7 ms·

“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.” Easily my favourite George R

“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.” Easily my favourite George R. R. Martin quote. We discovered why free speech is important during the 17th century in the Enlightenment period. The scientific method itself owes its existence to free speech, and the ability for any person to disagree with any other person, regardless of their class, race, age, nationality, religion, or beliefs. The same goes for democracy. Take away the fundamental principle of free speech and you undermine science and democracy. Are evil people going to attempt to convince the suggestible that they're not evil? Of course! Contrary to common sentiment, free speech has a cost. We pay this cost gladly so that we can live in relative prosperity.

lm28469 5y ago
Free speech has never been absolute. RT is a state owned propaganda organ, disinformation doesn't contribute to free speech. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
- lamp987 5y ago
  "as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise." this still applies. RT readers arent shooting you. funny how the paradox of tolerance is thrown around most by the people who understand it the least.
  - lm28469 5y ago
    > as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion I mean, we obviously can't. Who's going to make them provide balanced news ? no one since they're literally part of the Russian government. You can't "counter them by rational argument" if these arguments never reach the target What about islamist news ? Why don't we broadcast that freely ? Can't you provide rational arguments against that ? What about nazis, why are they banned in Germany ? Are you afraid of not having rational arguments ? > funny how the paradox of tolerance is thrown around most by the people who understand it the least. Well, I can say the same about freedom of speech...
- Gareth321 5y ago
  I did not argue that free speech is absolute. Merely that we should be free to try to convince each other of our premise. Even if you really, really, really don't like the other guy. Especially then. I caution you to so casually frame RT as an example of the paradox of tolerance. The byline makes it clear that this paradox was created and applied to situations where the tolerated eventually seized authoritarian power to silence the tolerant. RT, and as you rightly describe, Russia, has no hope of invading the U.S. and seizing this power. It's just Russia spouting Russian propaganda. Either you trust your citizens to freely exchange ideas - even those you really, really really, don't like - or you don't. I'm getting the feeling that you don't.
  - lm28469 5y ago
    > Russia, has no hope of invading the U.S. and seizing this power. Funny that you say that knowing the role of Russian propaganda during your elections but ok

lm28469 5y ago

Free speech has never been absolute. RT is a state owned propaganda organ, disinformation doesn't contribute to free speech. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

lamp987 5y ago
"as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise." this still applies. RT readers arent shooting you. funny how the paradox of tolerance is thrown around most by the people who understand it the least.
- lm28469 5y ago
  > as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion I mean, we obviously can't. Who's going to make them provide balanced news ? no one since they're literally part of the Russian government. You can't "counter them by rational argument" if these arguments never reach the target What about islamist news ? Why don't we broadcast that freely ? Can't you provide rational arguments against that ? What about nazis, why are they banned in Germany ? Are you afraid of not having rational arguments ? > funny how the paradox of tolerance is thrown around most by the people who understand it the least. Well, I can say the same about freedom of speech...
Gareth321 5y ago
I did not argue that free speech is absolute. Merely that we should be free to try to convince each other of our premise. Even if you really, really, really don't like the other guy. Especially then. I caution you to so casually frame RT as an example of the paradox of tolerance. The byline makes it clear that this paradox was created and applied to situations where the tolerated eventually seized authoritarian power to silence the tolerant. RT, and as you rightly describe, Russia, has no hope of invading the U.S. and seizing this power. It's just Russia spouting Russian propaganda. Either you trust your citizens to freely exchange ideas - even those you really, really really, don't like - or you don't. I'm getting the feeling that you don't.
- lm28469 5y ago
  > Russia, has no hope of invading the U.S. and seizing this power. Funny that you say that knowing the role of Russian propaganda during your elections but ok