5 ms·

> Unfortunately outside the US and a handful of other places free speech doesn't seem to be valued that much, often it's even viewed as a threat Can you convin

by squigz 2y ago

> Unfortunately outside the US and a handful of other places free speech doesn't seem to be valued that much, often it's even viewed as a threat Can you convince me of this? Because it's not my impression.

throwawayfear 2y ago
Canada and the EU certainly don’t care about free speech.
- squigz 2y ago
  That comment is not doing a good job of convincing me.
  - throwawayfear 2y ago
    Are you actually open to being convinced or are you going to justify every example of those governments compelling and controlling speech?
wwtrv 2y ago
Amongst other examples: https://globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu/cases/e-s-v-austria/#:~:text=The%20European%20Court%20of%20Human,prophet%20Muhammed%20as%20a%20paedophile https://globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu/cases/e-s-v-a.... Not that I'm a particularly huge fan of some of the opinions that some of these people tend to express (to be fair in this case it's something that Muslims/their holy books acknowledge as well so it shouldn't be controversial at all...) but the whole idea of "balancing the rights to freedom of religion and expression" just seems extremely repulsive to me. Of course this is a spectrum but having an (effectively) immutable constitution that guarantees freedom of speech is certainly worth something.
- erklik 2y ago
  The issue is when "free speech absolutists" often aren't actually that. They'll stand up to defend folks like the ones from the case you cited because "Free Speech". Yet, they'll also defend laws like the ones passed earlier in the year by the US House about codifying the IHRA's definition of anti-Semitism. > spectrum The spectrum is far too often simply colored by the politics one's interested in, i.e. Free Speech is simply a tool to attack another and provide justification for their own opinions. Not an actual Free Speech position. I don't believe anyone truly has a Free Speech Absolutist position. It's always just a tool. When the speech is against you, everyone conveniently turns against it.
  - tonynator 2y ago
    >they'll also defend laws like the ones passed earlier in the year by the US House about codifying the IHRA's definition of anti-Semitism. Anyone who defended that isn't even close to a free-speech absolutist. >I don't believe anyone truly has a Free Speech Absolutist position I do. It's what makes America great. Erosions like that jewish law are slowly weakening that. You should be allowed to say whatever you want about White people, straight people, men, Christians, etc. and I should be able to say whatever I want about jews. You just don't want to acknowledge such a stance is possible because the people you agree with are in power, allow the speech you agree with, and censor the speech you don't disagree with, so you stand with nothing to gain by supporting free speech. That's a personal choice to have no integrity.
    - katbyte 2y ago
      Should I be able to make wild claims about my product to trick you into buying it? False claims about my buisness performance to pump the stock? Lies about your character? Your kids? made up stuff that whips up entire segments of your city to commit violence or vandalism against you? Because absolute free speech is allowing all that without consequence
      - tonynator 2y ago
        Yes. The free market would solve the first two, the next two aren't even crimes currently, and with the last the crime is the violence/vandalism not someone telling a fib.
vik0 2y ago
>> Unfortunately outside the US and a handful of other places free speech doesn't seem to be valued that much, often it's even viewed as a threat >Can you convince me of this? Because it's not my impression. In my country (Macedonia), our then-Prime Minister a few years ago during the height of the pandemic, spoke (broken) English and funnily pronounced vaccines, something like "vac-signs" (or "vaksajns" in Macedonian). A guy made a website called vaksajns.com or .mk (can't remember the exact details) and if you visited it, it automatically redirected you to the Ministry of Health covid watch page. Police showed up at his door and he was taken to the police station to be questioned. This would never happen in a true free speech country like the United States. Free speech in principle is enshrined in the Macedonian constitution as a fundamental right (I studied law), but there are many hate speech laws (we have a complex ethnic structure and wars based on ethnic sides), making it so that free speech isn't a thing (I studies law, if I need to clarify once more.) If you criticize someone based on their religion, ethnicity, or whatever else that they can't control, you will be fined, or worse (although this does get selectively applied, mainly based on how much political power the group has which the offended member is a part of. Roma people have no political power in this country, so this very rarely happens when they do get offended(I don't think it has ever happened to be honet))- this does not happen in the US where free speech rains supreme (to clarify, i don't think we should go around criticizing people based on things they cant control, *but once you start limiting things the people can and cannot say, you don't have free speech* in your nationstate, Period.) And what's funny, nobody talks about freedom of speech. Ever. Every political party and politicians of opposing political parties, and even their supporters have seemed to implicitly agree that it's somehow not an issue at all that the all-good state can tell you what's right and what's wrong, and what can be said and what can not be said. Another funny story. At around the same time when the previous story takes place, the government made an official dictionary of the Macedonian language, supposed to contain all of the known words, BUT excluded all of the offensive words. Talk about state censorship... What I described, more or less applies to the entire EU. Hate speech laws reign supreme in Europe. Asian countries do not have a good track record of freedom of speech, to say the least, either. I'm not sure about Africa, though I'm sure, that in the countries that do have a stable government, things aren't dissimilar when compared to European and Asian countries. I've also lived in the US, and I've observed that it's the only place in the world where free speech is, actually, free. Anybody who disagrees hasn't lived in a country other than the US *and* experienced life there. No, going to a country for 3 months back in '98 when you were in college and only going to parties does not, alas, constitute experiencing life in that country - at best you experienced party life (if you were not blackout drunk), which is a very tiny subset of life. And to the Europeans and other people except those who live in the US, trust me, you do not know, what free speech feels like, not until you can experience the true freedom to express yourself like you can in the US. If you've done extensive research on this topic, you may actually know what it is, but not the actual indescribable feeling. Also, have you ever heard of what happened in Tiananmen square, in Hong Kong a few years ago, in Prague a few centuries ago, in Kent State in the US (mind you, one of these was taken much, much, inexplainably much more seriously than the other events.) But I guess you haven't, considering you're asking people to convince you that free speech is not valued that much in countries outside the US.
technion 2y ago
Coming from Australia, everything about Westboro baptist style freedom of speech is something I'm pretty happy to not have.
t0bia_s 2y ago
Shutting down so called Russian-propaganda sites on DNS level, hate speech regulations, mantra about disinformation regulations, even though nobody can define disinformation legislatively, remove access to bank accounts because of supporting protest against goverment, unavailable books to buy that are too extreme even though few years ago they were fine... It's all driven by politics.
- Wytwwww 2y ago
  > Shutting down so called Russian-propaganda sites That's a significant disadvantage democracies that embrace freedom of speech have, though. China/Russia/other authoritarian shitholes have a very easy time shaping, blocking or severely limiting information spread from the outside world. Trying to play nice against a side which is cheating and playing dirty isn't exactly a winning strategy...
  - t0bia_s 2y ago
    If one loves democracy, the argument runs, one must crush its enemies by no matter what means. And who are its enemies? It always appears that they are not only those who attack it openly and consciously, but those who ‘objectively’ endanger it by spreading mistaken doctrines. In other words, defending democracy involves destroying all independence of thought. George Orwell https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/the-freedom-of-the-press/ https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwel... Btw even Nazi radio broadcasting was not blocked during WW2 in GB.
    - Wytwwww 2y ago
      > Btw even Nazi radio broadcasting was not blocked during WW2 in GB. No, they just executed their announcer for treason just for what he said on radio and accepting German citizenship (and it was not even clear he was legally a British subject to begin with...). Also jamming it back then wouldn't have been that easy and worthwhile also the Nazis occasionally allowed POWs to send messages to their families back home. Btw the scale of censorship and other measures restricting the freedom of speech in Allied states during WW2 (or WW1 for that matter) were was extreme by modern standards.

