You never know what the political world has in store. Before Alexandre de Moraes, doing blatant preventive censorship was unthinkable. When he made this practice into the “new normal”, he radicalized the right even more, and they might turn to dirty tricks to get to him.

Any flavor that would send Alexandre de Moraes to the jail cell, his rightful place.

Brazil’s dictator-judge Alexandre de Moraes only had free reign last year to do what he did because the US used to have a living corpse as the president. Now, with Orange-Man-Bad as president, I don’t know if the same judge would have the guts to block X nationwide again. Especially with Trump showing he’s not afraid to impose tariffs on a whim. And it’s also apparent that Trump hears what Elon has to say, and Elon is hungry for revenge. The judge only needs to step out of the line for Elon to retaliate.

I’m waiting for your counter-arguments. Or is ad hominem the only thing you know?

The problem was when lefties were in charge of Twitter’s moderation team. They were trigger-happy in banning anyone who didn’t agree with their self-proclaimed “social consensus.” In this last U.S. election cycle, we found out this consensus was a lie. Examples:

User1: “I’m against illegal immigration. Deport the illegals now!”

Mod: “Racist!! You’re permanently banned!”

User2: “We gotta have stricter laws for legal refugees. They don’t respect our local customs and bring social issues (i.e., higher crime rates) that burden the taxpayer.”

Mod: “Nazi!! You’re permanently banned!”

User3: “I’m against hormonal therapies and sex-change surgeries on kids. We gotta have legislation that forbids it and makes doctors accountable.”

Mod: “Transphobe!! You’re permanently banned!”

They maliciously extrapolate dissenting opinions to paint them as something bad. People have the right to be dissatisfied with current policies and advocate for change. That shouldn’t be a bannable offense.

Twitter 1.0 outright banned right-leaning users. Silencing dissenting voices from online political discourse isn’t considered “gaming the system”?

Does anyone remember when Twitter 1.0 censored stories about the Hunter Biden Laptop? On my book, that’s manipulation.

X has been accused of manipulating its systems to give far-right posts and politicians greater visibility over other political groups.

Before Elon bought Twitter, the system did the exact same thing, but with left-leaning posts. Back then, the French prosecutors didn’t seem to care. Now that the political tide is changing, they suddenly care?

It’s a well-known fact that the Earth is round and I can show you evidence with about two seconds of Googling.

You established that a well-known fact like the Earth being round is easy to prove in mere seconds by Googling. I did exactly what you suggested and the search results are plentiful with links in the first page confirming that there’s a left-leaning bias in USA universities. In the suggested images they even list survey results showing most students lean left.

The fact is so well-known that a simple Google search gives multiples articles confirming it. You suggested this criteria yourself. 🤔

Okay, if a Google search will make you believe me, here goes:

Does USA university students and faculty have a left-leaning bias?

Most search results confirm what I said. And remember: this is not an exact science, but a subjective assessment. Certainly there are university students that didn’t notice that bias because their institution was more politically neutral, or said person was not enrolled in humanities courses so the political activism was not very close to their day-to-day lives. But, in general, the bias is real and is only getting more intense as political polarization is on the rise globally.

By the way, sorry for the late response. As I knew my responses would require the most extensive use of quoting, I decided to respond it last.

Your comments contradict one another. You say this here but your other comments give a whole different mindset.

The main idea I’m trying to express is that the IDF should practice restraint where possible. If the restraint is at the cost of raising the risk of their opperations, I’d not blame them if they don’t restrain themselves as much as we, people that are safe and sound possibly in another continent, would think is reasonable.

This doesn’t matter much. Because Israel have bombed refugee camps where Hamas didn’t even went to. Israel is bombing anyone who’s a Palestinian, heck even journalists. The argument of “Hamas is using humans as shields” is an old excuse.

I’m not aware of all the movements of the IDF. When Isreal bombs any civilian building, they always claim it was being used as a Hamas hideout or a missile launching base. If there’s civilians casualities, it’s possible the Hamas forced them to remain there to act as human shield deterrent. If not, I see no reason for Isreal to waste their bombs on buildings where there’s no terrorists hiding. For now there’s no way to confirm things one way or another. If journalists died, we can’t confirm at the moment the IDF targeted them specifically or if it’s mere casuality of war (doing journlistic work in a war zone is risky, after all).

