4 ms·

> Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences. How is the US different from any other country in history in that regard? You can be in North Kor

> Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences. How is the US different from any other country in history in that regard? You can be in North Korea and freely criticize the government, you're just not gonna be "free from the consequences". Turns out, being protected from the 'consequences' is what actually matters.

Dalewyn 2y ago
You can say Boe Jiden is a purple Martian born in Backwaterstan. Boe Jiden will probably sue you for defamation. The courts will very likely give him the win, slamming you with a hefty fine and perhaps more such as prison time depending on the damages your speech incurred. You can say Boe Jiden is a purple Martian born in Backwaterstan again, so long as you're fine going through that rigmarole again though you'll probably face even heftier penalties. You are in no way prevented from voicing your thoughts because the 1st Amendment guarantees your right to do so. You can only ever be prosecuted for the consequences, such as the fallout from making false statements.
- anal_reactor 2y ago
  You have exactly described how freedom of speech works in North Korea. You are allowed to say "I think that Kim is a bad leader", which is guaranteed by the article 67 of The Socialist Constitution of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. But this doesn't mean you can spread untrue claims and cause societal disrupt, so Kim arrests you for your reckless actions and you go to gulag. Again, freedom of speech exists in North Korea and it's protected by law, it's just that you're not free from the consequences of abusing freedom of speech.
  - Dalewyn 2y ago
    Free speech protects you from prosecution against your speech. The consequences of that speech are a separate matter and not protected by the 1st Amendment. Again, note precisely what is prosecuted here in the US where free speech is a guaranteed Constitutional right. You can with absolute power say whatever you want, but you will need to own up to it. If you don't or can't own up to what you say, don't speak. This isn't a violation of free speech because nobody is prohibiting or otherwise compelling you from speaking.
    - anal_reactor 2y ago
      You still haven't explained how is that different from North Korea.
      - Wytwwww 2y ago
        Is this some sort of sarcasm?
        anal_reactor 2y ago
        "Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from being punished for saying things" I'm sorry but there's no universe in which this makes any sense. Either we say that people are free to express their opinions, or we punish people for saying things we don't like. Can't have both at the same time. The other guy used the argument "but the US constitution guarantees freedom of speech" yeah so does North Korean, argument invalid. I don't understand why this step "if people can be punished for saying something then they don't have freedom of speech" isn't an obvious logical statement.
        Wytwwww 2y ago
        What do you mean by "punished"? You have the right to say whatever you want just like I have the right to not listen to what you're saying, not to employ you, not buy goods/services from you and to encourage my friends to do the same (we're both exercising our right to the freedom of speech). > but the US constitution guarantees freedom of speech" yeah so does North Korean, argument invalid. Well courts in the US are somewhat independent and generally tend to usually adhere to that part of the US constitution when making decisions. North Korean courts? Not so much... Obviously it's a spectrum since the world is not black and white but I really don't quite understand what are you trying to say. Are you seriously claiming that you don't see a fundamental difference between the US and North Korea in this case? Or do you just want someone to spend their time compiling a list of Supreme Court decisions relating to freedom of speech?
        2y ago

Dalewyn 2y ago

You can say Boe Jiden is a purple Martian born in Backwaterstan. Boe Jiden will probably sue you for defamation. The courts will very likely give him the win, slamming you with a hefty fine and perhaps more such as prison time depending on the damages your speech incurred. You can say Boe Jiden is a purple Martian born in Backwaterstan again, so long as you're fine going through that rigmarole again though you'll probably face even heftier penalties. You are in no way prevented from voicing your thoughts because the 1st Amendment guarantees your right to do so. You can only ever be prosecuted for the consequences, such as the fallout from making false statements.

anal_reactor 2y ago
You have exactly described how freedom of speech works in North Korea. You are allowed to say "I think that Kim is a bad leader", which is guaranteed by the article 67 of The Socialist Constitution of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. But this doesn't mean you can spread untrue claims and cause societal disrupt, so Kim arrests you for your reckless actions and you go to gulag. Again, freedom of speech exists in North Korea and it's protected by law, it's just that you're not free from the consequences of abusing freedom of speech.
- Dalewyn 2y ago
  Free speech protects you from prosecution against your speech. The consequences of that speech are a separate matter and not protected by the 1st Amendment. Again, note precisely what is prosecuted here in the US where free speech is a guaranteed Constitutional right. You can with absolute power say whatever you want, but you will need to own up to it. If you don't or can't own up to what you say, don't speak. This isn't a violation of free speech because nobody is prohibiting or otherwise compelling you from speaking.
  - anal_reactor 2y ago
    You still haven't explained how is that different from North Korea.
    - Wytwwww 2y ago
      Is this some sort of sarcasm?
      - anal_reactor 2y ago
        "Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from being punished for saying things" I'm sorry but there's no universe in which this makes any sense. Either we say that people are free to express their opinions, or we punish people for saying things we don't like. Can't have both at the same time. The other guy used the argument "but the US constitution guarantees freedom of speech" yeah so does North Korean, argument invalid. I don't understand why this step "if people can be punished for saying something then they don't have freedom of speech" isn't an obvious logical statement.
        Wytwwww 2y ago
        What do you mean by "punished"? You have the right to say whatever you want just like I have the right to not listen to what you're saying, not to employ you, not buy goods/services from you and to encourage my friends to do the same (we're both exercising our right to the freedom of speech). > but the US constitution guarantees freedom of speech" yeah so does North Korean, argument invalid. Well courts in the US are somewhat independent and generally tend to usually adhere to that part of the US constitution when making decisions. North Korean courts? Not so much... Obviously it's a spectrum since the world is not black and white but I really don't quite understand what are you trying to say. Are you seriously claiming that you don't see a fundamental difference between the US and North Korea in this case? Or do you just want someone to spend their time compiling a list of Supreme Court decisions relating to freedom of speech?
        2y ago