• capital
    link
    19 months ago

    Why do people who want to ban certain speech always seem to believe those with the power to choose exactly what to ban would agree with them?

    Y’all already forget Trump was president and has another chance to be?

    • Flying Squid
      link
      19 months ago

      Those with the power in Germany chose exactly what to ban that would make their country a better place.

      I have no idea why you and others think that overt racism should be allowed when it is an implicit call for violence.

      • capital
        link
        2
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Those with the power in Germany chose exactly what to ban that would make their country a better place.

        Because one place had a good out come means all will? And that it will continue being good for them over time?

        The UK doesn’t have free speech either. Recall that a few people were arrested for shouting “who elected him?” in regards to King Charles III. Convenient that you forgot about that one.

        I have no idea why you and others think that overt racism should be allowed when it is an implicit call for violence.

        I just told you why. Without the bedrock of free speech, we risk speech you and I like being banned. I don’t know about you but I would like to go on saying things like “god does not exist”, “I’m an atheist”, or “fuck the police”.

        What’s more, I believe in free speech the way the ACLU used to. That is, the principle of free speech, not just token free speech that really just means speech I like.

        • Flying Squid
          link
          2
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          There is no “bedrock of free speech.” There are many things you can’t say. You can’t slander or libel. You can’t foment violence. You can’t threaten people.

          Racism is a threat.

          • capital
            link
            29 months ago

            Racism is a threat.

            The right: “Saying fuck the police is a threat”.

            • Flying Squid
              link
              19 months ago

              You can make this argument about anything.

              The left: “Healthcare is a right!”

              The right: “Gender confirming care isn’t health care.”

              All you are arguing for is maintaining a status quo which has been responsible for countless murders and assaults and rapes and all sorts of other oppression because the right might find a way to abuse something even though we have a real-world example of that not happening.

              • capital
                link
                19 months ago

                The left: “Healthcare is a right!”

                Feel free to point this one out to me in the Bill of Rights the way you can free speech.

                • Flying Squid
                  link
                  29 months ago

                  Again, free speech is not a legal absolute, so your argument that it is an absolute based on the Constitution doesn’t work. There are already restrictions on speech.

                  • capital
                    link
                    2
                    edit-2
                    9 months ago

                    I didn’t say it was absolute. I’m well aware there are restrictions.

                    Your example of healthcare just makes no sense in this context.

                    Not using the state to stop the sharing ideas we think are disgusting IS bedrock of free speech. And the ACLU used to think so even back when the KKK was far more active and overt.