this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2026
589 points (98.4% liked)
A Boring Dystopia
17525 readers
527 users here now
Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.
Rules (Subject to Change)
--Be a Decent Human Being
--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title
--If a picture is just a screenshot of an article, link the article
--If a video's content isn't clear from title, write a short summary so people know what it's about.
--Posts must have something to do with the topic
--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.
--No NSFW content
--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Banning words. Next will be books. Fuck the fash.
They already banning books in USA...
They didn't say the US has banned books at the federal level. Book bans are book bans, and the US has book bans.
You just said there's no banned books and then said there's banned books.
Its hair splitting. Libraries are controlled by a variety of institutions, sometimes non-profits or municipalities. The 1st amendment prevents the federal government from banning protected speech, but private entities can do what they like. (like moderators on a forum).
So you're saying or not saying that there are books banned within the USA?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_banning_in_the_United_States_(2021%E2%80%93present)
Unless you're going to use the "from a certain point of view" argument, this is demonstrably false.
That's the thing tho, they are doing these bannings at low level places like those to get those books already out of as many places as they can while maintaining a veil of legitimacy as they haven't done in a national level, therefore they aren't "banning bonds" just like you're argumentive, but the effect is not too dissimilar from banning them at a federal level, less people are getting access to critical information that allows them to learn of how evil the government has been and currently is
What is this? https://legiscan.com/TX/bill/HB900/2023
Australia is quietly speed running censorship.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/australia-s-age-verification-rules-is-a-vpn-ban-on-the-horizon/ar-AA1XQMTX
Depends on.
For example: I hold up a Sign, where I demand the Death of (insert minority here). Should this be legal?
yes, as should be calling you out on it.
Is that what happened here??
Ignoring the fact that that's the literal opposite of what happened here... Who should decide whether that's legal, and to what extent should they be able to decide what is and isn't legal to say?
I guess I ought to clarify my position. The line should be drawn well on the side of freedom of expression. Emotive expressions should virtually always be legal. As long as there isn't reason to believe that a thing that someone says is going to lead to a crime being committed, any punishment for that speech is unwarranted. That includes things like "I demand the death of (insert minority here)."
Unless you can convince a jury of that person's peers that that particular expression was going to lead to a particular crime being committed against a particular person (like, if I said "here's a gun, go kill that guy"), that speech should be legally protected.
Found the stochastic terrorist.