3 ms·

The case for free speech preventing nasty dictators is an empirical one - America has the strictest free speech laws and has never been taken over by a dictator

The case for free speech preventing nasty dictators is an empirical one - America has the strictest free speech laws and has never been taken over by a dictatorship, Germany and other places had very weak free speech laws and was taken over repeatedly. Also, dictators are always very keen on censorship. To what extent it really helps them is a matter of debate; probably it depends a lot on how effective the censorship is for any given topic.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
shaki-dora 7y ago
It's obviously statistical malpractice to draw conclusions from one or two datapoints. But anyway: the UK and France have arguably more restrictive free speech laws than Germany, yet they have far longer democratic histories than the US. It's also somewhat misleading to present the US as some sort of haven of free speech. Just look at the widespread "de-platforming" of anyone even remotely left-wing during the "red scare"/McCarty era. Or the FBI and other agencies' efforts to undermine both the Civil Rights movement as well as anti-war effort in the 1970s.
- alephnerd 7y ago
  Your statement that the UK and France had a longer democratic history is patently false. France was an absolute monarchy until the French Revolution in 1789 (which was a major splitting point between the Adams, Jefferson, and Hamilton factions of the early United States), and the UK had a very limited form of franchise compared to the US until the Reform Act was passed in 1832, and even then it was still lacking due to the undue power of unelected, monarchy chosen House of Lords (though the US Senate as well didn’t have elections, but Senators were directly chosen by democratically elected governors)
- repolfx 7y ago
  The UK has not had more restrictive free speech laws than Germany, what are you thinking of exactly? Certainly for most of the 20th century the UK was a bastion of free speech compared to Germany during WW1, then pre-war Germany in which political censorship was rife, then Germany during WW2 in which it was total, and then post-WW2 in which half of Germany was still controlled by a socialist dictatorship and had very little freedom of speech and the other half did still have restrictions on speech related to Nazi-ism. What has the UK got compared to that? Yeah, in recent years it's gone down the same road as most of Europe with vaguely defined "hate speech" laws. But there's little or no political censorship in the UK, even bias at the BBC attracts a lot of attention and that's not exactly censorship.
imgabe 7y ago
Ah, one of my favorite Simpsons moments. Homer: Not a bear in sight. The bear patrol must be working like a charm. Lisa: That's specious reasoning, Dad. Homer: Thank you, honey. Lisa: No, I mean by that logic, I could say that this rock keeps tigers away. Homer: How does it work? Lisa: It doesn't! It's just a stupid rock! Homer: ahuh... Lisa: But I don't see any tigers around here, do you? Homer: ... Lisa, I would like to buy your rock.
anoncake 7y ago
> Germany and other places had very weak free speech laws and was taken over repeatedly. I'm counting 1 takeover, in 1933. The 1871 Reich was before the revolution, the GDR was due to the Soviet occupation. The Parliamentary Council, who wrote the West German constitution, clearly did not think the Weimar Republic failed because of too much free speech. They made our free speech "very weak" because a democracy should not help its enemies destroy it. Which is what the Weimar Republic did.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

shaki-dora 7y ago

It's obviously statistical malpractice to draw conclusions from one or two datapoints. But anyway: the UK and France have arguably more restrictive free speech laws than Germany, yet they have far longer democratic histories than the US. It's also somewhat misleading to present the US as some sort of haven of free speech. Just look at the widespread "de-platforming" of anyone even remotely left-wing during the "red scare"/McCarty era. Or the FBI and other agencies' efforts to undermine both the Civil Rights movement as well as anti-war effort in the 1970s.

alephnerd 7y ago
Your statement that the UK and France had a longer democratic history is patently false. France was an absolute monarchy until the French Revolution in 1789 (which was a major splitting point between the Adams, Jefferson, and Hamilton factions of the early United States), and the UK had a very limited form of franchise compared to the US until the Reform Act was passed in 1832, and even then it was still lacking due to the undue power of unelected, monarchy chosen House of Lords (though the US Senate as well didn’t have elections, but Senators were directly chosen by democratically elected governors)
repolfx 7y ago
The UK has not had more restrictive free speech laws than Germany, what are you thinking of exactly? Certainly for most of the 20th century the UK was a bastion of free speech compared to Germany during WW1, then pre-war Germany in which political censorship was rife, then Germany during WW2 in which it was total, and then post-WW2 in which half of Germany was still controlled by a socialist dictatorship and had very little freedom of speech and the other half did still have restrictions on speech related to Nazi-ism. What has the UK got compared to that? Yeah, in recent years it's gone down the same road as most of Europe with vaguely defined "hate speech" laws. But there's little or no political censorship in the UK, even bias at the BBC attracts a lot of attention and that's not exactly censorship.

imgabe 7y ago

Ah, one of my favorite Simpsons moments. Homer: Not a bear in sight. The bear patrol must be working like a charm. Lisa: That's specious reasoning, Dad. Homer: Thank you, honey. Lisa: No, I mean by that logic, I could say that this rock keeps tigers away. Homer: How does it work? Lisa: It doesn't! It's just a stupid rock! Homer: ahuh... Lisa: But I don't see any tigers around here, do you? Homer: ... Lisa, I would like to buy your rock.

anoncake 7y ago

> Germany and other places had very weak free speech laws and was taken over repeatedly. I'm counting 1 takeover, in 1933. The 1871 Reich was before the revolution, the GDR was due to the Soviet occupation. The Parliamentary Council, who wrote the West German constitution, clearly did not think the Weimar Republic failed because of too much free speech. They made our free speech "very weak" because a democracy should not help its enemies destroy it. Which is what the Weimar Republic did.