5 ms·

>I'm scared because every day or two I see another article on HN that uses Free Speech, a precious and vital political freedom, as a way of spreading fear and h

>I'm scared because every day or two I see another article on HN that uses Free Speech, a precious and vital political freedom, as a way of spreading fear and hate. And I see the heads nodding along. And you, like seemingly increasing amounts of people, fail to understand the mechanics of free speech. The part you don't understand is that hate is protected. And that is just as important to protect as any other free speech.

fzeroracer 4y ago
Well no, depending on where you live 'hate' is not protected for one. And for two, it should be obvious that there is no such even handed methods of protection going on, considering how quickly Twitter is banning even mildly left-leaning voices under false pretenses elevated by liars and charlatans. There is no 'free speech' being protected. It's speech for me and not for thee. Which is hypocritical coming from Musk.
- the_doctah 4y ago
  I didn't say anything about Twitter.
- luckylion 4y ago
  > Twitter is banning even mildly left-leaning voices under false pretenses elevated by liars and charlatans. Who? That one comedian who impersonated Musk? She has been reinstated, hasn't she?
  - 1attice 4y ago
    off the top of my head: Crimethinc, a relatively boring and old leftist site, was banned recently and not reinstated AFAIK. There was that Friedman guy yesterday. Refusing to stick out your hand does not make the rain go away.
    - luckylion 4y ago
      They were banned a few days ago, it seems -- unclear why, it sounds like the called for violence (against Tesla no less), but it's so full of "the capitalist fascists are murdering us"-crazy-level rhetoric that it's hard to find out what happened. I don't know who "that Friedman guy" is, but I did read that Musk announced a general amnesty. No clue if they are included, I assume it depends on the (given) reason for the ban. It's hard to tell. Whenever I look at something on Twitter, I still see left-wingers posting, but I assume if they're not banned they're not real leftists and that's not a counter-example etc. Movements should really go back to officially recognizing members so we can discuss these things more easily!
      - 1attice 4y ago
        Dude, the capitalist spent 44 BILLION dollars to fight the "woke mind virus". He proceeded by inducing Twitter to shed most of its LGBT, Black and female workforce -- those before/after team pics are gutting, and easily googled. You get that that is literally how fascism do, right? This phase is called "Gleischaltung".
        indy 4y ago
        It's difficult to argue about the woke mind virus with someone who is suffering from the woke mind virus. Not everything is fascism.
        1attice 4y ago
        describing your opponent as "infected" is, in the most literal sense, dehumanizing. In this instance, for example, you used it as an excuse to stop thinking and talking. That's all that's needed. It scales. Fascism is a process, not a toggle. And currently, it's processing you. Read your Adrendt. I am also available on this thread to continue explaining it.
        indy 4y ago
        Oh no, you've caught me red handed 1attice, I am indeed a fascist. I would have gotten away with it if it weren't for your brilliant insight, you truly are an amazing person protecting the marginalised communities from evil. Truly a life well spent, your father must be very proud to have a son like you.
yunwal 4y ago
- the_doctah 4y ago
  Nazi rhetoric is so lazy and reddited. And your comment is useless without examples. With anti-free-speech advocates continually trying to expand the definition of what constitutes "hate speech", we could be talking about totally different things.
  - greenhorn360 4y ago
    [flagged]
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - kinnic 4y ago
      Only a fraction of the people being referred to as Nazis in contemporary, largely-online discourse are saying anything close to this though. It's a routinely misapplied term.
    - the_doctah 4y ago
      The examples you're using have always been illegal. Threats, libel, slander will get your speech removed from any platform. I don't know too much about their correlation with Nazism though.
      - yunwal 4y ago
        Threats, libel, and slander must be directed towards a specific person
      - 1attice 4y ago
        Well, what about something like 'The Libs of Tiktok', a Twitter account that routinely posts the home addresses of trans people? They get away with this by posting the address on its own, but against a trans-symbol background. Technically, they haven't threatened anyone, but the threat of stochastic violence is legimately chilling to that 'vigorous open free speech debate' that we supposedly all want, and that is so untroubling to so many freeze-peachers speaks volumes. You can have physical intimidation or free speech, pick any one.
1attice 4y ago
I'm always distressed when Americans act like this isn't a problem that Germany's strong anti-hate laws had to solve years ago, successfully. Which isn't to say that hate speech is solved problem in Germany -- but this ontological handwringing about separating it from regular speech is disingenuous. See https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/germanys-laws-antisemitic-hate-speech-nazi-propaganda-holocaust-denial/ https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/germanys-laws-ant... for example. My understanding (as a non-German citizen who lived there for a year, in the '00s) is that while the line between hate speech and regular speech might be open to debate in Germany, no one debates that there is a line. In other words, the existence of the distinction is recognized even though it is irredeemably vague. This is important: there is a recognized, valid ontological category for vague distinctions! To non-American ears, the U.S. debate around free speech sounds a lot like one person shouting 'squares and circles are different and can be treated differently,' and another pointing out that, because squircles exist, the slope is too slippery to acknowledge the reality of squares and circles. But you know what? You can still make one of these pretty good: https://www.etsy.com/nz/listing/867606078/fisher-price-shape-sorter-ball-for?show_sold_out_detail=1&ref=nla_listing_details https://www.etsy.com/nz/listing/867606078/fisher-price-shape... This pattern is employed on both sides of the aisle -- my fellow leftists do it to, particularly around issues of gender. (And I say that as a trans woman.) The only thing worse than a pink-is-for-girls transphobe coming at me and telling me that gender isn't real is a nonbinary polyamorous anarchist telling me that gender isn't real, and those are basically my options in 2022. The next protest I attend, I'm bringing a sign saying 'clastic, ad-hoc, and vague ontological distinctions are still real distinctions' but this is why I'm not really invited to protests

fzeroracer 4y ago

Well no, depending on where you live 'hate' is not protected for one. And for two, it should be obvious that there is no such even handed methods of protection going on, considering how quickly Twitter is banning even mildly left-leaning voices under false pretenses elevated by liars and charlatans. There is no 'free speech' being protected. It's speech for me and not for thee. Which is hypocritical coming from Musk.