by squigz 2y ago

throwawayfear 2y ago

Canada and the EU certainly don’t care about free speech.

squigz 2y ago
That comment is not doing a good job of convincing me.
- throwawayfear 2y ago
  Are you actually open to being convinced or are you going to justify every example of those governments compelling and controlling speech?

wwtrv 2y ago

Amongst other examples: https://globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu/cases/e-s-v-austria/#:~:text=The%20European%20Court%20of%20Human,prophet%20Muhammed%20as%20a%20paedophile https://globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu/cases/e-s-v-a.... Not that I'm a particularly huge fan of some of the opinions that some of these people tend to express (to be fair in this case it's something that Muslims/their holy books acknowledge as well so it shouldn't be controversial at all...) but the whole idea of "balancing the rights to freedom of religion and expression" just seems extremely repulsive to me. Of course this is a spectrum but having an (effectively) immutable constitution that guarantees freedom of speech is certainly worth something.

erklik 2y ago
The issue is when "free speech absolutists" often aren't actually that. They'll stand up to defend folks like the ones from the case you cited because "Free Speech". Yet, they'll also defend laws like the ones passed earlier in the year by the US House about codifying the IHRA's definition of anti-Semitism. > spectrum The spectrum is far too often simply colored by the politics one's interested in, i.e. Free Speech is simply a tool to attack another and provide justification for their own opinions. Not an actual Free Speech position. I don't believe anyone truly has a Free Speech Absolutist position. It's always just a tool. When the speech is against you, everyone conveniently turns against it.
- tonynator 2y ago
  >they'll also defend laws like the ones passed earlier in the year by the US House about codifying the IHRA's definition of anti-Semitism. Anyone who defended that isn't even close to a free-speech absolutist. >I don't believe anyone truly has a Free Speech Absolutist position I do. It's what makes America great. Erosions like that jewish law are slowly weakening that. You should be allowed to say whatever you want about White people, straight people, men, Christians, etc. and I should be able to say whatever I want about jews. You just don't want to acknowledge such a stance is possible because the people you agree with are in power, allow the speech you agree with, and censor the speech you don't disagree with, so you stand with nothing to gain by supporting free speech. That's a personal choice to have no integrity.
  - katbyte 2y ago
    Should I be able to make wild claims about my product to trick you into buying it? False claims about my buisness performance to pump the stock? Lies about your character? Your kids? made up stuff that whips up entire segments of your city to commit violence or vandalism against you? Because absolute free speech is allowing all that without consequence
    - tonynator 2y ago
      Yes. The free market would solve the first two, the next two aren't even crimes currently, and with the last the crime is the violence/vandalism not someone telling a fib.

