Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

The censorious political left and free speech

Page 1 of 7 [ 103 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

blitzkrieg
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jun 2011
Age: 115
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 17,820
Location: The line in the sand

10 Oct 2018, 10:52 pm

What are people thinking when they want to censor everything because it is perceived to be offensive - especially when it concerns history? Don't these people put things into context; are they really that stupid?

Blows my mind how censorious much of the political left is. It's bad in my country, the UK, but even worse in the US. Some of those people are downright scary with how anti-liberal they are.



mr_bigmouth_502
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Dec 2013
Age: 31
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 7,028
Location: Alberta, Canada

11 Oct 2018, 12:47 am

The right likes to censor things too, like the teaching of evolution in public schools.


_________________
Every day is exactly the same...


B19
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jan 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 9,993
Location: New Zealand

11 Oct 2018, 12:52 am

Relocated to PPR from Autism Activism politics forum - the forum is for political activism and news specifically relating to AS initiatives toward achieving change, not political topics of this kind.



blitzkrieg
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 8 Jun 2011
Age: 115
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 17,820
Location: The line in the sand

11 Oct 2018, 6:50 pm

mr_bigmouth_502 wrote:
The right likes to censor things too, like the teaching of evolution in public schools.


Yeah, this post wasn't an attack on the left in general - more so a specific subset of illiberal leftists. I have no sympathy for most things right wing.



AspE
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,114

11 Oct 2018, 8:41 pm

The right doesn't believe in free speech, but they will happily goad perceived leftists to put their foot down over Nazis and trolls, just so they can use it as a weapon.

f**k brexit



Mythos
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 457
Location: England

12 Oct 2018, 3:54 pm

I understand your concerns are valid, but in reality there is no definition of free speech that satisfies all. Personally, I don't think as an example Nazism should be protected but some people regard censoring neonazi lies and slander as "free speech". Is it, though? Not in my opinion; it's a hate crime and misinformation, both of which need to be stamped out posthaste.

There are many examples we could discuss but you likely understand my point. Free speech is more or less just a myth peddled by people who like to spew hateful rhetoric or protect an assumed right to be cyberbullies.

I know there's more to it than that, but I get the impression this is the majority thought process.

AspE wrote:
The right doesn't believe in free speech, but they will happily goad perceived leftists to put their foot down over Nazis and trolls, just so they can use it as a weapon.

f**k brexit
Essentially. More to the point, it's a tool to be utilised by those who can shape it into a weapon for their rhetoric. Misinformation, slander and lies are all rampant and ubiquitous online. We need less freedom of speech, not more.



Tim_Tex
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Jul 2004
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 46,127
Location: Houston, Texas

12 Oct 2018, 4:03 pm

mr_bigmouth_502 wrote:
The right likes to censor things too, like the teaching of evolution in public schools.


They’re doing that up there?


_________________
Who’s better at math than a robot? They’re made of math!


VegetableMan
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Jun 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,208
Location: Illinois

12 Oct 2018, 4:29 pm

Mythos wrote:
I understand your concerns are valid, but in reality there is no definition of free speech that satisfies all. Personally, I don't think as an example Nazism should be protected but some people regard censoring neonazi lies and slander as "free speech". Is it, though? Not in my opinion; it's a hate crime and misinformation, both of which need to be stamped out posthaste.

There are many examples we could discuss but you likely understand my point. Free speech is more or less just a myth peddled by people who like to spew hateful rhetoric or protect an assumed right to be cyberbullies.

I know there's more to it than that, but I get the impression this is the majority thought process.



Hate speech is not a crime, nor is misinformation. I certainly understand your sentiments, and I wish there weren't so many ignorant, bigoted bastards around. But the first Amendment protects all speech, regardless of how vile it may be. That's the price of living in a free society. We have to put with everyone's opinions, even if we find them objectionable. Once we start determining which speech is acceptable or not, then we ae on a nonstop course to total fascism.


The antidote to hate speech is not censorship; it's a counter argument.


_________________
What do you call a hot dog in a gangster suit?

Oscar Meyer Lansky


AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

12 Oct 2018, 4:38 pm

blitzkrieg wrote:
What are people thinking when they want to censor everything because it is perceived to be offensive - especially when it concerns history...?

When all political parties, save few, engage in supporting the restriction of free-speech laws, speech itself is their enemy.


_________________
Diagnosed in 2015 with ASD Level 1 by the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic using the ADOS-2 Module 4 assessment instrument [11/30] -- Screened in 2014 with ASD by using the University of Cambridge Autism Research Centre AQ (Adult) [43/50]; EQ-60 for adults [11/80]; FQ [43/135]; SQ (Adult) [130/150] self-reported screening inventories -- Assessed since 1978 with an estimated IQ [≈145] by several clinicians -- Contact on WrongPlanet.net by private message (PM)


ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,554
Location: Long Island, New York

12 Oct 2018, 5:13 pm

VegetableMan wrote:
Mythos wrote:
I understand your concerns are valid, but in reality there is no definition of free speech that satisfies all. Personally, I don't think as an example Nazism should be protected but some people regard censoring neonazi lies and slander as "free speech". Is it, though? Not in my opinion; it's a hate crime and misinformation, both of which need to be stamped out posthaste.

