5 ms·

Just for context on the publication here - "Persuasion" seems to be a Substack blog run by Yascha Mounk, a US political commentator who's mostly known for campa

Just for context on the publication here - "Persuasion" seems to be a Substack blog run by Yascha Mounk, a US political commentator who's mostly known for campaigning against "multinationalism" in Germany. The points made in the article aren't a reflection of broad public sentiment within Ireland - in particular the following statement: > Despite outcry from civil-liberties activists, the bill sailed through the lower house of Irish Parliament Civil-liberties activists within Ireland are overwhelmingly in favour of the bill. The word "outcry" links to an article reporting that Donald Trump Jr is against the bill, and that the Irish Council for Civil Liberties supports it. In short: this is blogspam wildly misrepresenting its own references.

raxxorraxor 3y ago
I would imagine that some civil liberties unions would have a lot of trouble with criminalizing "hatred". Not sure how accurate that fits the bill, but if it does, it wouldn't be the brightest bill among the stars or Ireland presumably.
- lucideer 3y ago
  Are you referring to American civil liberties unions, or Irish? I would recommend familiarising yourself with the bill & contributions to it from actual Irish bodies - its being carefully scrutinised & debated already, with a lot of nuance covered.
  - raxxorraxor 3y ago
    Neither nor, I assume some universality among civil liberty unions. You maybe can sanction insults, although I wouldn't recommend that either, but can not legislate hate, love, solidarity or apathy. It is a fantasy and will surely at some point collide with the freedom of individuals, which civil liberty unions should protect.
    - lucideer 3y ago
      > I assume some universality among civil liberty unions This seems like an extremely naive outline which I would read as basically saying "I assume everyone in the world should align with my personal cultural perspective". > can not legislate hate This is in my experience an Americanism that isn't particularly widely shared outside of the US.
      - raxxorraxor 3y ago
        The universal declaration of human rights might be naive politically, that is true, but another topic and then it must be true for every civil liberty people fight for. I am not American, although I am kind fond of the US for their focus on freedom, which is a strong requirement for any liberty as well.
        lucideer 3y ago
        > The universal declaration of human rights might be naive This isn't remotely what I said. > their focus on freedom Freedom is a word the definition of which can be, and very much is, twisted to most people's agenda. Being fond of freedom is a meaningless statement in isolation, without an accompanying discourse on the meaning of that freedom. The US record on freedom in practice is exceptionally poor when compared to the rest of the world. There's certainly a strong focus on talking about it but I've seen very little evidence of delivering on it.
        raxxorraxor 3y ago
        > This isn't remotely what I said. It was just my case that some liberties might be universal. > Freedom is a word the definition of which can be, and very much is, twisted to most people's agenda. That is true, but it is a positive definition. When in doubt make the case for freedom. This is different when we talk about hatred or expressions of it. I do think the US makes some wrong decisions when it comes to social responsibility, out of the question. But I have even less doubt that hatred will an umbrella term to restrict speech. We already see instances of such cases today.

raxxorraxor 3y ago

I would imagine that some civil liberties unions would have a lot of trouble with criminalizing "hatred". Not sure how accurate that fits the bill, but if it does, it wouldn't be the brightest bill among the stars or Ireland presumably.

lucideer 3y ago
Are you referring to American civil liberties unions, or Irish? I would recommend familiarising yourself with the bill & contributions to it from actual Irish bodies - its being carefully scrutinised & debated already, with a lot of nuance covered.
- raxxorraxor 3y ago
  Neither nor, I assume some universality among civil liberty unions. You maybe can sanction insults, although I wouldn't recommend that either, but can not legislate hate, love, solidarity or apathy. It is a fantasy and will surely at some point collide with the freedom of individuals, which civil liberty unions should protect.
  - lucideer 3y ago
    > I assume some universality among civil liberty unions This seems like an extremely naive outline which I would read as basically saying "I assume everyone in the world should align with my personal cultural perspective". > can not legislate hate This is in my experience an Americanism that isn't particularly widely shared outside of the US.
    - raxxorraxor 3y ago
      The universal declaration of human rights might be naive politically, that is true, but another topic and then it must be true for every civil liberty people fight for. I am not American, although I am kind fond of the US for their focus on freedom, which is a strong requirement for any liberty as well.
      - lucideer 3y ago
        > The universal declaration of human rights might be naive This isn't remotely what I said. > their focus on freedom Freedom is a word the definition of which can be, and very much is, twisted to most people's agenda. Being fond of freedom is a meaningless statement in isolation, without an accompanying discourse on the meaning of that freedom. The US record on freedom in practice is exceptionally poor when compared to the rest of the world. There's certainly a strong focus on talking about it but I've seen very little evidence of delivering on it.
        raxxorraxor 3y ago
        > This isn't remotely what I said. It was just my case that some liberties might be universal. > Freedom is a word the definition of which can be, and very much is, twisted to most people's agenda. That is true, but it is a positive definition. When in doubt make the case for freedom. This is different when we talk about hatred or expressions of it. I do think the US makes some wrong decisions when it comes to social responsibility, out of the question. But I have even less doubt that hatred will an umbrella term to restrict speech. We already see instances of such cases today.