Would Israel bomb their own hospitals, schools, refugee camps and all that if Hamas was within Israel? (bet not).

In this case, I think it would e much easier to identify the Hamas terrorists when they’re surrounded by people of another ethinicity, and when those people would gladly point out where’s the terrorist instead of being coerced to cooperate with Hamas. So I think Israel would not bomb the hospital.

You see the old argument of “Hamas being destroyed” does not work at all. Israel killing innocent civilians creates more hatred against Israel as a whole. It means that anyone who’s a Palestinian and lost their entire land, home, friends, acquaintances and family will high likely join Hamas to get vengeance. Now, guess whose fault is for children joining Hamas after losing everything they ever cared for? Israel.

Even before the October 7th, Hamas was already fostering hatred for Israel in its population. The children were being indoctrinated from their school ages to hate Israel. Most humanitarian donations the Gazan government received from the UN and other countries they diverted for the construction of their tunnel system and missile launchers whenever possible. Contruction materials for building houses and schools were all used to build the tunnels they’re using now to hide from the IDF. The pipes for pumbling were used for missile launchers. Instead of using the international aid to develop their community, they used it for terrorist purposes. At this point, capitulating for the Hamas’ demands will not stop the hatred, because they were hateful long before October 7th. Israel saw that the only way to stop the future attacks is in a pragmatic way: destroying Hamas and its military e political capabilities, and making sure no future Gazan government shall have the military capability to attack Israel. How the’re gonna do it? I don’t know, but they’re adamant in doing it.

36 000 innocent civilians is not collateral damage. Its purposefully murdering innocent Palestinian people, its genocide and all the evidence backs it up. It is not Hamas who’s bombing refugee camps, hospitals, schools, homes and any place that a Palestinian is. It is Israel. You’re good on pointing fingers but there’s zero factual evidence.

These numbers were provided by the Hamas, which have an incentive to inflate it so as to exert pressure on Israel’s allies. I’m certain there’s no way for anyone to provide an accurate body count of casualities in this war, as it is ongoing, and there’s many bodies that might be under rubble. And as I said: it’s a Hamas tactic to use their citizens as human shields whenever possible. When they brag about the number of casualities, deep down they like when there’s more dead citizens, because for them it only represent necessary sacrifices for achieving one goal: pressure Israel allie’s to make Isreal stop their military advancement, so the Hamas can regroup and resume their missile strikes against Isreal territory at full force. For them this is a holy war: they just hate Isreal and want it gone. If they make Isreal back down and agree to a indefinite ceasefire, it’ll signal to the other enemies of Isreal (Hezbolah, Iran…) that they’re soft, and will encourage them to attack Isreal as well. Isreal is a country that’s surrounded by enemies that hate it, so they were forced to invest heavily in millitary defense systems, and make millitary conscription mandatory to both genders. Israel is the only democracy in a area brimming with autocracies and teocracies.

You do realize from the moment Israel become a state, Israel has never lived in actual peace? They stole the land, displaced 750 000, murdered thousands of people. Set fires to homes, good and everything else. Placed mines so Palestinians cannot return. This “war” didn’t start on 7 October 2023 neither somewhere in 2020. It started the moment Israel decided to murder and steal everything the Palestinian people owned. The ceasefire deal is a joke to begin with. 6 weeks ceasefire and then they’ll continue bombing the entirety of Gaza again. Its needs to be permanent. Israel has to be held accountable for their actions (genocide). Israel want 100% safety? Well, should not have stolen the land, displaced thousands of Palestinian people, murdering, Apartheid system, discrimination. And for everything I say here; I can link sources if you want. It’ll be tomorrow though, not on PC. But I will if you ask me to.

