What Freedom of Expression Means to those of us who support it.

^{Northern-  
@Inucroft  
How am I a shitty person for defending freedom of expression? I have never once been comfortable or happy with Nazi Horse, I don’t like looking at or thinking about Nazi horse, but I WILL defend to the death the right to post Nazi horse because that’s what standing for freedom of expression MEANS.
 
Background Pony #B016  
@Northern  
Freedom of Expression*  
*Some restrictions apply.}
 
I posted a reply to Inucroft in another thread and went to bed thinking nothing of it because it was time to sleep, but I think this needs to be stated very loud and very clear to the side that is calling for the banning and thereby censorship of the content that they do not like on this site:
 
When I say I support freedom of expression, I do not mean this in any partisan or politically leaning direction. I would and have just as eagerly defended the right of BLM protesters (so long as they are not calling for direct, actionable violence), Nazi shitposters (so long as they are not calling for direct, actionable violence), the Westboro Baptist Church (When they were expressing their right to peaceful assembly and protest back when), the Feminist and Gay Rights movements (when they demonstrated in the wake of the Trump Presidency as well as before and since) and this even applies to my direct political, social or economic opposites.
 
I hold to the saying of Evenlyn Beatrice Hall, from The Friends of Voltaire: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
 
I do this not out of political or personal convenience (as this stance has lost me many friends on the left and right who would rather de-platform their opponents than face them without dishonest tactics), nor out of any sense of ‘all sides must artificially be raised to the same level’ (as has been so often accused of me), but rather because the very foundational principle that creates the idea of freedom of expression is and must be the right to say what you want regardless of who or what disagrees with you. The only exception to this rule is when you’re calling for direct, actionable physical violence toward a person or group or targeted harassment of an individual, which cross the line from being expression to direct calls for criminal action that would, in most cases, exist to suppress the freedom of expression of another in favor of your own. In other words: The only limit I would apply to freedom of expression is where it tramples on another’s freedom of expression, regardless of which side is expressing their ideas.
 
I would no sooner remove a low effort BLM edit, such as an edited screencap of Pinkie Pie waving a flag that says ‘Black Lives Matter’ than I would remove a low effort Nazi Horse drawing that says an alt-right meme of any description. I have no stake in protecting Nazi horse or BLM, as I am with neither group. I have never been a part of the Black Lives Matter protests (though I have supported mandatory always on bodycams for police officers) nor have I ever drawn or even enjoyed (a dark chuckle at one particular friend posting an image of Starlight Glimmer as one) nazi horses either.
 
The reason I can hold this stance free of political bias is because I understand and support the underlying principle of freedom of expression itself more than any of my own interests politically. This fundamental principle, outlined in the quote above has been the cornerstone that allowed things like the show we all hold dear to exist in the first place. Thinking, expression and the inviolable barrier that separate them from action grant them the sanctity of protection from the same rigorous mandate actions have to be what we currently consider just or legal because we, in our own minds and in our artwork (so long as, again, it does not call for real world action or violate the ideal of not trampling another’s direct personage) cannot directly harm another. This barrier protects fetishes, such as rape, torture, enslavement, foalcon and other otherwise objectionable ideas from the legal ramifications of such actions in real life as well. It’s this fundamental principle that creates the space wherein we all coexist to this day, whether you agree with it or not. If you were to attempt to beat into submission everyone you disagree with or force them out of your life, you would be alone. No one, and I repeat, no one will ever agree with you on everything.
 
My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic is a show that did, indeed celebrate diversity. It celebrated that diversity culturally, through the existence of Zebras, Griffons, Breezies, Seaponies and more, of course it did. But what a lot of people here seem to be forgetting is that it also celebrated the right to artistic expression and diversity of thought. Discord was allowed his completely anathema concept of existence in the form of Chaos, which expresses the opposite of harmony. There was an episode specifically about him attempting to force himself to conform to pony ideals and losing what made him himself in the process, which was specifically an episode about the dangers of attempting to enforce ideological purity (even of something we see as good) upon those who disagree with us whom we would otherwise consider friends. The show was put into place with the very foundational idea that there is no right way to be a person (girl, but it applies to the broader concept of person-hood as well), which represents a diversity of thought and a multitude of opinions.
 
In short: Yes, I do support freedom of expression. NO restrictions apply aside from those that strictly and directly physically call for harming another group or the mental, emotional or physical bullying specifically of another person.
 
Regardless of side, regardless of who they are or what they think, the principle of freedom of expression outweighs the politics or convenience of having my own rhetoric or ideas reflected back at me. Believe it or not, I think you’ll find that if you use the filters appropriately, the existence of things you don’t like won’t bother you either.
 