There are many examples we could discuss but you likely understand my point. Free speech is more or less just a myth peddled by people who like to spew hateful rhetoric or protect an assumed right to be cyberbullies.

I know there's more to it than that, but I get the impression this is the majority thought process.



Hate speech is not a crime, nor is misinformation. I certainly understand your sentiments, and I wish there weren't so many ignorant, bigoted bastards around. But the first Amendment protects all speech, regardless of how vile it may be. That's the price of living in a free society. We have to put with everyone's opinions, even if we find them objectionable. Once we start determining which speech is acceptable or not, then we ae on a nonstop course to total fascism.


The antidote to hate speech is not censorship; it's a counter argument.

^^^^
This
The first amendment does not protect you from consequences of your speech. If the consequeneces of your speech is being a victim of a crime the perpetrator should be procescuted. Punching Nazis in the face is satisfying emotionally. While the Nazis deserve to be punched in the face and a lot more their rights are bieng directly violated if the government arrests him for his Nazi speech. If the government fails to procescute people violently attacking Nazis the are failing to do what they were sworn in to do protect their constitutional rights.


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


Mythos
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 457
Location: England

13 Oct 2018, 5:47 am

VegetableMan wrote:
Mythos wrote:
I understand your concerns are valid, but in reality there is no definition of free speech that satisfies all. Personally, I don't think as an example Nazism should be protected but some people regard censoring neonazi lies and slander as "free speech". Is it, though? Not in my opinion; it's a hate crime and misinformation, both of which need to be stamped out posthaste.

There are many examples we could discuss but you likely understand my point. Free speech is more or less just a myth peddled by people who like to spew hateful rhetoric or protect an assumed right to be cyberbullies.

I know there's more to it than that, but I get the impression this is the majority thought process.



Hate speech is not a crime, nor is misinformation. I certainly understand your sentiments, and I wish there weren't so many ignorant, bigoted bastards around. But the first Amendment protects all speech, regardless of how vile it may be. That's the price of living in a free society. We have to put with everyone's opinions, even if we find them objectionable. Once we start determining which speech is acceptable or not, then we ae on a nonstop course to total fascism.


The antidote to hate speech is not censorship; it's a counter argument.
True enough, but if speech encourages violence then the pragmatic thing to do would be to prevent such speech rather than wait until it genuinely reaches a violent conclusion.



Tim_Tex
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Jul 2004
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 46,127
Location: Houston, Texas

13 Oct 2018, 6:48 am

I think we need to be crystal clear as to what constitutes hate speech. Calls to violence should definitely fall under that category, as should Holocaust denial/defense.

Should Bible verses such as Leviticus 18:22 or 1 Corinthians 14:34 (and similar verses in the Quran) fall under the hate speech category. Should opposition to Israel be considered anti-semitism (and opposition to Palestine considered Islamophobia)?


_________________
Who’s better at math than a robot? They’re made of math!


Mythos
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 12 Aug 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 457
Location: England

13 Oct 2018, 6:55 am

Tim_Tex wrote:
I think we need to be crystal clear as to what constitutes hate speech. Calls to violence should definitely fall under that category, as should Holocaust denial/defense.

Should Bible verses such as Leviticus 18:22 or 1 Corinthians 14:34 (and similar verses in the Quran) fall under the hate speech category. Should opposition to Israel be considered anti-semitism (and opposition to Palestine considered Islamophobia)?
It's a matter of examination versus action, I think. If one is led to pursue beliefs and subsequently lead their lives based on such beliefs, assuming they are damaging in some way, then yes they should be classified as hate speech.

Controversially, I'm of the opinion that pretty much all holy books should be classified as hate speech but can you imagine, especially in America, the kind of reaction that would garner?



NoClearMind53
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

Joined: 25 Mar 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 369

15 Oct 2018, 2:56 am

I’m a free speech absolutist when it comes to government censorship, but US right wingers these days constantly cry when they are merely socially shunned.



Piobaire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Dec 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,347
Location: Smackass Gap, NC

15 Oct 2018, 7:08 am

Trump to abrogate your right to free speech, freedom of assembly, and right to petition your government for redress of grievances.



AspieUtah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jun 2014
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Brigham City, Utah

15 Oct 2018, 7:33 am

Piobaire wrote:
Trump to abrogate your right to free speech, freedom of assembly, and right to petition your government for redress of grievances.

And how will he do this without 2/3 or 3/4 of the various states? This is exactly why the constitutional amendment process is extremely detailed and tedious. Whether we are talking about the First, Second or other amendments, they simply can't be tossed aside without years, decades or even centuries to ratify.

In other words, he is either functionally delusional or yanking your chain. Move on to more likely matters.


_________________
Diagnosed in 2015 with ASD Level 1 by the University of Utah Health Care Autism Spectrum Disorder Clinic using the ADOS-2 Module 4 assessment instrument [11/30] -- Screened in 2014 with ASD by using the University of Cambridge Autism Research Centre AQ (Adult) [43/50]; EQ-60 for adults [11/80]; FQ [43/135]; SQ (Adult) [130/150] self-reported screening inventories -- Assessed since 1978 with an estimated IQ [≈145] by several clinicians -- Contact on WrongPlanet.net by private message (PM)