I am not targeting any group, race or religion or whatever, just an observation why does it seem that freedom of speech appears to invoke an image of a defence to be an asshole?
I get it, free to speak your mind and all and sometimes hard truths need to be said that but is the concept so out of whack that people have less empathy for others that they don’t agree with that they antagonise another to the point of disrespecting the right to dignity?
It seems like humanity is hard wired for conflict and if it isn’t actively trying to kill itself it seems to find an outlet for violence some way somehow. Maybe it is social conditioning or just some primal urge that makes humans human.
I don’t even know where else I could ask it, and it seems kind of stupid to think about so… have at thee
This only works for that particular law (insults) and I agree. However it breaks down at misinformation and allowing more of it enables attacks on the very foundation of those freedoms. And very often insults and misinformation go hand in hand in people with extremist stances.
I understand where you’re coming from but I’m talking about the general parts of his speech. What he is saying is true regarding how are you going to have freedom of speech when everyone had a subjective view of things and get offended by one thing while finding other normal?
This is the problem with the main issue and I especially find it problematic to limit freedom of speech because there is almost no way to stop it becoming something to censore and/or ban people.
Misinformation is something else like defamation. Someone lying about a person or defaming someone can be proven and the guilty party would be punished. That’s already implemented into the law systems off almost all the countries. On the other hand there will always be extremists in the world doesn’t matter if you limit or ban them. Look at the fascist movements of the WW2 era and how they are still continuing today or the religious extremist bullshit going in the world. But justifying limiting freedom of speech because extremists are using it is like banning people from buying Toyota trucks because ISIS is using them or banning people from flying 9/11 happened.
I am have let myself be too soft as I have not invoked my freedom of expression and fair conditions and let them bypass responsibility and get away with imposing their way of business.
End tldr
You know reading these comments made me look at my Country’s constitution… South Africa
Makes me think that people in general don’t fully read them, myself included.
It is interesting because in a way some of the things written here can in practice get someone put in jail because of the stigma of the past - primarily racism
I was raised in the demographic as white but my mother is, and this the term they use here, coloured ( fair complexion) i am sure an internet search can confirm.
Also realised that when my last job told me I wouldn’t advance in the work because of the colour of my skin ( and I was too stupid and eager for a job I accepted) they were legally covering their ass as there is provision for it if it is formally accepted. That my rights were ebbed away with fine print ( example, they made me sign something inocculous 3 months into employment and fine out down the line that I missed out on receiving bonus by a month because of the signed document)
But even through all that and the contracts they made me sign i still had the right to strike or to unionized… of course they make sure that you can’t do that because they prey on that need and suppress your right to diginity
Really off topic apologies, brain wonders off and puts pieces into play that fell off the bandwagon😂
I grew up with freedom of speech (the overall ideal, not the US legal concept) being a non-negotiable, axiomatic thing.
Every bit of social progress the world has seen, came about by loudly and obnoxiously challenging accepted norms, and refusing to sit down and shut up. Civil rights, worker’s rights, women’s rights, gay rights, trans rights and a whole bunch more - all of them only advanced by brave people getting up on their hind legs and speaking up for them, even though it was considered an affront to common decency, even an abomination.
For a bunch of overprivileged idiots to try and pull the ladder up behind them because their comfort is offended… really fucking bothers me.
I promise, I absolutely guaranfuckingtee that every person alive today will one day be on the wrong side of history; there are norms in society that our descendants (should humanity survive long enough for us to have any) will be utterly disgusted with all of us; and we would be just as disgusted by them. The shiny GenZ hope-of-the-world darlings of today will be the contempible boomers of 60 years from now, that’s just how history works. You can’t stop that from happening; the best you can do is increase social flexibility and mobility so they don’t remain totally rooted in the norms of their youth.
The absolute unmitigated gall of people today to imagine that no, unlike all that came before them, they have the right of it, that their accepted norms must be coddled and protected from any that might dare challenge them, that social change can stop right here… fuck no, fuck that, fuck them, fuck the entire concept.
You don’t disable progress, you mustn’t hobble change. And speech that offends us is the only way you get change, pretty much by definition.