This thread exists for others who share my exact opinion on freedom of expression to be able to express their understanding of the concept in the wake of the new rule changes and to have a guidepoint to point to when discussing with others what they believe, so that they don’t have to write the whole thing each time and that the idea of freedom of expression is absolutely clear to those who currently oppose it on this site.

I think it’s fair to say that from various polls, this is what the majority of fans and users feel. They don’t want to see restrictions and censorship imposed, BUT, BUT, if it has to be imposed then it must be done fairly and consistently. And we’re seeing that it’s not.

@Northern  
You’ve got the just of it. My art is usually pretty tame but I still believe freedom of expression is important. To be able to create freely, maybe even make an edgy joke here or there without fear of being canceled.
 
At this point in time I’m having a real hard time seeing a way forward with this site and it’s unfortunate. This place contains a lot of history and it is sad to see it in such a state. It’s clear that the mods have done nothing to limit thier bias towards the things they don’t like. Prior to all this people could co-inhabit the same site thanks to the filter system. I just wish we could go back.

Freedom of expression means not mass reporting a charity art pack that generated $7,000 for actual horses because you have to look virtuous and totally not batshit psychotic to your twitter friends.  
Y’know, sort of like what just happened to Marenheit.

@Background Pony #2428  
Datte’s account has been suspended because of that charity.
 
In which timeline do you delete an account that set up a charity?

 
This sums it up nicely. When your position reaches the point where you would brand the ACLU a hate group for defending freedom of expression, then there’s no point in further discussion because you have become intellectually bankrupt.

 
And this tweet states that there would be support towards charities. This is the side that is supposed to fight against fascism.
 
Can anyone explain to me how a perfectly legal charity (Marenheit) got suspended from e-junkie and Datte’s account has been disabled because of it?
 
How? In what world do you get suspended by donating money to an art pack?

Friendly reminder that there is no evidence that anyone “mass reported” or otherwise tried to sabotage the Marenheit 451 art pack. I’m as upset by this as the next horse lover, but this could very well have been the storefront determining that the charity pack was too crass for their service. Do not jump to conclusions and call guilty before proven innocent. As little as I like the pro-censorship people, I’m not gonna accuse them of something so despicably low as shutting down a charity without solid proof.
 
Datte will be looking into a different storefront where we will be able to re-sell the exact same art pack as before and still raise more money than other current MLP-related charities, restarting from $0.

The whole premise here rests on false equivalences.
 
Banning Nazi imagery here on Derpibooru is not an issue of freedom of expression because Derpibooru is a platform, not a government. Derpiboore cannot regulate what you are allowed to create. It cannot regulate what you are allowed to post somewhere else. All Derpibooru can regulate is what can be disseminated from their platform… and guess what? THEY ALREADY DID. This was never a free-for-all of “free expression.” There were always rules for what you can and cannot post long before this Nazi question came up, and no one was arguing that these rules were a “freedom of expression” issue then.
 
So why is this suddenly one now?
 
This doesn’t make any sense. It doesn’t add up to logical consistency or consistency of motive. If “freedom of expression” wasn’t a problem before now, and you were fine with certain things not being “expressible” before, I call bullshit on the honesty of arguing this “Nazi pictures = but muh free expression!” equivalence. You have some other reason you’re not being honest about, and crying about freedom of expression is a smokescreen that sounds more acceptable than whatever ugliness lies at the heart of your real reasons for wanting to enable Nazis, or perhaps more likely the apathy and selfishness of just not caring that you are and not caring who it hurts.
 

 
But if you believe those are valid grounds for restricting what can be posted, then that’s the crux of the argument FOR banning Nazi images. Nazi ideology and history is inextricably intertwined with directly calling for physically harming other groups. THERE IS NO SEPARATING A PICTURE OF A NAZI FROM THE BAGGAGE THAT NAZIS CARRY.
 

 
Completely missing the point because this isn’t about not hearing things you don’t like. It’s about not allowing people to be marginalized and pushed out of the community by fostering (whether intentionally through or inadvertently through thoughtlessness or apathy and indifference) the kind of hostile atmosphere that things like casually plastering up Nazi symbols inherently and unavoidably creates for certain classes of people who have been their targets.

@Background Pony #C5E8  
“It’s a private platform” is the worst argument ever, not because it’s wrong but because we know that. No one promoting free expression is arguing that because of the first amendment, they can’t choose what’s acceptable to say on their platform. We’re saying that it’s wiser that they don’t. There are a lot of things which it would be legal for the platform to do which would be unhealthy to its position as an art archive. It could require that art can only be uploaded by the original artist, for example, but that would turn it into less of a booru/archive and more a social network.
 
