4 ms·

Then it's not free speech. If you're not free to speak about certain things, you do not have freedom of speech, it is very much all or nothing. Freedom is a bi

• pmyteh 9y ago
  It may be that having 'full' freedom is correct in some senses, but it seems fairly clear that it's non-binary. A government which firmly censors newspapers writing restaurant reviews but allows anything else is fairly clearly more free than one which also forbids discussion of politics, religion, and the football results. I don't think anybody would say they are indifferent to which of the two they would prefer, on the grounds that neither are wholly free.
  • gnaritas 9y ago
    It's an abuse of language to call either of them free, neither are free, one is simply less authoritarian than the other. Yes, authoritarianism is not binary, there are many levels, but freedom of speech is binary, if you can be jailed for speaking, you do not have freedom of speech, you have an authoritarian government that may be less worse than others, but don't confuse it or label it as less free, it's simply not free. What you're doing is newspeak.
    • deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]