Once you silence offensive speech (of whatever form), you’re locking in the status quo, and ironically that’s the most conservative thing you can ever do. Even if you believe that you and your team will never censor genuine activism, once you enable shutting-people-up as an option, you hand an absolutely terrifying weapon to the assholes that take power next time you lose the election.
Now I will grudgingly concede that the landscape has changed, that the coming of the information age has shifted the way everything works, that the mechanisms and underlying rules are changing, and that the principles of absolute freedom of speech that made sense in my youth no longer get you the same results. The internet is a big scary machine, and its ability to create filter bubbles and viral trends and cliques and misinformation and just general ugh… is pretty damn terrifying. Just look at the damn antivaxers, climate change deniers, the rampant and increasing transphobia, the fascist assholes getting their hooks in everywhere - clearly the marketplace of ideas is a mob town now, and we can’t just expect it to run itself.
How do we fix it? I don’t fucking know. Both sides seem to lead some pretty terrible places - is there a middle path somewhere? How do we trust anyone to steer it?
I agree on a lot of points, although it seems I have a more pacifist outlook while you have a more active outlook which if I am honest does more for progress.
I see freedom of speech - in the general sense - as a means to be able to express yourself and your opinions and I feel that if people could express that without outright spreading a feeling of hatred and rage then I feel pretty much anything goes within reason. As even innocuous well meaning ideas can lead to dangerous outcomes.
That doesn’t mean people should expect the status quo, but sometimes I look at chimps and their “gang wars” and think we aren’t that much different sometimes.
We are primed to respond most strongly with hatred and rage… perhaps some deep primitive instinct and that gets taken advantage of.
Humans nature seems to be a violent one and if I look at history it is unfortunately violence that seems to be the most effective means to get through our thick human psyche to advance.
Ancient Egypt, Alexander’s Legacy, Rome’s rise and fall, The Crusades, French Revolution, British Empire, American Independence, The World Wars.
We are forever doomed to repeat history it seems until history can no longer repeat
It is like humanity must experience great suffering and that suffering must reach a tipping point before we as a collective species change
What the next big tipping point will be that forces a change, if we last that long, I don’t know as well
Well, if you’re saying things everyone agrees with, you probably won’t have problems, and it won’t even come up whether you have the right to speak. Freedom of speech only comes up as a concept when it is in conflict with other interests.
Many legal issues are defined by their extremes. That doesn’t mean they only encompass extremes. Just that it’s the extremes that delineated the actual boundaries.
I wish people didn’t confuse the right to do something with the necessity to go do it. I fully support people’s right to be removeds, but I honestly don’t understand why anyone would want to be an removed
In addition, the phenomenon of social media has made everyone decide that what they have to say is just as important as a Nobel Prize Winner or president because all of our tweets and posts look the same. Everyone gets a virtual podium. To relatively insignificant people, the notion that they can shout back at a famous person or expert and appear to be on equal footing is too enticing to resist. A great example is someone who never spent a single day in med school trying to tell our nation’s health experts that they were wrong about COVID for instance. The number of people with absolutely zero qualifications that thought their argument was worth making was depressing. Most would never do that in public and if they did, would simply be escorted out of the room and forgotten.
It invokes any number of people from all around the spectrum to be an arse.
If you’re trying to be neutral or just don’t much care for some particular political issue (what’s political or not is an interesting question in itself, but nowadays anything is), you see just as much toxicity from all the ends of the spectrum.
I still can’t believe all the fights that were ensuing regarding wearing masks. But once something becomes a symbol…
I’d even argue the “left” is faster to call names and dump baseless accusations on anyone quite at random, to be honest.
I mean, just watch the downvotes on this comment from the “if you’re not with us, you’re a nazi” crowd.
I won’t be getting into it more in public. It’s just hard for me to leave posts like this alone.
If you’re trying to be neutral or just don’t much care for some particular political issue
There is no such thing, if you’re “neutral” you’re merely defending the status quo. The right defends the status quo, the left opposes it.
