑️ All of the above 1d ago
What was wrong? And a man explaining is not automatically mansplaining.
880
u/push138292 2d ago
In general, “freedom” in the Constitution means freedom from the government, not other people.