4 ms·
"In this one specific case, convicting this one specific person didn't destroy the whole movement." Well, no; because they haven't gotten together the politica
by danaris 1y ago
"In this one specific case, convicting this one specific person didn't destroy the whole movement."
Well, no; because they haven't gotten together the political will to outlaw AfD itself as a Nazi party.
This doesn't show that banning the speech doesn't work; if anything, it shows that being overly tolerant of Nazis...lets the Nazis stay around.
- Esophagus4 1y agoI’m not convinced we can legislate morality. If anything, outlawing it may increase its credibility as an anti-establishment movement.
- bofadeez 1y agoClearly
- danaris 1y ago> I’m not convinced we can legislate morality. I've never understood this argument in the least. We legislate morality all the time. Slightly less so these days, with the reduction of laws against things like same-sex marriage, miscegenation, and such, but what do you think laws against murder, theft, and fraud are? "That's not legislating morality!" you say. "Those are there to prevent real harms, or damage to society!" Well, so are laws against hate speech. They cause real, measurable harm to the people they are targeted at. The damage they do to society you can see all around you right now. Our laws and our morals have always been inextricably entangled. It seems to me that people who make that argument just think that the things they say it about (like hate speech) shouldn't be considered immoral.
- bofadeez 1y agoFree speech is inalienable, it does not originate from majority opinion.