3 ms·

But really, who is advocating the government do anything other than the fringes? The discussion around "Free Speech" is the concept, not the government's role i

But really, who is advocating the government do anything other than the fringes? The discussion around "Free Speech" is the concept, not the government's role in regulation of it or lack there of.

rothbardrand 9y ago
Are you saying that "hate speech" is a concept that is only adopted by the fringes? Doesn't seem to be that way to me. 20 years ago, it was the fringe. Now it seems like if it isn't mainstream, it is close. Certainly we see Canada and the UK passing laws eliminating free speech for political minorities.
- noobermin 9y ago
  Can you give me a link to evidence of this? Like an op-ed in a major publication or something? My first google shows articles that affirm "hate speech" is protected speech in the US. I really can't speak for the UK or Canada. The US has free speech enshrined in the constitution's first amendment; and I'm not aware other countries have such constraints that are as absolute as the first amendment.
zeveb 9y ago
> But really, who is advocating the government do anything other than the fringes? Former senator Harry Reid called for the repeal of the First Amendment in 2014, in response to the Citizens United ruling which held that the First Amendment protects the right to show a film critical of a political candidate prior to an election. Whether or not one supports that action, I'd say that's certainly not on the fringes.
- noobermin 9y ago
  Googled it and the only publications who discussed this were right wing publications. I think "repeal of the first ammendment" is hyperbole used mostly by those sets of authors. Politifact seems to say it was about campaign finance[0] [0] http://www.politifact.com/iowa/statements/2015/dec/22/ted-cruz/ted-cruz-overstates-effect-proposed-constitutional/ http://www.politifact.com/iowa/statements/2015/dec/22/ted-cr...
- s73ver_ 9y ago
  That is an incredibly uncharitable and biased take on things.

But really, who is advocating the government do anything other than the fringes? The discussion around "Free Speech" is the concept, not the government's role in regulation of it or lack there of.

rothbardrand 9y ago

Are you saying that "hate speech" is a concept that is only adopted by the fringes? Doesn't seem to be that way to me. 20 years ago, it was the fringe. Now it seems like if it isn't mainstream, it is close. Certainly we see Canada and the UK passing laws eliminating free speech for political minorities.

noobermin 9y ago
Can you give me a link to evidence of this? Like an op-ed in a major publication or something? My first google shows articles that affirm "hate speech" is protected speech in the US. I really can't speak for the UK or Canada. The US has free speech enshrined in the constitution's first amendment; and I'm not aware other countries have such constraints that are as absolute as the first amendment.

zeveb 9y ago

> But really, who is advocating the government do anything other than the fringes? Former senator Harry Reid called for the repeal of the First Amendment in 2014, in response to the Citizens United ruling which held that the First Amendment protects the right to show a film critical of a political candidate prior to an election. Whether or not one supports that action, I'd say that's certainly not on the fringes.

noobermin 9y ago
Googled it and the only publications who discussed this were right wing publications. I think "repeal of the first ammendment" is hyperbole used mostly by those sets of authors. Politifact seems to say it was about campaign finance[0] [0] http://www.politifact.com/iowa/statements/2015/dec/22/ted-cruz/ted-cruz-overstates-effect-proposed-constitutional/ http://www.politifact.com/iowa/statements/2015/dec/22/ted-cr...
s73ver_ 9y ago
That is an incredibly uncharitable and biased take on things.