3 ms·

Agreed, we have a justice system based on what we agreed as a society. The rule of law. If you want to prohibit speech to white supremacists, fine, let’s pass

Agreed, we have a justice system based on what we agreed as a society. The rule of law. If you want to prohibit speech to white supremacists, fine, let’s pass a law and if it doesn’t hold constitutional muster, go ahead convince everyone to amend the constitution. But since our founding fathers made this process difficult on purpose, let’s take a different approach: that’s what social justice is. It is anti-democratic mob lunacy where corporations and governments are playing a proxy authoritarian game.

robert_foss 4y ago
I do believe hate speech is illegal already. Certainly online harassment leading to someone committing suicide is. KF is a platform that facilitates these activities.
- yanderekko 4y ago
  >Certainly online harassment leading to someone committing suicide is. Documenting people's lives is not harassment.
  - robert_foss 4y ago
    It most definitely can be. To have all of your privacy taken away from you.
  - paulmd 4y ago
    Which jurisdiction are you speaking about? Do you have legal qualifications to dispense this advice? The US is rather unique in their absolutist view of free speech and other countries don't work the same way. Generally, for example, this would be a violation of UK law.
- whalecancer 4y ago
- pessimizer 4y ago
  Neither of those things are illegal in the US.
- Natsu 4y ago
  > I do believe hate speech is illegal already. Not in the USA, no. https://www.popehat.com/2015/05/19/how-to-spot-and-critique-censorship-tropes-in-the-medias-coverage-of-free-speech-controversies/ https://www.popehat.com/2015/05/19/how-to-spot-and-critique-... > Certainly online harassment leading to someone committing suicide is. Harassment can be, but here "harassment" means making threats of violence, not just criticizing someone. That falls under "true threats": https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1025/true-threats https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1025/true-threats Note that the older "fighting words" doctrine is probably obsolete and even then only applies to face-to-face conversation. For more on that see the prior link to Popehat.
chc 4y ago
This appears to be describing a parallel universe. The justice system we have in America today is arcane, strongly favors monied interests, is subject to perverse incentives ("tough on crime" DAs, lack of interest in pursuing crimes against groups without institutional power), frequently produces results that go against the common understanding of what is just, and is generally inaccessible to the most vulnerable people in society. The idea that this is what "we agreed as a society" is absurd. The justice system is a thing that evolved in our society largely as a result of powerful people feeding it when it protects their interests.
- systemvoltage 4y ago
  I think US has one of the best judicial systems, if not the very best in the world. I loathe about American exceptionalism, but the constitution and American legal system truly is: https://youtu.be/Ggz_gd--UO0 https://youtu.be/Ggz_gd--UO0
- infamouscow 4y ago
  > The idea that this is what "we agreed as a society" is absurd. The justice system is a thing that evolved in our society largely as a result of powerful people feeding it when it protects their interests. The people elect representatives to pass and/or change laws. What you're saying is we should disregard voting because you know best - an argument famously supported by every genocidal maniac in the 20th century.
joshuamorton 4y ago
Read the 10th amendment. The powers not delegated to the government are delegated to the states, or to the people. What you describe as "social justice" is constitutional, if you want to fix that, change the constitution and make it illegal, but you're quite right, the founders made that difficult, perhaps because they believed mob justice had its place sometimes, I mean in the eyes of the British, what were the Unionists but a mob rallying behind blatantly illegal ideas?

robert_foss 4y ago

I do believe hate speech is illegal already. Certainly online harassment leading to someone committing suicide is. KF is a platform that facilitates these activities.

yanderekko 4y ago
>Certainly online harassment leading to someone committing suicide is. Documenting people's lives is not harassment.
- robert_foss 4y ago
  It most definitely can be. To have all of your privacy taken away from you.
- paulmd 4y ago
  Which jurisdiction are you speaking about? Do you have legal qualifications to dispense this advice? The US is rather unique in their absolutist view of free speech and other countries don't work the same way. Generally, for example, this would be a violation of UK law.
whalecancer 4y ago
pessimizer 4y ago
Neither of those things are illegal in the US.
Natsu 4y ago
> I do believe hate speech is illegal already. Not in the USA, no. https://www.popehat.com/2015/05/19/how-to-spot-and-critique-censorship-tropes-in-the-medias-coverage-of-free-speech-controversies/ https://www.popehat.com/2015/05/19/how-to-spot-and-critique-... > Certainly online harassment leading to someone committing suicide is. Harassment can be, but here "harassment" means making threats of violence, not just criticizing someone. That falls under "true threats": https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1025/true-threats https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1025/true-threats Note that the older "fighting words" doctrine is probably obsolete and even then only applies to face-to-face conversation. For more on that see the prior link to Popehat.

chc 4y ago

This appears to be describing a parallel universe. The justice system we have in America today is arcane, strongly favors monied interests, is subject to perverse incentives ("tough on crime" DAs, lack of interest in pursuing crimes against groups without institutional power), frequently produces results that go against the common understanding of what is just, and is generally inaccessible to the most vulnerable people in society. The idea that this is what "we agreed as a society" is absurd. The justice system is a thing that evolved in our society largely as a result of powerful people feeding it when it protects their interests.

systemvoltage 4y ago
I think US has one of the best judicial systems, if not the very best in the world. I loathe about American exceptionalism, but the constitution and American legal system truly is: https://youtu.be/Ggz_gd--UO0 https://youtu.be/Ggz_gd--UO0
infamouscow 4y ago
> The idea that this is what "we agreed as a society" is absurd. The justice system is a thing that evolved in our society largely as a result of powerful people feeding it when it protects their interests. The people elect representatives to pass and/or change laws. What you're saying is we should disregard voting because you know best - an argument famously supported by every genocidal maniac in the 20th century.

joshuamorton 4y ago

Read the 10th amendment. The powers not delegated to the government are delegated to the states, or to the people. What you describe as "social justice" is constitutional, if you want to fix that, change the constitution and make it illegal, but you're quite right, the founders made that difficult, perhaps because they believed mob justice had its place sometimes, I mean in the eyes of the British, what were the Unionists but a mob rallying behind blatantly illegal ideas?