“The ultimate test of a society’s freedom is not how it treats its good, obedient, compliant citizens; it’s how it treats its dissidents.” - Glenn Greenwald
Okay, sure, but Greenwald’s an absolute fascist-apologist piece of shit who only hides behind a liberal-libertarian veneer when it is convenient.
Past that, the problem you run into with dissent is that it is heavily predicated on whether you are willing to endorse the dissenters. The more alien a community’s political views and activities, the less tolerant admins become. The cause of Luigi Mangione is the most notable one, as certain communities seem to reveal in cannonizing his image while others furiously scrub out anything but the most derogatory mention of his name.
How do you distinguish between the dissident Freedom Fighter and the dissident Terrorist? What do you perceive as the limit of tolerance towards the intolerant? What kind of advocacy is constructive and what is merely provocative or trollish?
When you’ve got a guy like Glenn paling around with Tucker Carlson and bemoaning the Woke Antifa Left one minute, then crying over their own community of MAGA Truthers getting deep sixed by the Deep State, it seems the very idea of legitimate “dissent” is predicated on whether you align with it or not.
In his own words:
Independent, Unencumbered Analysis and Investigative Reporting, Captive to No Dogma or Faction.
He criticizes the duopoly and the oligarchy, but I know those loyal to the duopoly tend to become tribal if people don’t outright support one side and hate the other.
Glenn has proven himself as a journalist with his reporting of Edward Snowden and much more.
He does not fall into simplistic political groups, so I understand the frustration some political factions have with people like him.
Which people do you recommend if Glenn Greenwald does not meet your standards?
