3 ms·

Let me guess, you only see freedom of speech from the perspective of those who speak and not of those who don’t dare to speak because of online harassment. Stra

by croes 11mo ago

Let me guess, you only see freedom of speech from the perspective of those who speak and not of those who don’t dare to speak because of online harassment. Strangely enough their freedom of speech doesn’t seem to matter for people who justify things like hate speech under the label of free speech. In a society freedoms are compromises. Absolute freedoms means all for some and nothing for the rest. The EU at least tries a balance. Countries like the US don’t seem to care and seem to favor the strongest or even sociopaths.

llmslave2 11mo ago
> you only see freedom of speech from the perspective of those who speak and not of those who don’t dare to speak By this logic, when government suppresses speech that is a violation of one's rights?
- croes 11mo ago
  If they suppress legal speech then yes.
  - llmslave2 11mo ago
    Since the government holds a monopoly on the legal system, that can be simplified to "no".
    - croes 11mo ago
      In a democracy that not a no. A government is made by people and laws aren’t usually made against the will of the voters.
      - llmslave2 11mo ago
        Democracy is majority rule, so perhaps it can be simplified to speech that the majority approve of.
        croes 11mo ago
        That's how society works
        llmslave2 11mo ago
        Is, not ought.
        saubeidl 11mo ago
        Ought as well.