3 ms·

It's not quite that simple - not only can absolute free speech be absurd (a condition I don't really care about to be honest, untruth will always be prevalent),

It's not quite that simple - not only can absolute free speech be absurd (a condition I don't really care about to be honest, untruth will always be prevalent), but it can be actively dangerous: free speech can include terrorist radicalisation, trying to convince people to join perform suicide bombings or shoot up churches. Much of the far right radicalisation in recent years has occurred in Internet forums. That's not to say that the answer is obvious, but the current setup that we have where only the most egregious speech and harassment is explicitly banned and social norms are enforced by social pressure seems to work. I think a lot of people advocating for free speech are ambiguous as to whether they're arguing against explicit censorship or against social pressure, which can obscure the conversation.

cwkoss 4y ago
"Terrorist radicalization" is a nonsense buzzword cultivated by warmongers and governments trying to manufacture consent for oppression. Terrorists are radicalized by material conditions, the speech that is claimed to radicalize them is part of the process but it is not causal. Western imperialism created ISIS, not a handful of bloggers who are mad about it. Do you think if you read ISIS propaganda you'd feel compelled to join, or is the speech itself not the primary factor in radicalization?
- beaconstudios 4y ago
  I agree 100%, material conditions are the initial cause, but that outside the affected area that simply causes disaffection - terrorist propaganda directs that disaffection towards killing civilians. Given that far right radicals are created by the material conditions of late capitalism and misdirected towards hating minorities by propaganda, the only thing we can really do about that (aside from trying to change those conditions, which we should already be doing) is to try to avoid them being contacted by fascists looking to utilise their anger.

cwkoss 4y ago

"Terrorist radicalization" is a nonsense buzzword cultivated by warmongers and governments trying to manufacture consent for oppression. Terrorists are radicalized by material conditions, the speech that is claimed to radicalize them is part of the process but it is not causal. Western imperialism created ISIS, not a handful of bloggers who are mad about it. Do you think if you read ISIS propaganda you'd feel compelled to join, or is the speech itself not the primary factor in radicalization?

beaconstudios 4y ago
I agree 100%, material conditions are the initial cause, but that outside the affected area that simply causes disaffection - terrorist propaganda directs that disaffection towards killing civilians. Given that far right radicals are created by the material conditions of late capitalism and misdirected towards hating minorities by propaganda, the only thing we can really do about that (aside from trying to change those conditions, which we should already be doing) is to try to avoid them being contacted by fascists looking to utilise their anger.