the_doctah 4y ago
I didn't say anything about Twitter.
luckylion 4y ago
> Twitter is banning even mildly left-leaning voices under false pretenses elevated by liars and charlatans. Who? That one comedian who impersonated Musk? She has been reinstated, hasn't she?
- 1attice 4y ago
  off the top of my head: Crimethinc, a relatively boring and old leftist site, was banned recently and not reinstated AFAIK. There was that Friedman guy yesterday. Refusing to stick out your hand does not make the rain go away.
  - luckylion 4y ago
    They were banned a few days ago, it seems -- unclear why, it sounds like the called for violence (against Tesla no less), but it's so full of "the capitalist fascists are murdering us"-crazy-level rhetoric that it's hard to find out what happened. I don't know who "that Friedman guy" is, but I did read that Musk announced a general amnesty. No clue if they are included, I assume it depends on the (given) reason for the ban. It's hard to tell. Whenever I look at something on Twitter, I still see left-wingers posting, but I assume if they're not banned they're not real leftists and that's not a counter-example etc. Movements should really go back to officially recognizing members so we can discuss these things more easily!
    - 1attice 4y ago
      Dude, the capitalist spent 44 BILLION dollars to fight the "woke mind virus". He proceeded by inducing Twitter to shed most of its LGBT, Black and female workforce -- those before/after team pics are gutting, and easily googled. You get that that is literally how fascism do, right? This phase is called "Gleischaltung".
      - indy 4y ago
        It's difficult to argue about the woke mind virus with someone who is suffering from the woke mind virus. Not everything is fascism.
        1attice 4y ago
        describing your opponent as "infected" is, in the most literal sense, dehumanizing. In this instance, for example, you used it as an excuse to stop thinking and talking. That's all that's needed. It scales. Fascism is a process, not a toggle. And currently, it's processing you. Read your Adrendt. I am also available on this thread to continue explaining it.
        indy 4y ago
        Oh no, you've caught me red handed 1attice, I am indeed a fascist. I would have gotten away with it if it weren't for your brilliant insight, you truly are an amazing person protecting the marginalised communities from evil. Truly a life well spent, your father must be very proud to have a son like you.

yunwal 4y ago

the_doctah 4y ago
Nazi rhetoric is so lazy and reddited. And your comment is useless without examples. With anti-free-speech advocates continually trying to expand the definition of what constitutes "hate speech", we could be talking about totally different things.
- greenhorn360 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - kinnic 4y ago
    Only a fraction of the people being referred to as Nazis in contemporary, largely-online discourse are saying anything close to this though. It's a routinely misapplied term.
  - the_doctah 4y ago
    The examples you're using have always been illegal. Threats, libel, slander will get your speech removed from any platform. I don't know too much about their correlation with Nazism though.
    - yunwal 4y ago
      Threats, libel, and slander must be directed towards a specific person
    - 1attice 4y ago
      Well, what about something like 'The Libs of Tiktok', a Twitter account that routinely posts the home addresses of trans people? They get away with this by posting the address on its own, but against a trans-symbol background. Technically, they haven't threatened anyone, but the threat of stochastic violence is legimately chilling to that 'vigorous open free speech debate' that we supposedly all want, and that is so untroubling to so many freeze-peachers speaks volumes. You can have physical intimidation or free speech, pick any one.

1attice 4y ago

I'm always distressed when Americans act like this isn't a problem that Germany's strong anti-hate laws had to solve years ago, successfully. Which isn't to say that hate speech is solved problem in Germany -- but this ontological handwringing about separating it from regular speech is disingenuous. See https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/germanys-laws-antisemitic-hate-speech-nazi-propaganda-holocaust-denial/ https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/germanys-laws-ant... for example. My understanding (as a non-German citizen who lived there for a year, in the '00s) is that while the line between hate speech and regular speech might be open to debate in Germany, no one debates that there is a line. In other words, the existence of the distinction is recognized even though it is irredeemably vague. This is important: there is a recognized, valid ontological category for vague distinctions! To non-American ears, the U.S. debate around free speech sounds a lot like one person shouting 'squares and circles are different and can be treated differently,' and another pointing out that, because squircles exist, the slope is too slippery to acknowledge the reality of squares and circles. But you know what? You can still make one of these pretty good: https://www.etsy.com/nz/listing/867606078/fisher-price-shape-sorter-ball-for?show_sold_out_detail=1&ref=nla_listing_details https://www.etsy.com/nz/listing/867606078/fisher-price-shape... This pattern is employed on both sides of the aisle -- my fellow leftists do it to, particularly around issues of gender. (And I say that as a trans woman.) The only thing worse than a pink-is-for-girls transphobe coming at me and telling me that gender isn't real is a nonbinary polyamorous anarchist telling me that gender isn't real, and those are basically my options in 2022. The next protest I attend, I'm bringing a sign saying 'clastic, ad-hoc, and vague ontological distinctions are still real distinctions' but this is why I'm not really invited to protests