12 ms·

>free speech isn't always the solution >I'm not from the states There's a cultural difference that rears its head here. Free speech in the US seems to be near

by noarchy 11y ago

>free speech isn't always the solution >I'm not from the states There's a cultural difference that rears its head here. Free speech in the US seems to be nearly-absolute when compared to even its northern neighbour (Canada), which has some provisions for "hate speech". Europe, from what I can see, is even more interventionist. I'm not using this post to argue for or against either perspective, but only to show that people from outside the US bring a very different perspective to the table, and it is reflected in their laws.

k-mcgrady 11y ago
Very true. I don't like the idea of being so rigid though. It seems like Americans stick to the idea of things like free speech or right to bear arms (basically constitutional ideas) without considering the fact they may not be right or times have changed. It's almost a religious zealotry as evidenced by the quick down voting of my post. NB (to everyone not noarchy): Down down vote things you disagree with - down vote things that don't add to the conversation.
- nsxwolf 11y ago
  You're cutting your own throat when you dismiss freedom of speech.
  - k-mcgrady 11y ago
    Apparently so. It's interesting to watch though. Both my posts, while perfectly reasonable opposite viewpoints are getting down voted a lot. HN feels like reddit when you touch a nerve on freedom of speech. Crowd mentality/emotion seems to take over even in a group that is usually very logical and rational.
    - WildUtah 11y ago
      "while perfectly reasonable opposite viewpoints are getting down voted a lot. " Everyone else is discussing how to distinguish racist and historical use of symbols like swastikas and Confederate symbols. You're actively advocating vicious totalitarian policy such as censorship that those symbols represent and that Conederates and Nazis used to promote, defend, and continue evil policies.
      - k-mcgrady 11y ago
        >> "You're actively advocating vicious totalitarian policy" Of course I am.
    - __z 11y ago
      Free speech only applies to governments. Many people (not necessarily on HN) don't realize that.
      - nsxwolf 11y ago
        Free speech is a value, not just a law. You can't just stamp out free speech any chance you get and then say you support free speech just because you're not the government.
        __z 11y ago
        You have zero idea what you are talking about. I support free speech, but that doesn't mean I am going to allow the KKK to do their demonstrations on my front lawn because "free speech." Disallowing that is not "stamp[ing] out free speech." Not even in the slightest. Its a two way street - they are free to do their cross burning elsewhere and I'm also free to put signs on my lawn that support racial harmony. Walmart (or whoever) is free to decide they don't want to sell the Confederate flag. The Daughters of the Confederacy (or whoever) are free to decide they want to sell the Confederate flag. Neither is stamping out free speech. BOTH are practicing free speech. Free speech (as a value) doesn't mean "I need to facilitate everyone else all the time, always and so does everyone else." Free speech (as a value) means "you let me say what I want and I let you say what you want." The KKK can do their own thing and American Atheists can do theirs. I can choose to hold an atheist convention and disallow priests to speak. Priests can choose to hold Mass and not allow atheist to speech. Its each party's choice. If some types of items are unpopular with the public (or unpopular with the people who choose what to sell) it is a business decision to not sell them in order to appeal to their chosen demographic. It is not "stamp[ing] out free speech." There are niche markets everywhere for items that don't appeal to the general public. Most companies you are hearing about (Walmart, Sears, Apple) are trying to appeal to the masses. Being forced to support everything is the exact opposite of free speech. Let's also distinguish "the law" from "the Constitution." They are different.
- bobcostas55 11y ago
  >Down down vote things you disagree with - down vote things that don't add to the conversation. The irony is palpable.
  - k-mcgrady 11y ago
    Not really. I don't think we should forget about symbols like that flag. They should be debated openly and freely. Same goes for the debate here. But if a large group of people are intimated by the 'speech' (Flag) then I think it's perfectly reasonable to remove it.
- mason240 11y ago
  >But if a large group of people are intimated by the 'speech' (Flag) then I think it's perfectly reasonable to remove it. >Down down vote things you disagree with - down vote things that don't add to the conversation. We just removing something that "intimates" us, you understand.

by noarchy 11y ago

k-mcgrady 11y ago

Very true. I don't like the idea of being so rigid though. It seems like Americans stick to the idea of things like free speech or right to bear arms (basically constitutional ideas) without considering the fact they may not be right or times have changed. It's almost a religious zealotry as evidenced by the quick down voting of my post. NB (to everyone not noarchy): Down down vote things you disagree with - down vote things that don't add to the conversation.

nsxwolf 11y ago
You're cutting your own throat when you dismiss freedom of speech.
- k-mcgrady 11y ago
  Apparently so. It's interesting to watch though. Both my posts, while perfectly reasonable opposite viewpoints are getting down voted a lot. HN feels like reddit when you touch a nerve on freedom of speech. Crowd mentality/emotion seems to take over even in a group that is usually very logical and rational.
  - WildUtah 11y ago
    "while perfectly reasonable opposite viewpoints are getting down voted a lot. " Everyone else is discussing how to distinguish racist and historical use of symbols like swastikas and Confederate symbols. You're actively advocating vicious totalitarian policy such as censorship that those symbols represent and that Conederates and Nazis used to promote, defend, and continue evil policies.
    - k-mcgrady 11y ago
      >> "You're actively advocating vicious totalitarian policy" Of course I am.
  - __z 11y ago
    Free speech only applies to governments. Many people (not necessarily on HN) don't realize that.
    - nsxwolf 11y ago
      Free speech is a value, not just a law. You can't just stamp out free speech any chance you get and then say you support free speech just because you're not the government.
      - __z 11y ago
        You have zero idea what you are talking about. I support free speech, but that doesn't mean I am going to allow the KKK to do their demonstrations on my front lawn because "free speech." Disallowing that is not "stamp[ing] out free speech." Not even in the slightest. Its a two way street - they are free to do their cross burning elsewhere and I'm also free to put signs on my lawn that support racial harmony. Walmart (or whoever) is free to decide they don't want to sell the Confederate flag. The Daughters of the Confederacy (or whoever) are free to decide they want to sell the Confederate flag. Neither is stamping out free speech. BOTH are practicing free speech. Free speech (as a value) doesn't mean "I need to facilitate everyone else all the time, always and so does everyone else." Free speech (as a value) means "you let me say what I want and I let you say what you want." The KKK can do their own thing and American Atheists can do theirs. I can choose to hold an atheist convention and disallow priests to speak. Priests can choose to hold Mass and not allow atheist to speech. Its each party's choice. If some types of items are unpopular with the public (or unpopular with the people who choose what to sell) it is a business decision to not sell them in order to appeal to their chosen demographic. It is not "stamp[ing] out free speech." There are niche markets everywhere for items that don't appeal to the general public. Most companies you are hearing about (Walmart, Sears, Apple) are trying to appeal to the masses. Being forced to support everything is the exact opposite of free speech. Let's also distinguish "the law" from "the Constitution." They are different.
bobcostas55 11y ago
>Down down vote things you disagree with - down vote things that don't add to the conversation. The irony is palpable.
- k-mcgrady 11y ago
  Not really. I don't think we should forget about symbols like that flag. They should be debated openly and freely. Same goes for the debate here. But if a large group of people are intimated by the 'speech' (Flag) then I think it's perfectly reasonable to remove it.
mason240 11y ago
>But if a large group of people are intimated by the 'speech' (Flag) then I think it's perfectly reasonable to remove it. >Down down vote things you disagree with - down vote things that don't add to the conversation. We just removing something that "intimates" us, you understand.