I feel this post sums it up. Censorship isn't the case here, its a company not wanting to be associated with it. At all. Same reasons a company can fire someone for what they post on their social media.


The whole "freedom of speech" argument is irrelevant. It's a private company who have their rights to disassociate themselves with someone who can possibly damage their image.


PewDiePie is free to make whatever comedic (if you want to call it that) content he wants on YouTube (unless it starts to go against their ToS as well). It's just Disney and Google distancing themselves from it, with whatever consequences that come with it for PewDiePie.

This is a very sophomoric anolysis of the first-amendment as well as freedom of speech. Aldous Huxley might have a word with you. If you're up to it, I could also recommend the works of Plato and Aristotle to clear up some confusion.

In any case, Pewdie Pie should be jailed.

I just love the fact that it seems like you skipped what I said and only read the last few sentences. I quite literally said that it was legal, and they had the right to do it. Never did I say the first amendment shields someone from criticism or consequence. I simply said that by setting standards on what people can say, you are limiting their ability to speak their mind and express themselves.

But he's still able to speak his mind...

Ehhhh, yes, but censorship from the masses can be very intimidating. It's like being in a classroom, and you're the guy with a very unpopular opinion, you'd have to be very strong and foolish to voice it in front of everyone. I think most people tend to keep those opinions to themselves. That's a form of censorship. In fact, some scholars and philosophers have claimed it is the worst form of censorship, worse than any law or totalitarian government because you are truly alone in your opinion.

Sorry, my English isn't very good. Hopefully, my point came across correctly.

Jailed for what? Words? Just kick his ass and be done with it. If it bothers you that much, that is. No need to be so vindictive, on some longterm basis. The offense itself isn't persistent or longterm, so why would the punishment be?

edit: Besides, this is much cheaper

The irony right now is I'm watching a WW2 series at the moment. And it's on an episode of Kristallnacht. It'd be helpful to put things like Pewdiepie into perspective, and remind ourselves what true monstrosities look like.

The gentiles have been persecuting the Jewish race for thousands of years and, even after the Holocaust, perpetrated by gentiles, we are the target of snide remarks and hate-speech. In some countries it is considered hate-speech.

I always thought pewdiepie is a [censored] and I've never liked him. Though I don't find him so offensive I'd want him banned or anything. I don't find him funny at all, but I'm sure somebody else does and if they want to watch his crap, that's on them.


Still I think it's up to any private business or sponsorship to keep sponsoring whoever they choose, and if they don't want to continue sponsoring someone for whatever reason they see fit, that's up to them.


Obviously what he did was problem enough for Disney and YouTube to not keep giving him their money, and they have the freedom to choose whatever they want to do with their money.

Just because you don't like what someone says does not mean that they should be jailed. I am totally against that. I would hate to live in a country where I could be thrown in jail for saying the wrong thing.

Him losing all that money for offending one of his sponsors is punishment enough.

They're not mere Gentiles. They're Malaysian, Australian, Kenyan, French, Greek, Cherokee... Some with terrible histories too. Just like Jewish people.

If I were someone to be offended easily (I'm not), I'd point out all the problems with the word "Goy". It's as if everyone in the world is not worthy enough to be designated with any real humanity, if they're not Jewish.

As for hate speech, you'd actually have to go to court and a jury first and prove the intent behind it. At least in most civilized countries. You just don't imprison people willy-nilly, because of words. And like I said, it's just weak. Just kick someone's ass and be done with it, if you're so offended. I did this as early as 8 or 9, when someone called me a "rice cooker", because I was Asian. I'm still fond of the beatdown I put on that kid 30 years later. But I didn't hold it against him after I got it out of my system. He eventually wisened up and even became a friend. We're now just grown men and he has own family and things moved on. I didn't need to ruin his life with literal prison.

On a strictly humorous note, isn't calling someone that cooks rice a ricecooker accurate? That's like someone calling me a hamburger eater. I kid, I kid. Seriously though, I get it. Someone made a racial insult to you and you beat him like there was no tomorrow. See? Instead of sending the guy off to jail, he got his butt whipped and he became a better person.


That was like me growing up in Louisiana and getting teased in California becaise of my accent. I was in Yankee land and having to hear "yeah we beat you Rebs!"


I just shrugged it off and went on my way.

I actually ninja edited, as that was getting really long winded.

But yeah, I'm a literal rice cooker actually. Rice is good

The full insult though was, "Slanted eyed rice cooker". lol. I think he got it from his parents. No kid could come up with that.

I wanted a rice cooker but my wife, who was born and raised in the Philippines likes the old fashioned method of just boiling it. In Louisiana we always had gravy on top of rice. Here in California it's soy sauce!


I miss that gravy on top of rice though. When I tell people here in California of it they look at me like I grew a third arm!

Does anybody have the name of the video in question? I want to watch for....reasons.

your English was fine friend

Do you have kids? Because technically, I'm a halfie. It's just that I look more Asian than white and still associate with it as a sort of shorthand.

I grew up in Texas though (first Hawaii), so I like rice in many ways too. You lucked out though. Louisiana has better food imo.

I have one daughter in her twenties. I tried to teach her how to speak Tagalog(I'm white) but she wouldn't have anything of it. Now she gets mad when the wife and I speak Tagalog and doesn't understand lol.


Texas has that awesome chili. Oh yeah....

I'm not sure if that's good advice, in no small part because the offending party is often capable of kicking your ass instead.

Or you could in return be charged with Assault and could possibly wind up being in Jail or Juvenile Court.

Details, details...

I said, the intentions are good, but it is still censorship. Just like "racism", censorship applies to all, not just certain appropriate (or inappropriate) cases. I'm not saying I agree with him, but I will fight for his right to be stupid

The religious group practices "financial censorship", which is also what these reporters did. If the movie can be influenced to flop, that group is happy. Most of the time that type of censorship backfires as we humans love car wrecks

Censorship is censorship, not some "apply only here" deal.

But, it looks like we disagree

[edit]

Merriam-Webster:

Censorship

1) a : the institution, system, or practice of censoring

b : the actions or practices of censors; especially : censorial control exercised repressively

One person can practice censorship. It does not take a whole body of people. When one person tries to stifle what another says or writes, that is censorship.

That's fine. But as Peter Griffin (Family Guy) said once, "I may not agree with you're saying (or doing), but I'll fight to the death to allow you to say (or do) it."

I really don't see what you disagree with. We both agree the behavior is bad. I just don't think people need to be crucified for their words. There is a scale to how bad things can get, but this isn't halfway to the top.

I'm sorry but this is just so ridiculous. I'll fight to the death for people's right to freedom of speech. It's very clear this was intended as numerous. Guess what someone is offended by something no matter what. Who cares?


People need to stop being so sentisive. This country is going to [censored] with these hippy skinny jean wearing softies while men dress like women and cry when men call them out on it. It's so disgusting not because the man wears girls clothes, but that he doesn't have the constitution to stand up to criticism when publically making a statement in the first place. It's so hypocritical.


And then there's this. My opinion if you thought it was offensive move on? What do you aim to gain?