2 ms·

"Free Speech" in the west is the concept that the government cannot use its power to silence your opinions or expression. It has been co-opted fairly recently

"Free Speech" in the west is the concept that the government cannot use its power to silence your opinions or expression. It has been co-opted fairly recently -by some- to mean that no one can silence you anywhere. This is a new interpretation, and unrelated to the USA constitutional right to free speech. This has never been the case. If you say something offensive to me in my house, I can rightfully remove you. You can continue to say the thing somewhere else, just not in a private house. Hacker News -in this instance- is a private house. If they allowed unlimited free speech, they would have to allow personal attacks, spam, off-topic submissions, etc... Part of the value of HN is that the speech IS NOT free. You and I can come here and trust that the conversations will meet a standard, banning people who flagrantly abuse that standard is also a form of free speech. edit: after seeing your edit, it looks like this is a disingenuous question intended to start a flamewar. If that isn't your intention, you should be careful about how you phrase things.

wawjgreen 4y ago
- dghlsakjg 4y ago
  I'm not dang, so I can only speculate, but I would argue that the original comment is very close to a personal attack, and the comment was not made in good faith. Likewise, I would caution you about your own phrasing, particularly << So, there--the enlightened, FREE Western man or woman or "it", please tell me, is your freedom of speech an illusion and only applicable to Moslems? >> You have had your question answered thoroughly, but you have escalated to examples that have already been explained (in one sentence: private companies can choose what to publish (Hebdo) and what not to publish (HN, Twitter) without government interference), and chosen a phrasing that is generally acknowledged to be insulting to non-gender conforming individuals. This isn't a debate in intellectual good faith.

wawjgreen 4y ago

dghlsakjg 4y ago
I'm not dang, so I can only speculate, but I would argue that the original comment is very close to a personal attack, and the comment was not made in good faith. Likewise, I would caution you about your own phrasing, particularly << So, there--the enlightened, FREE Western man or woman or "it", please tell me, is your freedom of speech an illusion and only applicable to Moslems? >> You have had your question answered thoroughly, but you have escalated to examples that have already been explained (in one sentence: private companies can choose what to publish (Hebdo) and what not to publish (HN, Twitter) without government interference), and chosen a phrasing that is generally acknowledged to be insulting to non-gender conforming individuals. This isn't a debate in intellectual good faith.