5 ms·

When could you speak freely without repercussions at any point in history?

salawat 6y ago
Out in the field, the crops don't seem to mind a thing. The dog doesn't either. Cats, an empty room, same story. Add anotger human to the equation, and my, how circumstances change.
- CorpOverreach 6y ago
  Pretty sure the cats are judging you regardless of what you say.
cousin_it 6y ago
Russia 1990-2010 or so. We were coming off many decades of speech repression, and everyone understood that it's a treasure when people speak their mind. The Russian segment of LiveJournal had people of all imaginable political views yelling at each other all day, but when a US-based "abuse team" tried banning a few people for an offensive image, everyone saw that as a restriction of speech and rose up in protest. That's how I want the world to work.
- andy_boot 6y ago
  Didn't Russia make a habbit of killing journalists who criticized either the old or new regimes from 1990 to present day? Pretty sure that was prevalent. Maybe they weren't tracking online much in the early days though.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
AnimalMuppet 6y ago
When you were alone with someone trustworthy.
- jaredandrews 6y ago
  Thank you!
munk-a 6y ago
I think true freedom of speech is an impossibility of the same vein as freedom of action. Your speech is generally half of an interaction with one or more listeners and forcing their precipitation is impinging on their freedoms. It is also generally recognized that there is such a thing as dangerous speech but I don't think we even need to start including that category of speech to hit a contradiction - that said we can and should strive to allow as much freedom in expression as possible.
meowfly 6y ago
Is this snark or is the difference between what free-speech looks like today and 30 years ago not apparent? What people are nostalgic for is the ability to have semi-anonymous semi-ephemeral speech. For example: The ability to have a private conversation in public without fear someone is recording you and can easily use that recording to identify you.
- jaredandrews 6y ago
  I assure you it was not snark. Your example is not something I would have thought of and is interesting. Probably because I am 29 and for my entire adult life I have assumed all digital communications I participate in can and will be used against me at a future point (which is why I just use my real name here on HN). And while that is all horrible, I have played Dungeons and Dragons my entire life without persecution and none of the bands I listen to who are the same age as me have been harassed by the government. Not something I can say about the lates 80s and 90s from my understanding of it. (I am referring to the DnD panic and the legal harassment that destroyed the Dead Kennedys among other bands who the Govt pursued)

Out in the field, the crops don't seem to mind a thing. The dog doesn't either. Cats, an empty room, same story. Add anotger human to the equation, and my, how circumstances change.

CorpOverreach 6y ago
Pretty sure the cats are judging you regardless of what you say.

cousin_it 6y ago

Russia 1990-2010 or so. We were coming off many decades of speech repression, and everyone understood that it's a treasure when people speak their mind. The Russian segment of LiveJournal had people of all imaginable political views yelling at each other all day, but when a US-based "abuse team" tried banning a few people for an offensive image, everyone saw that as a restriction of speech and rose up in protest. That's how I want the world to work.

andy_boot 6y ago
Didn't Russia make a habbit of killing journalists who criticized either the old or new regimes from 1990 to present day? Pretty sure that was prevalent. Maybe they weren't tracking online much in the early days though.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

AnimalMuppet 6y ago

When you were alone with someone trustworthy.

jaredandrews 6y ago
Thank you!

munk-a 6y ago

I think true freedom of speech is an impossibility of the same vein as freedom of action. Your speech is generally half of an interaction with one or more listeners and forcing their precipitation is impinging on their freedoms. It is also generally recognized that there is such a thing as dangerous speech but I don't think we even need to start including that category of speech to hit a contradiction - that said we can and should strive to allow as much freedom in expression as possible.

meowfly 6y ago

Is this snark or is the difference between what free-speech looks like today and 30 years ago not apparent? What people are nostalgic for is the ability to have semi-anonymous semi-ephemeral speech. For example: The ability to have a private conversation in public without fear someone is recording you and can easily use that recording to identify you.

jaredandrews 6y ago
I assure you it was not snark. Your example is not something I would have thought of and is interesting. Probably because I am 29 and for my entire adult life I have assumed all digital communications I participate in can and will be used against me at a future point (which is why I just use my real name here on HN). And while that is all horrible, I have played Dungeons and Dragons my entire life without persecution and none of the bands I listen to who are the same age as me have been harassed by the government. Not something I can say about the lates 80s and 90s from my understanding of it. (I am referring to the DnD panic and the legal harassment that destroyed the Dead Kennedys among other bands who the Govt pursued)