6 ms·

Another reason why you should be happy to have freedom of speech in the US.

by freddealmeida 5y ago

tonyedgecombe 5y ago
Being on the receiving end of racial abuse doesn't sound like freedmon to me.
- rayiner 5y ago
  Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me. I’d rather encounter the occasional negative comment than have people treat me like an alien because they’re afraid of legal consequences.
  - rscoots 5y ago
    Exactly, the ‘freedom’ to know what other people actually think about you is essential. By silencing others you’re simply depriving yourself of your own right to hear them out.
    - LadyCailin 5y ago
      To what end? Say that they tell me that they hate my kind, now what? Am I allowed to mail them because they’re a bigot? I expect you would say no to that. So then, to what end? So I can ban them from my private property?
      - rscoots 5y ago
        You would rather not be able to tell who is and isn’t racist in your society? If someone is prone to racist remarks that should be noticed and their thought process/moral failings should be addressed. If you simply threaten reprisal in advance you not only don’t address their core issue, but you also hide it from sight!
    - krapp 5y ago
      >By silencing others you’re simply depriving yourself of your own right to hear them out. Why do we need to hear racists and bigots out? Their garbage opinions are neither novel nor of value to society, and the groups they target are well aware of the prejudice exists against them.
      - rscoots 5y ago
        I’ll decide what’s ‘novel’ and ‘of value’ for myself thanks. Which will require the right of ppl to express their conscience. Don’t need Boris Johnson’s (or anyone else’s) govt deciding this for me under threat of jail time.
        krapp 5y ago
      - rayiner 5y ago
        What is “racist” or “bigoted?” My family is Bangladeshi on both sides going back to time immemorial. But white people would consider much of what my mom would have to say about Bangladeshi culture “racist.” In the last decade, I’ve watched white people’s fear of being called racist force them to adopt basically a “noble savage” view of developing countries and as indigenous communities, where they’re forced to think of every problem in those societies as being caused by white people, because it’s taboo to talk about those societies’ flaws. That has real world negative effects—it chills honest discussion and empowers opportunists who realize they can amass more power railing against British colonialism than fixing social and cultural problems. As someone from the developing world, the most important question to me is how did Britain colonize Bangladesh instead of the other way around—despite our head start? What are the things that make a people prosperous? You can’t have these conversations anymore. As a result the entire field of social sciences academia has been overtaken by ideas like “decolonization” instead of thinking about cultural innovation. Would you run a startup that way? Trying to remove Apple or Google cultural influences from your organization?
  - Eldt 5y ago
    Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can also hurt me. Stones and sticks break only skin, while words are ghosts that haunt me. Slant and curved the word-swords fall, it pierces and sticks inside me. Bats and bricks may ache through bones, but words can mortify me. Pain from words has left its' scar, on mind and hear that's tender. Cuts and bruises have not healed, it's words that I remember.
LadyCailin 5y ago
No thanks.
orf 5y ago
Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequences.
- rscoots 5y ago
  It actually does precisely mean freedom from legal consequences, yes.
  - jen20 5y ago
    Why, is the government running football now?
    - rscoots 5y ago
      The article is about government legislation.
      - originalvichy 5y ago
        Legislation that has existed for decades for the purpose of making football stadiums a safer place for all people to attend, and to cut down on hooliganism. People who would get several years' worth of bans if they used their hate speech in a stadium will now get the same bans from sports venues if they are caught doing that online too.
  - orf 5y ago
    Except it doesn’t. Go onto the street and hurl racist abuse at the nearest minority in a way that can be considered “calling for imminent harm” and you’ll find out quickly if there are consequences, legal or otherwise.
    - rscoots 5y ago
      Sounds kind of racist to imply minorities will attack me with street violence if I say words they don’t like. I’ll have to report this to the authorities mate, hope you’re not a big football fan. Edit: you stealth edited your post to include the “imminent harm” part. Sorry bro I’ve already sent the evidence to your friends Boris Johnson and the police who you trust to vet what is and isn’t racist.
piethesailorman 5y ago
Sticking to an American frame and the principle of freedom of speech from the federal government, if the premier league or another private organization wanted to enforce this from the boundaries of their stadium, that's fine.(banning people from being racist at football matches). Having legislation create a system of using the top level government resources to patrol the internet for what they deem to be racist should be concerning to a statesman that holds the original principles of the federal goverment to be law. This is because not only could they liberally enforce this onto people who are not being racist, but also to decide some forms of actual racism isn't racist and create a class of people who are above justice without any check on this power at the country level(except a slow bureaucracy/judicial system). Of course, England can do what ever it wants. If this is across the board what english want for themselves, great for them!
originalvichy 5y ago
Free speech absolutism makes you seem sillier than you probably are. If you go to an opera and you direct hate speech at the performers, is it a violation of free speech to ban you as punishment? Your use of speech is infringing on others' freedom and ability to conduct their business. It's not much different in football or any other sports. Hate speech has a direct link to denying others' human rights and making it hostile for minorities or people under attack from hate speech to take part in society.

