3 ms·
Yes, absolutely :) I agree with grayness, I just happen to draw my line fairly, for lack of better word, liberally - and specifically so that we Can, to your p
by NikolaNovak 5y ago
Yes, absolutely :)
I agree with grayness, I just happen to draw my line fairly, for lack of better word, liberally - and specifically so that we Can, to your point, discuss ideas productively as a society - something that censorship explicitly and by definition prevents! I am a proponent of marketplace of ideas and open discussion.
To your example, I do not see German laws making denial of holocaust as even remotely effective. I believe they are in fact counter productive - I've met people who use them to confirm the notion of "Jewish conspiracy". I do not agree with these people! But I'd rather have them spew their nonsense in the open, and be able to freely tell them they're wrong, unhindered by naive and ineffective at best attempts at censorship.
(speed driving laws are not censorship in any way that I've seen the word defined. Not every law is censorship, not every action is speech/communication).
- Pyramus 5y agoI'm not sure I understand your reasoning - why would some negative effects of an intervention automatically invalidate the positive effects? If you don't think there are plenty of positive effects, feel free to speak to somebody from the German Jewish community and see how they think about it. Which is my point - in a democracy restrictions to the rights of individuals are there to protect the rights of others. This rationale is shared by many restrictions to individual rights, hence the speed limit example.