I’m not extremelly familiar to the history of Isreal, but I don’t think it’s fair the Isrealli citizens of today pay for supposed mistakes of their ancestors from 70+ years ago. A ceasefire now would only benefit the Hamas and let them regroup with more weapons and ammo, and build new milittary outposts. I defend a indefinite ceasefire, but after Hamas is destroyed, of course. This war would already be over if Hamas surrendered already, but it seems they prefer to extend the suffering of their people. It just proves they don’t care for their people, they care for power. And if by apartheid system you mean border controls, so every country has such system because no serious country allows indiscriminate entry of foreigners in its borders without aplying some criteria first. And in Isreal, 20% of the population is of Arab descent and they enjoy full citizen status. Go ask them if they’re unhappy with the “Israelli regime” and if they’d rather go move to the Gaza strip.

It has nothing to do with “easy to judge”. There’s lots and lots of evidence. Documents, videos, articles and even actual ex-IDF soldiers speaking out. IDF soldiers are always “happy to trigger their gun” since day one. Not just now. Certainly soldiers are humans to but these soldiers are killing innocent civilians. They’re smiling, joking, stealing everything from the Palestinians. They’re recording themselves. The videos are all over Instagram. They let children and other people signature their bombs with cruel words like “kill them all” which I can give a source for as well. There’s in no way defending their atrocities. No matter how bad you want to. Like I said, you’re an Israel-supporter and by your other comments in others thread, a possible Zionist. I already told you; Israel is the core reason as to why Hamas even exist.

If there’s any misconduct among the IDF, of couse they should be called out and disciplined. I’m not saying it is a good thing to abuse vulnerable people during a war. But, let’s be honest, in all wars this kind of stuff happen. A bunch of guys are there in the open, with no law enforcement to contain them, under a high stress situation for it is a war and they might die at any moment. Of course they might regress to erratic behaviors. Maybe it’s fueled by rage for their people being attacked by Hamas? Maybe they’re taking out it on the citizens? I don’t know. I’ve never been a soldier to know.

This is just a conversation on the internet. We aren’t here presenting an undergraduate thesis. I try to limit things to empirical evidence and appeal to common experiences between us so I don’t have to make everyone read a huge wall of text. That’s why I said we can just agree to disagree. There’s nothing wrong about it. 👽

There’s some variation in this. The humanities courses have a higher concentration of left-leaning individuals than other areas. But it might also be explained that the left-leaning are more vocal about their concerns. I know there’s a significant silent population of students that might be right-leaning, but they just aren’t interested in discussing politics in the unniverity: they just want to finish their course with the minimum trouble possible.

No, it’s empirical evidence. It’s a well known fact that western universities have a left-leaning bias. And by extension, a pro-Hamas and/or pro-Palestine bias. This one is supported by the 3 points in my previous comment.

I don’t live in the cities that have the universities that held pro-Hamas protests so I can’t name them, sorry.

I’m just arriving at this conclusion because:

1. The main doctrine among students and faculty is being pro-Hamas, or at minimum agreeing on things like: Isreal is causing a genocide, Isreal is an apartheid state, Israel makes living in Gaza feel like an open prison, etc.

2. If any student goes over the line and is explicitly pro-Hamas, or advocates the extermination of all Jews (“to the river to the sea…”), harasses jewish students or blocks them from entering the building, protest in a way to disrupt the right of the non-protesting students to attend class, litter the common areas, etc. If they do this, the faculty just do nothing or reprimend them with a slap on the wrist. In other words, they condone this stuff.

3. The presidents of those universities often are beholden by the opinion of the pro-Hamas students. There’s a famous episode where the president of Havard, Claudine Gay, when asked if “calling for the genocide of Jews” would violate the college’s code of conduct, was evasive and said “it depends on context”.

And I’m sorry if I originally said they’re mostly pro-Hamas. What I really meant is that they’re either pro-Hamas or Pro-Palestine. If they’re not, they’d fell intimidated to express their pro-Isreael opinions, just like most pro-Israel students would when they see the treatment their jewish colleagues receive, so it creates the illusion that 99% of the faculty and students are pro-Hamas or pro-Palestine, but it’s the social and institutional pressure that I cited above that makes it seem so.

