3 ms·

> don't think it's that clear for a line. Which is why liberal societies are on the side of individual responsibility, not authoritarian intervention.

ericmay 7y ago
Yes, authoritarian intervention like this? "“There is enough for everybody,” German Agriculture Minister Julia Kloeckner said, castigating people for spreading panic by posting fake reports that supermarkets would be closing. “ https://apnews.com/15b99013e674de9ea83a707342e8ffe5 https://apnews.com/15b99013e674de9ea83a707342e8ffe5 When free speech causes panic (like shouting fire in a theater) or results in people actually dying, that's a problem for government to help solve. Writing some sort of op-ed is one thing. Actually working to undermine a country through the veil of journalism is another, especially if those people work for a disgusting dictatorship, like China. Or do we let people have "personal responsibility" and vote for more Brexit?
- luckylion 7y ago
  > Or do we let people have "personal responsibility" and vote for more Brexit? Listen to yourself. "Should we really allow voting when people might vote wrong?"
  - ericmay 7y ago
    That’s not what I’m saying. It’s the propaganda and lies from the campaign fueled by Russia to dismantle E.U. integration that I’m talking about. Its too easy for a country to just pay someone to be a journalist and spread propaganda, while also banning it in their own country. Tools of liberal democracy can and are being used against us, so we need to ensure that we limit their damage while respecting liberty.
    - luckylion 7y ago
      Sorry, I misunderstood you then. I do believe that the influence of Russian propaganda is vastly overestimated by you and others. I believe that they are paying and trying to influence and/or harm Western societies, but it's working because those are obvious break-lines that have been created over the past few decades. I see it more like a glacier that is going to calve any minute, and Russia is a guy with a 2x4, using it as a lever to help widen a crack: in the grand scheme of things, it's insignificant. RE "banning it in their own countries": of course, that's what authoritarian states do. It's always been my belief that if you want to uphold your standards as a country with a free and independent press, you need to accept that this can make things difficult. And your press must always, even if they think it hurts, be critical and vigilant. The US media all falling in line for the Iraq wars multiple times in a row and essentially becoming propaganda outlets did immense damage. That they admitted as much afterwards and promised to do better is noble (and is a major difference, that wouldn't happen in the state-controlled media of Russia, China or Turkey), but ultimately useless. I understand that they feel they have a responsibility to not harm their governments, but imho they are harming their societies much more by abandoning their role as an independent fourth power in democracy. If media companies discredit themselves, they're doing the enemy's work. If you know I'm out to get you and you keep lying for whatever reason, you're really making my job too easy, because all I need to do is point it out.
    - DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
      Russia didn't fuel Brexit. There's a long history of skepticism towards the EU in Britain. The idea that Russia could move the needle on British public sentiment towards Europe to any measurable degree is crazy. We need less panic about what terrible political opinions people might voice and more trust in freedom of speech.
      - lowdose 7y ago
        There is a tipping point for every paradigm in society and that could be at just a percent of the population.
        DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
        And there's no evidence that Russia tipped Britain over that edge. Britain's relation to the continent is something that people in Britain have a long history of having strong opinions about. It's utterly implausible that Russia could effect a 1% shift in public opinion on such a vital subject. There was an intense, years-long debate inside Britain about EU membership. Trying to blame Russia for that is just ridiculous. It's a demonization tactic used by people who are upset about their countrymen's opinions.
- philwelch 7y ago
  > When free speech causes panic (like shouting fire in a theater) You’re paraphrasing Schenck v. United States, part of a series of Supreme Court precedents that upheld such practices as imprisoning people for advocating draft resistance and organizing communist parties.

ericmay 7y ago

Yes, authoritarian intervention like this? "“There is enough for everybody,” German Agriculture Minister Julia Kloeckner said, castigating people for spreading panic by posting fake reports that supermarkets would be closing. “ https://apnews.com/15b99013e674de9ea83a707342e8ffe5 https://apnews.com/15b99013e674de9ea83a707342e8ffe5 When free speech causes panic (like shouting fire in a theater) or results in people actually dying, that's a problem for government to help solve. Writing some sort of op-ed is one thing. Actually working to undermine a country through the veil of journalism is another, especially if those people work for a disgusting dictatorship, like China. Or do we let people have "personal responsibility" and vote for more Brexit?

luckylion 7y ago
> Or do we let people have "personal responsibility" and vote for more Brexit? Listen to yourself. "Should we really allow voting when people might vote wrong?"
- ericmay 7y ago
  That’s not what I’m saying. It’s the propaganda and lies from the campaign fueled by Russia to dismantle E.U. integration that I’m talking about. Its too easy for a country to just pay someone to be a journalist and spread propaganda, while also banning it in their own country. Tools of liberal democracy can and are being used against us, so we need to ensure that we limit their damage while respecting liberty.
  - luckylion 7y ago
    Sorry, I misunderstood you then. I do believe that the influence of Russian propaganda is vastly overestimated by you and others. I believe that they are paying and trying to influence and/or harm Western societies, but it's working because those are obvious break-lines that have been created over the past few decades. I see it more like a glacier that is going to calve any minute, and Russia is a guy with a 2x4, using it as a lever to help widen a crack: in the grand scheme of things, it's insignificant. RE "banning it in their own countries": of course, that's what authoritarian states do. It's always been my belief that if you want to uphold your standards as a country with a free and independent press, you need to accept that this can make things difficult. And your press must always, even if they think it hurts, be critical and vigilant. The US media all falling in line for the Iraq wars multiple times in a row and essentially becoming propaganda outlets did immense damage. That they admitted as much afterwards and promised to do better is noble (and is a major difference, that wouldn't happen in the state-controlled media of Russia, China or Turkey), but ultimately useless. I understand that they feel they have a responsibility to not harm their governments, but imho they are harming their societies much more by abandoning their role as an independent fourth power in democracy. If media companies discredit themselves, they're doing the enemy's work. If you know I'm out to get you and you keep lying for whatever reason, you're really making my job too easy, because all I need to do is point it out.
  - DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
    Russia didn't fuel Brexit. There's a long history of skepticism towards the EU in Britain. The idea that Russia could move the needle on British public sentiment towards Europe to any measurable degree is crazy. We need less panic about what terrible political opinions people might voice and more trust in freedom of speech.
    - lowdose 7y ago
      There is a tipping point for every paradigm in society and that could be at just a percent of the population.
      - DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
        And there's no evidence that Russia tipped Britain over that edge. Britain's relation to the continent is something that people in Britain have a long history of having strong opinions about. It's utterly implausible that Russia could effect a 1% shift in public opinion on such a vital subject. There was an intense, years-long debate inside Britain about EU membership. Trying to blame Russia for that is just ridiculous. It's a demonization tactic used by people who are upset about their countrymen's opinions.
philwelch 7y ago
> When free speech causes panic (like shouting fire in a theater) You’re paraphrasing Schenck v. United States, part of a series of Supreme Court precedents that upheld such practices as imprisoning people for advocating draft resistance and organizing communist parties.