Stop arguing against a legal proposition when we’re not making one. An organization which is not a government can participate in censorship, it’s just legal for it to do so. The “private platform” argument is the one the NFL used to ban black protestors from kneeling. You didn’t stand for it then because it was a dodge, don’t hide behind it now. As an aside, why is it the only time the left are interested in an extreme interpretation of private property rights is when it suits you?
 
As for the “every depiction of a Nazi is Nazi propaganda” argument, it’s even worse. Cariacatures and satire about Nazis has been going on since the 1930s. Cards Against Humanity features a Hitler Pack. South Park and Family Guy have featured Nazis. We have “grammar Nazis”, “mini Hitlers”, and a “PC master race”. Poking fun at Nazis is part of the culture. And there’s a reason for that: because almost everyone sees Nazi as a synonym for bad. If you put a swastika on something, or liken it to a Nazi or to Hitler, you are saying it is bad in a way most people will immediately recognize.
 
If none of this complete saturation of our culture and language has desensitized people to Nazis, what makes you think a cartoon horse will?

@Background Pony #C5E8  
As long as Derpibooru cares at all about it’s community, I believe they have a duty to listen. You talk about pushing people out of the community, how about the people being pushed out by the policy change? Before everyone could filter what they didn’t like and everyone was able to coexist on the site. Now you make too edgy a joke, say the slightest wrong thing about a group and you get the boot. That’s far from any sort of tolerance. People are still being targeted, it’s just people who you approve to be targeted.

@Frosku  
I’m not just arguing against a legal proposition, though.
 
I’m saying that this is not actually an issue of freedom of expression, as shown by the lack of consistency to framing it that way when other content-restricting rules have clearly NOT been seen fit for that frame. I’m saying I don’t believe the argument is honest because it’s being used in an oddly selective way for this particular issue.
 
I’m also saying it’s NOT wise to allow hurtful images to create a prejudicial atmosphere. Doing so makes a mockery of the very virtues of freedom and tolerance being extolled in this argument. You don’t get to praise the show for being an inclusive step in the right direction (which it was) and then finish with, “…and that means people should be allowed to spread discrimination and hate speech, because we need to include and tolerate the excluders and the intolerant.” No. We don’t. It doesn’t work that way. You’ve just undone everything by completely missing the point of the last ten years of MLP.
 
And stop arguing that the tone-deaf inane repetition of “just filter it” is any real solution.

@Background Pony #5D0D  
If the rule “Don’t post hate speech” is enough to push you out of the community, I feel like you’re a person the community doesn’t need.

@Background Pony #C5E8  
You’re attacking a straw man and completely ignoring what I’ve said about Nazis in mainstream culture and humor.
 
Define hate speech, please.

@Frosku  

 
IT HAS.  
That’s part of the problem and why I’m so very, very FOR a community that recognizes that maybe we SHOULD be sensitive to how hateful and poisonous those images and the ideology inseparably bound up in them really are.

@Background Pony #C5E8  
This isn’t about “hate speech”, the whole thing is primarily around depictions of Nazis and whether the staff deem it acceptable. However thanks to the vagueness of the new rules this will be extended to anything that the staff doesn’t like. I mean you can find the most horrific images of ponies being torn to shreds on here but if a character looks like it’s a little too enthusiastic about something the staff doesn’t like, it’s out. And so I go back to: it’s fine to target and unperson an induvidual as long as it’s someone YOU don’t like.

@Background Pony #92EF  
I’m not arguing for “targeting and unpersoning” anyone.  
I’m only arguing that Nazi imagery shouldn’t be allowed because it targets and unpersons certain groups of people.

@Background Pony #C5E8  
The art is targeted for removal isn’t it? And I’m sure you think that the Twitter mob can do no wrong too, am I right?

@Background Pony #C5E8
 

 
First: I am far from apathetic on this issue. Secondly: Your own words are as offensive and harmful as any of the nazi imagery on this site is, to me. Third: The fact that I won’t argue for you to be silenced despite my disagreement is proof positive of my claim that this is not about political factions. Fourth: I have always maintained that people should be allowed to post what they want regardless of content as long as it does not harm others, even long before this became an issue now, the rules here allowed for virtually all of the freedom of expression that I desired and I did not see a problem with them before as they did not specifically dictate an ideological bias to the content that is allowed to be posted and did not restrict freedom of expression. Fifth: Platforms can engage in censorship, but more importantly censoring in an archive defeats the purpose of an archive. Sixth: How dare you attempt to tell me my own motivations? You know nothing about me and you have never spoken to me before in your life. Attempting to smear my motivations as disingenuous when you know nothing about me proves to me you’re acting in bad faith and attempting to poison the well. Seventh: The fact that you consider Freedom of Expression so trivial a point that you place it below protecting people from seeing things they don’t want to see is the very reason your side of this argument cannot be allowed to win. To achieve that goal is to demand draconian measures to control what is allowed to be posted that expand as people take offense, eventually leading to the stagnation and sterilization of all content into an ideologically normative lump. This is an inevitable result of allowing censorship to take root. Eighth: I was okay with ‘certain’ things not being expressible as I laid out above: Direct, actionable calls to violence and targeted personal harassment. Those were basically the only things covered by the site’s policy before and I feel they should remain the only things covered now. That is a consistent, logical argument that has not changed once since the beginning of my arguing here. I’m sorry you can’t see it that way.
 