As a said, even if the professor isn’t pro-Hamas, he’s beholden by institutional pressure to either hide his pro-Isreal views, or be lax on the pro-Hamas views of the students. No matter the side they are, it’s controversial either way. But just the pro-Hamas or Pro-Palestien side are allowed to express themselves freely without some kind of pushback or retaliation.

No. What I’m saying is that the pro-Palestine protesters in the western countries are, knowingly or unknowingly, boosting the pro-Hamas message in many cases. There are probably very few (if any) pro-Palestine protests that don’t include the presence of some degree of pro-Hamas (and by extension, pro-Extermination of all Jews) people. This manifests either in the form of Hamas Flags, explicit anti-Israel flags and demonstrations, or chants of “from the river to the sea”.

On the other hand, the pro-Israel protests are very focused on the defense of Israel territory/citizens and anti-discrimation against people of Jewish heritage. There’s no explicit call to kill/expell all Palestinians. If there is, it is very fringe and the protestors themselves would certainly eject said person from the protest. At most, the most aggressive remarks are reserved specifically to the Hamas only.

When they chant “from the river to the sea Palestine will be free”, what do you think they want? Israel is located between said river and sea, so they want to exterminate all Israeli so the land is all theirs. The extermination of all Jews is codified in written form in the Hamas Constitution.

If there are people there who only want to advocate for the Two State Solution for Israel/Palestine, that’s a fair point to make. But when these people, knowingly or unknowingly, mix themselves with people that carry Hamas flags and chant “from the river to the sea”, then they’re either useful idiots, or they’re pro-Hamas while using the pro-Palestine cause as a cop out.

But I know what’s the dominant doctrine in western universities related to the Israel/Hamas war. They’re mostly pro-Hamas. I know there are students that don’t condone this worldview, but they’re strongly penalized by peer pressure and institutional pressure (try being pro-Israel knowing your professor is pro-Hamas… Your grades will surely be affected negatively). When there’s incidents of students suffering antisemitism, the administration of those universities have shown they’re extremely lax on the perpetrators. It’s a systemic failure in respecting different worldviews, because there’s an “official” one already.

That’s why I’m saying these universities have lost a lot of credibility regarding anything related to this Israel/Hamas conflict, given the pro-Hamas protests occuring in university grounds, and the lack of any condemnation by faculty staff.

I don’t support the indiscriminate bombing of the Gaza territory by the IDF. The IDF should practice restraint and act in a way to minimize civil casualties.

But, consider that the Hamas militants deliberately use civilian buildings (hospitals, schools, mosques, etc.) as their military bases, and try their best to blend in with the civilians, when international law dictates all combatants in a war should be wearing uniforms so as to avoid mixing civilians in the skirmishes.

Under those circumstances, and knowing that until the Hamas is anhilated there won’t be true peace for Israeli civilians (risk of new missile attacks), it’s only natural that Israel will keep pressuring for the destruction on Hamas.

Will there be collateral damage? Sure, like all wars there will be. Especially when Hamas is doing its best to maximize civilian casualties so the useful idiots in the west take pity on them.

Should Israel be scrutinized for their effectiveness in minimizing civilian casualties? Sure. But I don’t think that we, living comfortably in countries in which there’s no neighbouring nation trying to send missiles at us, should be in a position to demand they cease the war just because we want them to, or pressure them to accept any ceasefire deal that’s not good for them. It’s primarily up to Israel to decide what’s best for the security of their citizens. And also for the security of their soldiers, which have families awaiting for their safe return home when this war’s over.

In this scenario, I’d not blame the IDF if they’re a little more trigger-happy than we would feel it’s reasonable. It’s easy for us to judge when we’re safe and sound in our countries. But the soldiers are human too and they’ll do what’s best to preserve their lives. If a neighbouring country launched missiles against my country, I’m sorry for sounding cold, but I’d rather they die them my people die. Of course, I’d prefer if the military acted in a way to minimize casualties so as to preserve the innocent, but if being too careful in this quest endangers the soldiers of my country, I’d prefer my soldiers enhance their survival rate a little more than grant this benefit to the nation that attacked me first.