3 ms·
... and that would be illegal for them to do, and for good reason. The solution to bad speech is not violence. It's more speech.
by rictic 14y ago
... and that would be illegal for them to do, and for good reason.
The solution to bad speech is not violence. It's more speech.
- fungi 14y agofeed the trolls?
- Steko 14y agoI never said violence was the solution, straw man much? My point is that freedom of speech doesn't mean your speech never has negative consequences. Nonviolent, legal example: you insult a customer and your boss fires you on the spot. What is the common thread? None of this really has anything to do with freedom of speech in the west. It's a massive red herring that people keep bringing up in this thread.
- nico 14y agoInteresting, I would actually say that all of society, almost on every country in the world, is governed by violence. Why dont people break the law? Because there are consequences to doing it, and if you don't voluntarily accept the consequences, then you'll be violently forced to take them. All of society actually ultimatly depends on violence as the mode of enforcing order.
- paganel 14y ago> All of society actually ultimatly depends on violence as the mode of enforcing order. It's funny how for the last 400 years or so all men and women who have been speaking and writing about politics and about how the world should be run in general have been trying to hide Hobbes and his ideas under a very thick rug. But his ideas keep creeping back in. Maybe because he was right?