Read this quote by one of the greatest heroes of the world, Martin Luther King:
I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to ‘order’ than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice […]
Bleh, it seems ideology is unavoidable😂, seems that can be applied to the world over actually if it examined where countries try not to rock the boat too much to ensure their best interests are not disrupted too much
I guess that’s not wrong, but I can passionately care about some other matter where the status quo is borked, and I can choose to fight that, and not some other random thing you care about. That doesn’t make me an ass or something other.
It’s a really interesting thing how the so-called “left” and “right” have chosen to fight over a handful of random things, and just as randomly chose to support one or the other side of the argument.
Almost as if, I dunno, these things weren’t even all that divisive in the first place, but it just might be in someone’s interest for people to fight over and not notice potentially worse things that are going on.
and just as randomly chose to support one or the other side of the argument.
Randomly? This has never happened even once in the entire history of the human race.
But I see it where you’re coming from, neoliberal propaganda convinces its viewers that politics is something out of touch for the masses, it’s their way of taking your out of the fight because you educate yourself, you’d become their enemy.
Sometimes it does feel pretty random to be honest. There are lots of cases where a political issue has become reversed as to which side is supposed to support it (support for unions in the US, as an example that comes to mind).
It’s also way too often the case that one side starts support for some issue, and the other side begins to vehemently oppose it, frankly for no good reason than just because they can’t be seen agreeing in public. This is really the main reason why I stopped giving a fuck about politics, as it’s really almost all about just who’s a top dog and not much else.
I’m sorry, I wasn’t aware there’s a conservative party in our parliament, much less in power. My bad I guess? Or are you just proving my point about accusing someone of something random without knowing anything?
Not an American, so the whole America politica is not my thing
My personal opinion or stance if I had to take one is one has the freedom to express themselves, but to also take into to try respect another’s beliefs and reasoning
So in this case, you have the right to express your opinions, you have made some assumptions, but still showed some level of restraint. Therefore I am, personally, going to respect your right to expression - seems sanctimonious for me to write that case but yeah… I do not know I am trying not to get into any ideology facets just trying to explore a question that has been bubbling in my mind.
( if you want my take on masks and you are free to disagree, is that during covid masks would lessen viral aerosol load… so not foolproof but I find dealing with a 10000 viral load easier to deal with than 100000000 viral load)
Meh, confirmation bias here anecdotal notions. As someone on the left I can say I argue with people all the damn time without calling them nazis Assuming of course they aren’t pushing for the genocide of a people.
A lot of people in both the left and the right argue with the other side all the time withour abusing the other of being a Nazi. However there are a number on both sides that assume anyone not in perfect agreement with them must be a Nazi. (Hint there are now two people on earth 100% agreed on everything, so such people tend to accuse a lot of people of being a Nazi)
People seems to be under the impression that freedom of speech means freedom from consequences, that you’re free to spout all sorts of hateful nonsense and not have to deal with the hurt they cause.
People constantly thinking they can say what they want until they encounter that person that’s willing to get arrested for assault when the wrong thing is said to them. That’s freedom
Or arrested for saying free stuff that calls for harm of other people. Your freedom ends where someone elses freedom starts vice versa. If you harm someone you are no longer protected
It’s because there are, like many things, 80% of us who get what the intentions were, while there is 20 percent who abuse it or mishandle it. It’s not the a majority are asses though, just the crazies get more airtime, and then it becomes an echo chamber.
I desperately want to see bans for excessive bad faith and unnecessarily abusive accounts. I’m getting stressed out with the amount of abuse and garbage floating around by a hyper-vocal minority or bots/bad actors.
Feels like each day Lemmy becomes more like r/the_donald.
“The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one’s time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.”. ― H.L. Mencken
Yeah - I never even bother trying to explain some point I know he’s already addressed, since anything I might come up with is going to be inferior anyway.
I may be mistaken, but wasn’t it Mark Twain who said that ever American has a God given right to make a total fool of themselves? Americans famously take a notion to doing that and flipping a very public bird to each other. The last great bird flipping was of course the election of Trump…
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community space dedicated to being helpful and answering each others’ questions on various topics.
