Freedom of Speech should be regulated

Page 2 of 3 [ 36 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

thinkinginpictures
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,310

12 Nov 2019, 1:44 pm

Wolfram87 wrote:

It's not false logic. Take a look at what you said. then replace the words "way better" with the word "aryan".

Yeah, and if we replace an article about coffee and replace every word "then" with "it" and put in another word than "coffee" and replace it with "apple" you get some other meaning entirely.

Wolfram87 wrote:

Morally. How do you justify to yourself the idea that other people should have the right to tell me that I can't hear certain things and consider them on their merits or possible lack thereof because you're too frail to hear those same things?

That people may be persuaded to believe in the nazi-propaganda and gain seats in the parliament.
1933 over again. WW2 over again. Yes, now I'm fulfilling Godwin's law - but it's true.

WW2 happened EXACTLY for the reason that the nazis were not banned and huge crowds of people listened to their BS and believed it.

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,952
Location:

12 Nov 2019, 1:50 pm

thinkinginpictures wrote:

I'd like to see any source or any evidence for this claim. Until then, I say whatever you just said is BS! Liar!

Ask any person in Cannes, Marseille or Paris whom you suspect might be an immigrant or refugee. Go ahead. I'll wait.

_________________
The mere fact that science may not yet adequately explain an object, event, or experience does not mean the immediate explanation should automatically default to a conspiratorial, extraterrestrial, paranormal, or supernatural cause.

thinkinginpictures
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,310

12 Nov 2019, 1:52 pm

Fnord wrote:

thinkinginpictures wrote:

I'd like to see any source or any evidence for this claim. Until then, I say whatever you just said is BS! Liar!

Ask any person in Cannes, Marseille or Paris whom you suspect might be an immigrant or refugee. Go ahead. I'll wait.

We were talking about nazi-speeches in Germany/France/Austria and how they're handled. Not immigrants (or suspected immigrants).

Last edited by thinkinginpictures on 12 Nov 2019, 1:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Wolfram87
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Feb 2015
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,976
Location: Sweden

12 Nov 2019, 1:54 pm

thinkinginpictures wrote:

Wolfram87 wrote:

It's not false logic. Take a look at what you said. then replace the words "way better" with the word "aryan".

Yeah, and if we replace an article about coffee and replace every word "then" with "it" and put in another word than "coffee" and replace it with "apple" you get some other meaning entirely.

Yeah, replace one instance of "I am X therefore" with another is basically the same as replacing all words with other words. how about using some of all those thoughts?

thinkinginpictures wrote:

I take it historical analysis is not exactly your strong suit, is it?

thinkinginpictures wrote:

We were talking about nazi-speeches in Germany and how they're handled. Not immigrants (or suspected immigrants).

Are you so bereft of principles that you can't think beyond your personal hate-objects?

_________________
I'm bored out of my skull, let's play a different game. Let's pay a visit down below and cast the world in flame.

thinkinginpictures
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,310

12 Nov 2019, 1:59 pm

Wolfram87 wrote:

Yeah, replace one instance of "I am X therefore" with another is basically the same as replacing all words with other words. how about using some of all those thoughts?

If you write a sentence: "I like to eat apples" and replace the word "apple" with "humans" the meaning and context of the sentence is changed entirely.

How about YOU use some thoughts?

Wolfram87 wrote:

I take it historical analysis is not exactly your strong suit, is it?

It actually is along with source criticism. And I know what I'm talking about.

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,952
Location:

12 Nov 2019, 2:03 pm

thinkinginpictures wrote:

Fnord wrote:

thinkinginpictures wrote:

I'd like to see any source or any evidence for this claim. Until then, I say whatever you just said is BS! Liar!

Ask any person in Cannes, Marseille or Paris whom you suspect might be an immigrant or refugee. Go ahead. I'll wait.

We were talking about nazi-speeches in Germany/France/Austria and how they're handled. Not immigrants (or suspected immigrants).

We're talking about oppressive practices against people whose actions, appearance, speech, and even thoughts are different from others. It doesn't matter if they're Nazis or Croatians, once you start screening people for what they might be thinking, then no one is safe.

thinkinginpictures
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,310

12 Nov 2019, 2:04 pm

Wolfram87 wrote:

Are you so bereft of principles that you can't think beyond your personal hate-objects?

Now you're trolling. I agree that suspected immigrants are being denied certain civil rights amongst other bad stuff.

But fnord was SPECIFICALLY talking about (suspected) nazi-speeches resulting in the same situation.

thinkinginpictures
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,310

12 Nov 2019, 2:06 pm

Fnord wrote:

thinkinginpictures wrote:

Fnord wrote:

thinkinginpictures wrote:

I'd like to see any source or any evidence for this claim. Until then, I say whatever you just said is BS! Liar!

Ask any person in Cannes, Marseille or Paris whom you suspect might be an immigrant or refugee. Go ahead. I'll wait.

We were talking about nazi-speeches in Germany/France/Austria and how they're handled. Not immigrants (or suspected immigrants).

But it isn't the result of the nazi-ban itself. That's the difference. You can't point at the nazi-ban and speech-ban specifically and say "it is for THAT reason there are oppressive practices".

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,952
Location:

12 Nov 2019, 2:08 pm

thinkinginpictures wrote:

Wolfram87 wrote:

Are you so bereft of principles that you can't think beyond your personal hate-objects?

