• sicaniv@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    His death was caused by that very revolutionary thing he made a name about. He was against locking of big chunk of humanity’s knowledge behind paywalls making it effectively inaccessible for everyone and mostly from third world countries.

    You certainly are demeaning his sacrifice by insinuating his suicide didn’t had any thing to do with going against JSTOR and hence US capitalism.

    • Muad'Dibber@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 years ago

      Also, the feds were involved in this from the very beginning, and hid their involvement, suggesting they had other reasons to go after swartz, possibly his correspondence with Assange. This was a time when the Obama admin was ruthlessly going after whistleblowers and open information activists.

      Swartz was the second computer-person from the same prosecutor that resulted in suicide, the first being Jonathan James, and wikileaks claimed after swartz’s death that he had been in contact with Assange, and was possibly a source.

    • pingveno@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 years ago

      You certainly are demeaning his sacrifice by insinuating his suicide didn’t had any thing to do with going against JSTOR and hence US capitalism.

      I didn’t say anything of the sort. This tweet is simply stuffed full of oft repeated lies.

        • pingveno@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 years ago

          Why do you always assume that I am either acting in bad faith or stupid? I saw something that is objectively false and corrected it. Simple. As. That.

          • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            2 years ago

            It’s because you’re incapable of acknowledging basic facts about the nature of the empire. The tweet is objectively correct. You could argue it’s not nuanced, but it’s simply a fact that Swartz committed suicide as a result of being prosecuted by the US regime.

            • pingveno@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              2 years ago

              I’m not nitpicking. It’s simply objectively incorrect to say he was sentenced (he wasn’t) or that it was 35 years (off by 70x compared to the plea deal). Could you argue that a six month plea deal was itself too much? Absolutely, and I would agree with that, especially given that MIT never asked for charges. But you can argue that plenty well with the facts and not resort to repeating lies.

              • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                2 years ago

                Sure, he likely wouldn’t have got the maximum sentence, but that’s just distracting from the point that prosecution by the regime was what led to his suicide.

                • pingveno@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  Okay, so where am I wrong? And I’ve been avoiding saying this so far because it feels disrespectful towards the dead, but his suicide was not a foreseeable consequence of being prosecuted. Most people don’t react to the prospect of time behind bars by killing themselves. So saying that his prosecution led to his suicide is a stretch at best. It would have been the straw that broke the camel’s back.

                  • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    5
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    2 years ago

                    You’re not wrong that he wasn’t convicted when he committed suicide. I’m just saying I don’t see why you think that’s the relevant part of the story. We don’t know what the details were or why he chose to commit suicide as a result of this prosecution. Saying most people don’t react that way just serves to deflect the blame from the state. He reacted that way, and if the state did not choose to attack him then he would’ve very likely been alive today. This man is a victim of the US regime plain and simple.