 
Wrong. Artistic expression exists outside of your political paradigm and you have no control over the intent or actual meaning of artwork you do not like. Nazi pony is primarily a parody or satire, two of the most protected types of expression ever conceived of, going down to being protected under the idea of Fair Use within US legal code, that specifically protects the right to use copyrighted material to produce parody or satire. Whether you like it or not, the artistic intention of the nazi themed content on this site has not been to create a direct, actionable call to violence or to target and harass a specific individual. The association you have, your political group has, your side of the argument has, the broader culture has or even nazis themselves have with the symbols and iconography in question is irrelevant if that is not their specific use in this case. The right to use symbols culturally associated with violence without actively calling for violence is a cornerstone of freedom of speech, otherwise every political cartoonist who drew a panel about the political violence we’ve seen anywhere in the world would be equally culpable under the rules. The value of free expression is held above political conviction or ideology for a reason.
 
 

 
You are marginalizing and pushing people out of this community for using symbols and liking things that you do not like when you specifically ban their free expression. You are doing exactly what you say you don’t want to do to others because you disagree with their choice of iconography. There are virtually no actual Nazis who post Nazi horse, just artists who enjoy making dark humor or content that is satirical or comedic in a way that you do not appreciate. You cannot laugh at the joke, so the comedians must be thrown out of the club, nevermind that the majority of the userbase does not want them thrown out. There is no hostile atmosphere being fostered by nazi imagery being posted, because it is not directed at any real people or a call for actual violence against a real group. A hostile environment is one that specifically says that someone is not welcome. Parodies and satire of nazi imagery do not say no one is welcome, in fact quite the opposite: banning parody and satires of things that a political faction does not enjoy specifically and clearly states that those with a opposite political leaning or those who care about true freedom of expression (myself included) are not welcome here. You are literally attempting to create the kind of hostility you accuse the nazi imagery of creating when there’s been no indication that it has driven people away due to anything but political motivations, which has nothing to do with the site’s policy directly being unwelcoming: but rather to do with people choosing to recuse themselves of the site’s usage because they don’t like what’s here. That’s not an unwelcoming environment – it’s an environment that doesn’t discriminate being told to discriminate by people who want discrimination based on their personal preferences.
 
Tl;Dr: You’re wrong, objectively so.

@Background Pony #BAA8  
I’m not sure what your point is. Removing pictures because they’re prohibited by a rule isn’t about targeting people, it’s about enforcing rules regarding acceptable pictures.  
I don’t know about Twitter, man. I’m only here talking about Derpibooru.

@Background Pony #C5E8
 
Targeting artwork you disagree with is targeting expression you disagree with is targeting people who express ideas you disagree with for removal. They’re one and the same. You can’t avoid the fact that what you’re actually targeting here is the people who make the artwork you disagree with.

@Northern  

 
As I’ve said above, if “WAAAAAAA I wanna post Nazis!” is REALLY the breakpoint that “marginalizes and pushes you out” of the community, maybe you’re not a person the community needed.
 

 
Hahaha, wow.  
Little tip: objective evidence is about what can be measured.  
The Nazis murdered millions of people. They caused billions of dollars in economic damage. They inflicted quantifiable physical and mental trauma on huge numbers of people.  
Those are all measurable harms.  
Those harms are still having measurable consequences.  
If anyone is “objectively” wrong, it’s people who are enabling an ideology that is so measurable, objectively damaging.

@Background Pony #C5E8  
“Enabling the ideology” is just a communist dogwhistle, and it’s objectively false. The ideology has been dead for 75 years.

@Northern  

 
You’re saying it’s a FACT that the mods can’t remove a piece of artwork that breaks the rules without personally targeting the artist in the process? Are you really claiming that “Boo hoo, I can’t post this picture of Aryanne on Derpibooru!” is tantamount to a form of meaningful, significant, personal persecution?
 
Because, just… wow. I don’t know what to say to someone who can’t see the difference between not being allowed to post a hate symbol because it’s a rule that no one can, versus real, legitimate, personally targeted persecution.