Now you're trolling. I agree that suspected immigrants are being denied certain civil rights amongst other bad stuff. But fnord was SPECIFICALLY talking about (suspected) nazi-speeches resulting in the same situation.

Fnord was also talking about rounding up people on suspicion alone to have their identities and activities checked. Sure, round up all the Nazis you want, but you'll still be rounding up people for what you suspect they are only thinking and not necessarily for anything they've actually done.

Wolfram87
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Feb 2015
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,976
Location: Sweden

12 Nov 2019, 2:09 pm

thinkinginpictures wrote:

If you write a sentence: "I like to eat apples" and replace the word "apple" with "humans" the meaning and context of the sentence is changed entirely.

How about YOU use some thoughts?

Yes, but the point was that nothing really changed between what you said and the nazi example. In fact, the only reason it needed changing at all was to illustrate my point about your reasoning.

You say: "I am superior to the people I'm attacking, therefore my methods don't matter so long as I do it to the people I have designated as "the enemy"."

A nazi might say: "I am superior to the people I'm attacking, therefore my methods don't matter so long as I do it to the people I have designated as "the enemy"."

Quote:

Wolfram87 wrote:

I take it historical analysis is not exactly your strong suit, is it?

It actually is along with source criticism. And I know what I'm talking about.

[/quote]

Forgive me if I'm disinclined to take your word for it.

_________________
I'm bored out of my skull, let's play a different game. Let's pay a visit down below and cast the world in flame.

Wolfram87
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 14 Feb 2015
Age: 38
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,976
Location: Sweden

12 Nov 2019, 2:12 pm

thinkinginpictures wrote:

Wolfram87 wrote:

Are you so bereft of principles that you can't think beyond your personal hate-objects?

Now you're trolling.

No, I'm pointing out that you seem to be wildly unprincipled and seemingly unaware of the fact.

_________________
I'm bored out of my skull, let's play a different game. Let's pay a visit down below and cast the world in flame.

thinkinginpictures
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,310

12 Nov 2019, 2:13 pm

Fnord wrote:

thinkinginpictures wrote:

Wolfram87 wrote:

Are you so bereft of principles that you can't think beyond your personal hate-objects?

Now you're trolling. I agree that suspected immigrants are being denied certain civil rights amongst other bad stuff. But fnord was SPECIFICALLY talking about (suspected) nazi-speeches resulting in the same situation.

Wrong. You're not being punished for your thoughts - but you actions. In this case, you action was a speech or writing a forum post.

If someone on Wrongplanet posted a terrorist threat, their IP will be reported by the mod team to the police who will investigate further and eventually someone will end up in jail. It is not the terrorist THOUGHT that results in this punishment, but the act of public speech that was banned.

It happens in U.S., UK, France, Germany, Denmark, Sweden - just about every single nation on planet Earth.

If you can ban terrorist threats - you can ban nazi propaganda as well.

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,952
Location:

12 Nov 2019, 2:15 pm

thinkinginpictures wrote:

Fnord wrote:

thinkinginpictures wrote:

Fnord wrote:

thinkinginpictures wrote:

I'd like to see any source or any evidence for this claim. Until then, I say whatever you just said is BS! Liar!

Ask any person in Cannes, Marseille or Paris whom you suspect might be an immigrant or refugee. Go ahead. I'll wait.

We were talking about nazi-speeches in Germany/France/Austria and how they're handled. Not immigrants (or suspected immigrants).

But it isn't the result of the nazi-ban itself. That's the difference. You can't point at the nazi-ban and speech-ban specifically and say "it is for THAT reason there are oppressive practices".

Yes, I can. How do you determine that someone is a Nazi unless they express their Nazi ideologies? What if you only suspect that someone might be a Nazi, but they never say they are? Are you going to start reading people's mail, listening in on their phone calls, and documenting their movements and the activities of everyone they know?

Have you really never heard of the Staatssicherheitsdienst, or "Stasi" as it came to be known in Communist-controlled East Germany? Do you really want your country to be run like them (or like mainland China is today)?

Do you really want a global Communist regime?

thinkinginpictures
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,310

12 Nov 2019, 2:17 pm

Wolfram87 wrote:

A nazi might say: "I am superior to the people I'm attacking, therefore my methods don't matter so long as I do it to the people I have designated as "the enemy"."

It would be a great mistake to reduce nazism to such simple terms and definitions.
Or any other ideology for that matter.

Nazism is an entire set of beliefs. Lots of ideologies and people have the "I am superior to the people I'm attacking, therefore my methods don't matter so long as I do it to the people I have designated as "the enemy"-way of thinking - without them being nazis for that reason alone.

Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,952
Location:

12 Nov 2019, 2:17 pm

Wolfram87 wrote:

No, I'm pointing out that you seem to be wildly unprincipled and seemingly unaware of the fact.

And no amount of reason will convince him otherwise.

Censorship is not free speech. Free speech is not censorship. He seems to want it both ways.

thinkinginpictures
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,310

12 Nov 2019, 2:20 pm

Fnord wrote:

Read my reply to that one just above your comment.

I'll put it in quote for you:

Quote:

Page 2 of 3 [ 36 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

Jump to:

Freedom of Speech should be regulated Post Reply New Topic

Freedom of Speech should be regulated