Freedom of Speech and the recent unpleasantness

Post Reply New Topic

I will try to be brief.

We see many voices clamoring for the right of certain forms of political self-expression to be freely communicated. In particular, Facebook, Twitter, as well as AWS have been attacked for violating Freedom of Speech.

The best way for me to explain my point is to look at Europe 100 years ago. At that time, there were "ideas" being propagated that quickly metamorphosed into something much more than any idea, at the cost of millions of lives. To me, the same thing appears to be happening today.

I used to believe in everybody's right to express themselves as they saw fit. Many points of view infuriated me but I told myself that those people came by their opinions honestly and I should respect their right to air them if I wished them to respect my right to express myself.

But now I see my country heading in the direction of Civil War — not a secessionist conflict like what happened in the mid-1800s but a more traditional Civil War such as Spain in the 1930s. The things that we Americans used to think only happened in "bad old Europe" are now happening here. In a war, those points of view are wielded as weapons. So now I am no longer willing to tolerate certain political messages in a spirit of self-defense, as those messages are a direct threat to me and my country.

With apologies if needed.

"Free Speech" does not mean what most people think it means.  In fact, listing our Freedoms in the Bill of Rights means only that the Federal Government cannot prosecute us for exercising them (I might take personal exception to the Right to Bear Arms in most cases).  None of these rights gives any of us the freedom to use them as excuses to behave like a$$holes, though.

There have always been online policies about what isn't allowed on their site. This is nothing new. I am learning now how dangerous some opinions are when people are allowed to express those. Look at what happened with Capital Hill. That was because so many believed in voters fraud. So Twitter and other websites decided saying there is voter fraud is citing violence. That's why Trump got banned. His lie caused this to happen.

I think people need to quit thinking they're experts where they're not.

Theory = less important than real life experience when it comes to minority stuff.

So for eg me as a white person over this side of the Atlantic has a different, more theoretical, more living room commentator/back street driver, experience of the police shootings in America compared to an African-American's real life experiences.

It's important that I listen and don't talk over people who have real life experiences.

Especially if I commonly (theoretical eg which isn't the case) find myself with very few people with irl experiences of something backing me up. Because in that case it's likely I've (accidentally?) stepped into a trap of saying something racist.

We can see this as autistic people with 'autism speaks'. They want to talk for us. They're not us. They should be listening not running their mouths.

I agree with you. Some of the things that are being said shouldn't be tolerated. Not after the mess they've caused.

Can't remember where I heard it exactly but there was a depression-era speech I heard pointing out how idiotic it is that we lock people up for going into communities and peddling cannabis but protect people for peddling nationalism when one of those is infinitely more harmful than the other.

Free speech gives people in the US the right to say whatever they want. The government cannot lock you up for saying things the government does not approve of, as in Russia right now with the opposition leader they just locked up - the name escapes me now, or in China and now Hong Kong.
These kinds of things, in theory, should never happen in the US.

However, the right to free speech does not mean that newspapers, radio, TV, internet platforms have to publish what you are saying.

Facebook, Twitter, etc, can ban anyone and anything they want because they are a private business and not the government.

Many people do not understand this.

I also will add that the problem goes way beyond expression of "opinions." "Alternate facts" (Bless you, Kelly Anne Conway) are just plain old lies and that needs to be said.

Agitating for violence should never be allowed.

This will always be the most accurate explanation of Free Speech rights I have every read:

XKCD #1357
 LINK 

Which is exactly why Trump has been impeached for the second time.

This is in the US I assume. But in Australia freedom of speech has limits if it is classified as hate speech.

Well, there's free speech, and then there's the right of private companies to allow or disallow certain things on their platform. To my understanding, social media platforms are exercising a right they have, and are not actually violating any laws regarding free speech.

Also, civil war because an election didn't go the way some people wanted is pure nonsense. The people spewing that nonsense are probably the same kind of people who were behind the attack on Capitol Hill. They have no end game, and any plan of attack they may have isn't very well-planned out. Let's not also forget who controls the US military.

I'll believe there's a civil war when it happens, but I'm skeptical. It seems likely they either nothing of note will happen, other than maybe a few more violent protests, or if the crazies try something, they could be in for a one-sided massacre. I guess they have to decide how much they like being alive, and not in prison. They're probably not the thinking type though, judging by their previous actions.

It stops being free speech when it puts lives in danger and incites violence.

The big development of the past 4 years has been the use of complete BS as a political weapon.

Not to disprove anything, or propose a better alternative, but simply to muddy the waters so much that no-one knows what is true right any more.

It sounds quite trivial but it's a significant, social manipulation technique.

The big question there is, how could anyone police what might be true, or might not?

Perspective, context etc. always mean a lot. Nonetheless what we've seen recently is a move towards giving any old half-baked nonsense equal credibility with mainstream thinking. The problems there, of course, are 1). sometimes the mad answer is the right one, and 2). censorship is therefore to be treated with suspicion, but nonetheless 3). most of this is simply disruptive white noise.

I don't have a solution for this.

Everything seems ridiculously partisan at the moment. Particularly in the U.S. which is ironic, given both political parties are actually pretty much the same.

Ah yes, that's probably because there seem to be more and more people who easily believe complete BS. I must be missing something, because nothing the orange ape says sounds remotely credible, nor do a lot of things some of his allies say. Some people were willing to inject themselves with Lysol just because that idiot said it would be a good idea, so what do I know? Maybe there's some kind of drug I need to take. I've conversed with my share of Trump supporters who sounded like they were constantly on meth. I never did think to ask them what they were on though...

Shucks...speaking of BS it makes me feel so nostalgic to think back when Trump made his first baby steps into politics