3 ms·

“Liking […] makes you more patriotic, not less“ Agreed that a patriot criticizes his country (btw, Im Western European, not American. Yet) Chesterton wrote: “

“Liking […] makes you more patriotic, not less“ Agreed that a patriot criticizes his country (btw, Im Western European, not American. Yet) Chesterton wrote: “My country, right or wrong,’ is a thing that no patriot would think of saying. It is like saying, ‘My mother, drunk or sober.” And I agree. Where I disagree is these metrics are that important, or even relevant. Especially since they are differentials of small numbers (however more likely I am to get shot at in the US compared to Germany its still a very rare event. Nor do I need to be told about Germany to know that there is poverty in the US. Instead, let’s criticize America on its own. There’s plenty of material, “ I'm pretty sure Germany has roughly equivalent freedom of speech protection to the US. ” No country has the legal speech protections the US has. No one is even in the same league. Thats why speech control is outsourced to private entities. The obvious example of German restrictions: try buying Mien Kampf or debating the veracity of the Holocaust. Or playing the original Wolfenstein with the real artwork in it. We all agree here (I hope!) that ppl arguing against the veracity of the Holocaust are factually wrong, that Mein Kampf is horrendous; but I don’t want to live in a country that imposes that on me. Germans are cool with that. Germans recognize that they need these restrictions placed upon them. Thats the beauty of nation states - nations can impose their own rules on themselves.

danparsonson 5y ago
> ...The obvious example of German restrictions... You're right that this is an obvious example, in fact I would say that it's too obvious and doesn't really make your point for you. Of course any right-thinking nation that had committed vast and terrible atrocities during a major conflict could be reasonably expected to try to suppress the kind of rhetoric that led to those things happening in the first place. I don't see that as a freedom of speech issue - rather it underscores the point that freedom of speech does not equate to the right to incite violence or cause harm. Or is this the point that you're making? That a modern Hitler could easily come to power in the US and that this is somehow desirable? I realise I'm being somewhat hyperbolic but if protection of the right to incite violence or cause harm is 'the league' that the US operates in, then I don't understand why any sane person would want that.

danparsonson 5y ago

> ...The obvious example of German restrictions... You're right that this is an obvious example, in fact I would say that it's too obvious and doesn't really make your point for you. Of course any right-thinking nation that had committed vast and terrible atrocities during a major conflict could be reasonably expected to try to suppress the kind of rhetoric that led to those things happening in the first place. I don't see that as a freedom of speech issue - rather it underscores the point that freedom of speech does not equate to the right to incite violence or cause harm. Or is this the point that you're making? That a modern Hitler could easily come to power in the US and that this is somehow desirable? I realise I'm being somewhat hyperbolic but if protection of the right to incite violence or cause harm is 'the league' that the US operates in, then I don't understand why any sane person would want that.