• FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    Complying with the incumbent to silence opposition is a political decision.

    No it’s not. Did you even read the linked X Global Affairs post?

    Lack of compliance with these orders can lead to severe sanctions, including throttling of the entire platform in Türkiye. X complied with the court order while we challenge the order in court because we believe keeping the platform accessible in Türkiye is vital to supporting freedom of expression and access to information, particularly following natural disasters and other emergencies.

    It’s not a political decision, it’s a legal one. If they don’t comply then the entire site can legally be banned from the entire country, for example.

    • ComradeSharkfucker@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Yes I read that and hold that this decision is still highly political. Technically X can choose to simply not exist in Turkey. Obviously they won’t do this and Erdogan knows this, profit is king. This doesn’t change the fact that they are choosing to cow to threats by a dictator. Legal decisions are political and have political implications. Who do you think wrote those laws?

      • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        So you think that instead of complying while fighting the legal order and being able to tell users that what is happening, you think that they should pull the entire site from the country?

        They aren’t “choosing to bow to threats by a dictator” - they are following the law, and fighting the legal order through the courts.

        Come on mate lol. They’re doing the absolute most user and free speech friendly thing they can possibly do given the situation.

        Question - what would you have done in this situation if you owned and ran X?

                • ComradeSharkfucker@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  9 hours ago

                  The employees of X, or any company for that matter. Businesses can only profit by extracting a portion of the value created by a laborer as value can only come from labor. This is exploitative because the laborer is by default put into a situation where they must sell their labor or starve and even still they only recieve a small percentage of the value they produce. This is effectively coercion at the threat of destitution.

                  • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    9 hours ago

                    O………k…………

                    So absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand, just ……… anything but communism is bad?