I hate this little thought terminating cliche. It’s trying to make everything into hypocrisy which it isn’t. Say he banned everyone who ever said anything pro Israel…you can fairly apply that rule across all people, and have disparate impacts.
The problem isn’t that he’s censoring others but not himself, it’s that the rule itself is bad on its face.
If that is what they said, it would be hypocrisy. The cliche is “X for thee and not for me” so the claimed hypocrisy is that he is censoring others and not himself for saying the same things. That isn’t the issue, as you point out the issue is that he is censoring when he said he wouldn’t.
Censorship for thee, not for me.
I hate this little thought terminating cliche. It’s trying to make everything into hypocrisy which it isn’t. Say he banned everyone who ever said anything pro Israel…you can fairly apply that rule across all people, and have disparate impacts.
The problem isn’t that he’s censoring others but not himself, it’s that the rule itself is bad on its face.
Man calls himself as a free speech absolutist
Same man buys social media platform
Same man then mass bans people and removes comments when he doesn’t like their political leaning or they criticise him/his companies too much
How is that not hypocrisy?
If that is what they said, it would be hypocrisy. The cliche is “X for thee and not for me” so the claimed hypocrisy is that he is censoring others and not himself for saying the same things. That isn’t the issue, as you point out the issue is that he is censoring when he said he wouldn’t.