vik0 2y ago

>> Unfortunately outside the US and a handful of other places free speech doesn't seem to be valued that much, often it's even viewed as a threat >Can you convince me of this? Because it's not my impression. In my country (Macedonia), our then-Prime Minister a few years ago during the height of the pandemic, spoke (broken) English and funnily pronounced vaccines, something like "vac-signs" (or "vaksajns" in Macedonian). A guy made a website called vaksajns.com or .mk (can't remember the exact details) and if you visited it, it automatically redirected you to the Ministry of Health covid watch page. Police showed up at his door and he was taken to the police station to be questioned. This would never happen in a true free speech country like the United States. Free speech in principle is enshrined in the Macedonian constitution as a fundamental right (I studied law), but there are many hate speech laws (we have a complex ethnic structure and wars based on ethnic sides), making it so that free speech isn't a thing (I studies law, if I need to clarify once more.) If you criticize someone based on their religion, ethnicity, or whatever else that they can't control, you will be fined, or worse (although this does get selectively applied, mainly based on how much political power the group has which the offended member is a part of. Roma people have no political power in this country, so this very rarely happens when they do get offended(I don't think it has ever happened to be honet))- this does not happen in the US where free speech rains supreme (to clarify, i don't think we should go around criticizing people based on things they cant control, *but once you start limiting things the people can and cannot say, you don't have free speech* in your nationstate, Period.) And what's funny, nobody talks about freedom of speech. Ever. Every political party and politicians of opposing political parties, and even their supporters have seemed to implicitly agree that it's somehow not an issue at all that the all-good state can tell you what's right and what's wrong, and what can be said and what can not be said. Another funny story. At around the same time when the previous story takes place, the government made an official dictionary of the Macedonian language, supposed to contain all of the known words, BUT excluded all of the offensive words. Talk about state censorship... What I described, more or less applies to the entire EU. Hate speech laws reign supreme in Europe. Asian countries do not have a good track record of freedom of speech, to say the least, either. I'm not sure about Africa, though I'm sure, that in the countries that do have a stable government, things aren't dissimilar when compared to European and Asian countries. I've also lived in the US, and I've observed that it's the only place in the world where free speech is, actually, free. Anybody who disagrees hasn't lived in a country other than the US *and* experienced life there. No, going to a country for 3 months back in '98 when you were in college and only going to parties does not, alas, constitute experiencing life in that country - at best you experienced party life (if you were not blackout drunk), which is a very tiny subset of life. And to the Europeans and other people except those who live in the US, trust me, you do not know, what free speech feels like, not until you can experience the true freedom to express yourself like you can in the US. If you've done extensive research on this topic, you may actually know what it is, but not the actual indescribable feeling. Also, have you ever heard of what happened in Tiananmen square, in Hong Kong a few years ago, in Prague a few centuries ago, in Kent State in the US (mind you, one of these was taken much, much, inexplainably much more seriously than the other events.) But I guess you haven't, considering you're asking people to convince you that free speech is not valued that much in countries outside the US.

technion 2y ago

Coming from Australia, everything about Westboro baptist style freedom of speech is something I'm pretty happy to not have.

t0bia_s 2y ago

Shutting down so called Russian-propaganda sites on DNS level, hate speech regulations, mantra about disinformation regulations, even though nobody can define disinformation legislatively, remove access to bank accounts because of supporting protest against goverment, unavailable books to buy that are too extreme even though few years ago they were fine... It's all driven by politics.

Wytwwww 2y ago
> Shutting down so called Russian-propaganda sites That's a significant disadvantage democracies that embrace freedom of speech have, though. China/Russia/other authoritarian shitholes have a very easy time shaping, blocking or severely limiting information spread from the outside world. Trying to play nice against a side which is cheating and playing dirty isn't exactly a winning strategy...
- t0bia_s 2y ago
  If one loves democracy, the argument runs, one must crush its enemies by no matter what means. And who are its enemies? It always appears that they are not only those who attack it openly and consciously, but those who ‘objectively’ endanger it by spreading mistaken doctrines. In other words, defending democracy involves destroying all independence of thought. George Orwell https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwell/essays-and-other-works/the-freedom-of-the-press/ https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwel... Btw even Nazi radio broadcasting was not blocked during WW2 in GB.
  - Wytwwww 2y ago
    > Btw even Nazi radio broadcasting was not blocked during WW2 in GB. No, they just executed their announcer for treason just for what he said on radio and accepting German citizenship (and it was not even clear he was legally a British subject to begin with...). Also jamming it back then wouldn't have been that easy and worthwhile also the Nazis occasionally allowed POWs to send messages to their families back home. Btw the scale of censorship and other measures restricting the freedom of speech in Allied states during WW2 (or WW1 for that matter) were was extreme by modern standards.