• Faust@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    How about the last scrap of pretense at democratic rule of law? Just because someone you do not like is on the receiving end, you should not applaud the authoritarian government.

    • ASDraptor@lemmy.autism.place
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s pretty simple: did Elon design a legal representative as asked by the judge?

      He could have avoided this, but he thought he was above the law, and guess what? He’s not.

    • Josey_Wales@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Care to expand on this?

      Genuinely asking how Elon Musk unilaterally defying a unanimous court order is losing the “last scrap of pretense at democratic rule of law.” Seems like more of the same old oligarchy games like it always has been.

      • Faust@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago
        1. It is a court order for censorship. You may not like what is said on that platform, but it is still straight up suppression of anything the government defines as dangerous. If you do not consider that a problematic move just because you agree with that government for now, you are in for a nasty surprise.
        2. If Brazil wants to shut down the service because of that: That is their right. Welcome to the same club as North Korea, China, and Iran. But what is that move with Starlink? When and where has it become acceptable to seize assets of a company because you have beef with one of its shareholders? What does this signal to other international activities in Brazil?
        • obbeel@lemmy.eco.br
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          When I first learned about it, it kind of seems like school bullying or something criminal. “Give me 50000 if you want to keep operating”. It’s kind of funny, but it is also kind of sad. Anyway, the decision has it geopolitical importance.

        • funtrek@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          It is not the government defining something as dangerous. It‘s the democratically elected parliament, the democratically elected government and the then appointed judges which rule based on democratically created laws. And if the society comes to the conclusion that hate speech, defamation and lies are not covered by free speech they can of course shut down X and co. And the law applies also to billionaires.

        • Buffalox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          There are standards whereby you can determine something is harmful and not covered by free speech. Like calling for violence against a demographic minority. That’s not either censorship or in bad faith, but upholding standards for a civilized society.
          It’s basically no different than the fact that you are not allowed to kill people in the street.

          • merde alors@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            when people volunteer their confessions, it probably makes jailing, torturing or execution easier. Xitter is a helpful service for the mullahs

        • Fedizen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Its a shutdown for non-compliance with a law.

          The law in non-compliance is an attempt to shut down misinformation related to an election where x refused to appoint a court representative. Rather than fight the battle in court they chose to just shut down brazil changing x from a brazil represented company to basically a purely foreign company similar to RT in the US.

          Like there’s a difference between showing up to court to fight for free speech and shutting down your offices so you can’t argue your case.

        • xthexder@l.sw0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          suppression of anything the government defines as dangerous

          That’s kind of one of the points of having a government… When it’s applied to banning toxic chemicals or violence, that’s the same thing happening but you just wouldn’t call it censorship.

    • Virkkunen@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Man you right wingers are a very annoying bunch, always claiming censorship and loss of democracy while applauding the actual wannabe dictators doing gold medal deserving mental gymnastics to justify antidemocratic actions

      • Faust@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yes, of course. The guy advocating against censorship and pro freedom of business must be a right winger. You do know, what the real right wingers will do, when they get these instruments into their hands? If not, you will probably find out soon in Brazil.

        • Cornelius_Wangenheim@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          The same thing that is already happening in Turkey, India and Saudi Arabia? Musk’s Twitter has no problem censoring people when it’s to help right-wing authoritarians.

    • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      america has her own supreme court problems to figure out before anyone starts weeping about brazil being mean to elon fucking musk

      • Faust@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Because some 300 million people somewhere have problems with their courts, the rest of the world does not matter?

    • realcaseyrollins@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Phew, I thought I was the only one here lol. This whole situation has me wondering what Brazil is trying to do that they’re so afraid will be talked about on X.