4 ms·

> 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

> 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

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.