译文/Translated：
有人说，“你有想说什么就说什么的自由，但是你要为自己的言论负责。”你可能会被绑在十字架上杀害，也可能在木桩上被烧死。成长中，我们慢慢相信，文明的抽象概念还是自然法则。这就反映在“自然权利”这个概念上。我却有些新的想法，丛林法则下不存在“自然权利”。无法区分对错的地方，我们只能服从丛林法则。
我不是说道德不是宝贵的生存技能，它肯定是！我只是说，道德是合作的更高级别的工具，它能促进文明的团队在丛林中获得更大的力量。但是，有道德的合作不是通往权力的唯一方式。
言论自由的权力来自丛林法则中你所拥有的力量、其倚仗是你能否从物理上保护自己和自己所处的社区不因为自己的言论而受到威胁。文明人取得了和平条约，禁止个人因为言论受到肢体暴力。
文明社会还尊重结社自由。所以，“取消文化”是在践行结社自由。
被推特“审查”的人遇到的问题是，我们允许自己过分依赖中心化的实体。这不单单包括脸书、推特，还包括AWS、苹果、谷歌，和金融系统。
“明显的”解决方案是创建我们自己独立基础架构。我们可以做到，但是政府却“通过监管”消灭了竞争。控制了金融系统，就控制了每个行业。
因为我们不能通过创造自己的货币、网络等获得“合法的”权力竞争，我们也就意识到言论自由实际上受到了野蛮使用“合法”势力的限制。和平协议被撕毁了，这就导致了被压迫（审查）的一方直接暴露在丛林法则之中。
按照丛林法则，暴力是生活的一部分。这无关好坏，只关生存。
被逼到绝境的狗很危险。但它不一定是一条坏狗。
讽刺的是，那些积极审查、关闭私人论坛的人喜欢Gab、Parlor，有一天Voice也会因为支持一只因为人类不喜欢它的叫声而被逼入绝境的无害的狗而煽动暴力。狗真的咬人的时候，煽动暴力的不是因为它的叫声。
如果你想要言论自由，你就要维护你社区依赖的基础架构的独立性。如果更大的社区不让你创建自己独立的基础架构，它们就是在否定分离权和和平共处的权力。
如果记挂着这些原则，真正文明的平台会根据独立标准促成多个社区。只要言论符合其发表的微型社区的公认标准，它就应该允许任何一种言论。最小的微型社区是个人。这就意味着，个人应该能够自由地发表他们的任何观点给想听的人，同时，也没有人必须听这些观点。
不要让人们再精神虐待吠犬，说它们煽动暴力，因为它们首先是被人拿着枪逼到了墙角。
原文/Original：
There is an expression that “You are free to say what ever you want, but you are not free of the consequences of your speech”. Some of these consequences might be death on a cross or being burnt at the stake. We have grown up believing that abstract concepts of civilization are laws of nature. This is reflected in the concept of “natural rights”. I have news for you, “natural rights” don’t exist under the law of the jungle. We are at all times subject to the law of the jungle where there is no right or wrong.
This doesn’t mean that morals aren’t a valuable survival skill, they are. It just means that morals are a higher level tool of cooperation which facilitates civilized groups acting with more power in the jungle. However, moral cooperation isn’t the only way to power.
Your freedom of speech is derived from the power you have under the law of the jungle and depends upon your ability to physically defend yourself and your community from those who would threaten you for what you say. Civilized people reach a peace treaty that prohibits physical violence against others for what they say.
Civilized societies also respect freedom of association. As a consequence “cancel culture” is an exercise of freedom of association.
The problem those who are “censored” by Twitter face is that we have enabled too much dependence on centralized entities. This goes beyond Facebook and Twitter and includes AWS, Apple, Google, and the financial system.
The “obvious” solution is to create our own independent infrastructure. We could do this, except that government has “regulated” competition out of existence. The control over the financial system provides control over every industry.
Absent “legal” right to compete by creating our own money, internet, etc, we realize that our freedom of speech is actually being restricted by uncivilized use of “legal” physical force. The peace treaty has been broken and that leaves the oppressed (censored) directly exposed to the reality of the law of the jungle.
Under the law of the jungle, violence is just a part of life. It is neither good nor bad. It is survival.
A dog backed into a corner is dangerous. This doesn’t make it a bad dog.
Ironically, those actively censoring and canceling private forums like Gab, Parlor, and someday Voice are inciting violence by backing a harmless dog into a corner because they don’t like its bark. When the dog finally does bite, it wasn’t the bark that incited the violence.
If you want freedom of speech you need to maintain independence of the infrastructure your community depends upon. If a broader community would deny you the right to create your own independent infrastructure they are denying the right of secession and the right of peaceful coexistence.
With these principles in mind, a truly civilized platform would facilitate a multitude of communities with independent standards. It would allow any and all speech so long as it falls within the accepted standards of the micro community it was posted in. The smallest micro community is the individual. This means an individual should be free to post anything they want to those who want to listen to them and that no one has to listen.
Don’t let people gaslight barking dogs for inciting violence because they are backed into a corner by people with guns.
原文链接/Original URL:
