Having been on Lemmy for a year now, one stark contrast to Reddit is how much sarcasm just goes over everybody’s head here. Sarcastic comments are always down voted into oblivion, despite agreeing with the common consensus in the thread.

Guess they also shot themselves and pooped out a Molotov.

People don’t know how to participate in a democracy, it’s ridiculous.

If millions upon millions of people in your country want to vote far right, you’re not going to get Bernie, you have to compromise. You pick the one that has the most likelihood of pulling your country in the direction you want, because the alternative is that you don’t get anything at all. You can’t be entitled, because you have to share your country with 350 million other people. Fucking compromise or get fascism.

It’s not foolishly phrased. The limits of the consequences are implicit by using “freedom of speech”. It feels more like you are just foolishly interpreting the statement. The statement doesn’t even pertain to the article in the post.

I’ve only ever seen it being used correctly to point out that speech having social consequences does not mean you don’t have freedom of speech. If someone says “oh woe is me, why can’t I say the n word anymore”, I don’t think going into a 30 minute tirade about the intricacies of freedom of speech is going to work out for you.

Let me help you out there.

The consequences in this statement will exclude stuff like imprisonment or illegal actions, as it would otherwise not constitute free speech. What is meant by consequences in that statement is social consequences, like being ignored, being “cancelled” or maybe being called names, like bigot.

For some reason people like to lament that “you aren’t allowed to say this bigoted thing anymore”. This statement rightly points out that you are, but people are also allowed to call you an asshole for doing it.

That feels a bit disingenuous. The record labels were already thoroughly fucking over musicians.