Another reason why you should be happy to have freedom of speech in the US.

tonyedgecombe 5y ago

Being on the receiving end of racial abuse doesn't sound like freedmon to me.

rayiner 5y ago
Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me. I’d rather encounter the occasional negative comment than have people treat me like an alien because they’re afraid of legal consequences.
- rscoots 5y ago
  Exactly, the ‘freedom’ to know what other people actually think about you is essential. By silencing others you’re simply depriving yourself of your own right to hear them out.
  - LadyCailin 5y ago
    To what end? Say that they tell me that they hate my kind, now what? Am I allowed to mail them because they’re a bigot? I expect you would say no to that. So then, to what end? So I can ban them from my private property?
    - rscoots 5y ago
      You would rather not be able to tell who is and isn’t racist in your society? If someone is prone to racist remarks that should be noticed and their thought process/moral failings should be addressed. If you simply threaten reprisal in advance you not only don’t address their core issue, but you also hide it from sight!
  - krapp 5y ago
    >By silencing others you’re simply depriving yourself of your own right to hear them out. Why do we need to hear racists and bigots out? Their garbage opinions are neither novel nor of value to society, and the groups they target are well aware of the prejudice exists against them.
    - rscoots 5y ago
      I’ll decide what’s ‘novel’ and ‘of value’ for myself thanks. Which will require the right of ppl to express their conscience. Don’t need Boris Johnson’s (or anyone else’s) govt deciding this for me under threat of jail time.
      - krapp 5y ago
    - rayiner 5y ago
      What is “racist” or “bigoted?” My family is Bangladeshi on both sides going back to time immemorial. But white people would consider much of what my mom would have to say about Bangladeshi culture “racist.” In the last decade, I’ve watched white people’s fear of being called racist force them to adopt basically a “noble savage” view of developing countries and as indigenous communities, where they’re forced to think of every problem in those societies as being caused by white people, because it’s taboo to talk about those societies’ flaws. That has real world negative effects—it chills honest discussion and empowers opportunists who realize they can amass more power railing against British colonialism than fixing social and cultural problems. As someone from the developing world, the most important question to me is how did Britain colonize Bangladesh instead of the other way around—despite our head start? What are the things that make a people prosperous? You can’t have these conversations anymore. As a result the entire field of social sciences academia has been overtaken by ideas like “decolonization” instead of thinking about cultural innovation. Would you run a startup that way? Trying to remove Apple or Google cultural influences from your organization?
- Eldt 5y ago
  Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can also hurt me. Stones and sticks break only skin, while words are ghosts that haunt me. Slant and curved the word-swords fall, it pierces and sticks inside me. Bats and bricks may ache through bones, but words can mortify me. Pain from words has left its' scar, on mind and hear that's tender. Cuts and bruises have not healed, it's words that I remember.

LadyCailin 5y ago

No thanks.

orf 5y ago

Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequences.

rscoots 5y ago
It actually does precisely mean freedom from legal consequences, yes.
- jen20 5y ago
  Why, is the government running football now?
  - rscoots 5y ago
    The article is about government legislation.
    - originalvichy 5y ago
      Legislation that has existed for decades for the purpose of making football stadiums a safer place for all people to attend, and to cut down on hooliganism. People who would get several years' worth of bans if they used their hate speech in a stadium will now get the same bans from sports venues if they are caught doing that online too.
- orf 5y ago
  Except it doesn’t. Go onto the street and hurl racist abuse at the nearest minority in a way that can be considered “calling for imminent harm” and you’ll find out quickly if there are consequences, legal or otherwise.
  - rscoots 5y ago
    Sounds kind of racist to imply minorities will attack me with street violence if I say words they don’t like. I’ll have to report this to the authorities mate, hope you’re not a big football fan. Edit: you stealth edited your post to include the “imminent harm” part. Sorry bro I’ve already sent the evidence to your friends Boris Johnson and the police who you trust to vet what is and isn’t racist.

piethesailorman 5y ago

Sticking to an American frame and the principle of freedom of speech from the federal government, if the premier league or another private organization wanted to enforce this from the boundaries of their stadium, that's fine.(banning people from being racist at football matches). Having legislation create a system of using the top level government resources to patrol the internet for what they deem to be racist should be concerning to a statesman that holds the original principles of the federal goverment to be law. This is because not only could they liberally enforce this onto people who are not being racist, but also to decide some forms of actual racism isn't racist and create a class of people who are above justice without any check on this power at the country level(except a slow bureaucracy/judicial system). Of course, England can do what ever it wants. If this is across the board what english want for themselves, great for them!

originalvichy 5y ago

Free speech absolutism makes you seem sillier than you probably are. If you go to an opera and you direct hate speech at the performers, is it a violation of free speech to ban you as punishment? Your use of speech is infringing on others' freedom and ability to conduct their business. It's not much different in football or any other sports. Hate speech has a direct link to denying others' human rights and making it hostile for minorities or people under attack from hate speech to take part in society.