Criminalization of private speech coming to U.S.

Go say something positive about Hitler in Germany... tell us what happens to you.

 

How did you pull that out of the article?

 

We need to be rid of section 230 to treat social media to the same standards as the rest of the media.

 

Orwell is laughing in his grave. The Ministry Of Truth is real.

 

And yet, completely accurate.
You -do- agree that laws against denying the holocaust violate what we consider free speech. Right?

 

I see/hear -plenty- of nudity and profanity on TV.

 

But disproves your position that there is "free speech protection" in Germany. Popular speech doesn't need protection.

 

Fortunately, unlike most of the world, we do actually have free speech and free expression baked into our founding documents. And we have a court that will very likely thwart any attempt -- legislatively or otherwise -- to nullify one of our most cherished principles.

 

Wow, what a substantial "rebuttal"....were you captain of the debate team?

 

I am from Germany. Germany learned from its mistakes in the third Reich. Most Germans agreed on that they would never let this happen again. That's why it is sensible to exempt holocaust denial from free speech protection. The neo-Nazis might not like it, but what do I care? Holocaust denial is one of these issues that is just too offensive to the victims and their families to be allowed by law.

 

And here, any such law would be quickly struck.

 

Then you do not have a leg to stand on when it comes to this topic. And you concede that there is such a thing as "European-style speech controls" that you attempted to deny upthread. You are either free to speak your mind or you are not. In Germany, and much of the world, you are not. Currently you have no problem with denying free speech rights and even criminalizing unpopular ideas. What happens when your speech becomes unpopular? The pendulum swings both ways, and the genie does not like being stuffed back in the bottle once you let him out. Careful what you wish for...

Another lesson from your country's troubling past:

"First they came for the neo-Nazis... and I did not speak out for I am not a neo-nazi..."

 

Social media has been weaponised.

We will eventually have to do something about that. But it will take far too long, which means we could get a dictator first.

It's a bit early for panic and jumping on the table screaming. But it isn't too early to start thinking about finding a balance between respecting liberty, and letting lunatics burn the country to the ground.

 

For now...

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

 

World nut daily

 

Agreed. We should have free speech in all arenas. The market should dictate the content of broadcast programming -- not government censors or obscenity police.

 

Big tech in league with legacy media have been limiting what people can see or hear, in effect, a concerted effort to limit speech. Since big tech and the legacy media are in league with the democrats, by extension democrats support limiting speech.

Also, the left wing's cancel culture IS having an effect chilling free speech. Those that do not spout the accepted narrative are threatened with losing their livelihood or getting threatened physically.

 

Noted you did not offer a counter-argument in rebuttal.

 

Government, as in democrats, have espoused their belief some speech should be limited. Pretty antithetical to the constitution.

 

Not just the monopoly of the Left, mind you. Troubling from wherever it comes. Of course it is the Left who have now tried to foist upon us this notion that "speech is violence."

 

Long time ago, in a much better forum, I had a couple discussions about this with a European. In the first one, he wanted to increase the repression of the Right in Europe. In the next one, a year or two later, he had flipped sides. He was Jewish, and American Republicans had done some things he liked for Israel. In the first discussion, I had argued that Europe needed to strike a balance, they had gone a bit far. But that had ended, and the extreme Right was growing. He wanted the Right to dominate.

I warned him to be careful what he wished for.

Because of Germany's history, there are some things they do not tolerate, and for good reason. But the heavy handed repression is over. There is more in Germany, than elsewhere in Europe, but even there things have changed a lot.

https://www.brusselstimes.com/opinion/79776/far-right-rise-in-germany-and-its-merkel-partys-fault/

https://www.theguardian.com/news/audio/2020/mar/02/whats-behind-the-rise-of-germanys-far-right

 

Why debate right wing conspiracy theories it only reinforces invalid belief systems

BTW what do you think of Trumps attempts to silence those people saying he lost the election ?

 

For my part, I think free expression is preferable to the alternative -- a world in which an elite few get to decide what is "truth" and what is not. This is exactly what Orwell predicted in 1984, and before him, the lesser-known Soviet dissident Zamyatin whose dystopian novel We described a totalitarian state in which the citizen was not only closely monitored by the secret police but even had to apply for a permit to lower the blinds in the glass houses in which they all lived to have sexual intercourse. An outlier to be sure, but once we have ceded our own minds to the state, we've lost...

 

Do you deny that European countries suppress speech?

Please cite specific examples and I will be happy to respond. Thank you.

 

Perhaps you should read the link in the OP?