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All posts titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That’s it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it’s in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content. Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
Matrix Chat Room
To find & join our chat room, log into fluffychat.im(or any other matrix client) and put #nostupidquestions:matrix.org on the search bar.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
Rowan Atkinson describe it perfectly for me. https://youtu.be/xUezfuy8Qpc
This only works for that particular law (insults) and I agree. However it breaks down at misinformation and allowing more of it enables attacks on the very foundation of those freedoms. And very often insults and misinformation go hand in hand in people with extremist stances.
I understand where you’re coming from but I’m talking about the general parts of his speech. What he is saying is true regarding how are you going to have freedom of speech when everyone had a subjective view of things and get offended by one thing while finding other normal?
This is the problem with the main issue and I especially find it problematic to limit freedom of speech because there is almost no way to stop it becoming something to censore and/or ban people.
Misinformation is something else like defamation. Someone lying about a person or defaming someone can be proven and the guilty party would be punished. That’s already implemented into the law systems off almost all the countries. On the other hand there will always be extremists in the world doesn’t matter if you limit or ban them. Look at the fascist movements of the WW2 era and how they are still continuing today or the religious extremist bullshit going in the world. But justifying limiting freedom of speech because extremists are using it is like banning people from buying Toyota trucks because ISIS is using them or banning people from flying 9/11 happened.
Denying the holocaust is only possible because of freedom of speech and look what it’s doing.
A person convinced against their will, Is of the same opinion still.
The people still hold these opinions you find unpalatable, they are just prevented from saying them.
So we should ban people from flying and buying Toyota trucks got it…
Tldr:
I am have let myself be too soft as I have not invoked my freedom of expression and fair conditions and let them bypass responsibility and get away with imposing their way of business.
End tldr
You know reading these comments made me look at my Country’s constitution… South Africa
Makes me think that people in general don’t fully read them, myself included.
It is interesting because in a way some of the things written here can in practice get someone put in jail because of the stigma of the past - primarily racism
I was raised in the demographic as white but my mother is, and this the term they use here, coloured ( fair complexion) i am sure an internet search can confirm.
Also realised that when my last job told me I wouldn’t advance in the work because of the colour of my skin ( and I was too stupid and eager for a job I accepted) they were legally covering their ass as there is provision for it if it is formally accepted. That my rights were ebbed away with fine print ( example, they made me sign something inocculous 3 months into employment and fine out down the line that I missed out on receiving bonus by a month because of the signed document)
But even through all that and the contracts they made me sign i still had the right to strike or to unionized… of course they make sure that you can’t do that because they prey on that need and suppress your right to diginity
Really off topic apologies, brain wonders off and puts pieces into play that fell off the bandwagon😂
GenX lefty here.
I grew up with freedom of speech (the overall ideal, not the US legal concept) being a non-negotiable, axiomatic thing.
Every bit of social progress the world has seen, came about by loudly and obnoxiously challenging accepted norms, and refusing to sit down and shut up. Civil rights, worker’s rights, women’s rights, gay rights, trans rights and a whole bunch more - all of them only advanced by brave people getting up on their hind legs and speaking up for them, even though it was considered an affront to common decency, even an abomination.
For a bunch of overprivileged idiots to try and pull the ladder up behind them because their comfort is offended… really fucking bothers me.
I promise, I absolutely guaranfuckingtee that every person alive today will one day be on the wrong side of history; there are norms in society that our descendants (should humanity survive long enough for us to have any) will be utterly disgusted with all of us; and we would be just as disgusted by them. The shiny GenZ hope-of-the-world darlings of today will be the contempible boomers of 60 years from now, that’s just how history works. You can’t stop that from happening; the best you can do is increase social flexibility and mobility so they don’t remain totally rooted in the norms of their youth.
The absolute unmitigated gall of people today to imagine that no, unlike all that came before them, they have the right of it, that their accepted norms must be coddled and protected from any that might dare challenge them, that social change can stop right here… fuck no, fuck that, fuck them, fuck the entire concept.
You don’t disable progress, you mustn’t hobble change. And speech that offends us is the only way you get change, pretty much by definition.
Once you silence offensive speech (of whatever form), you’re locking in the status quo, and ironically that’s the most conservative thing you can ever do. Even if you believe that you and your team will never censor genuine activism, once you enable shutting-people-up as an option, you hand an absolutely terrifying weapon to the assholes that take power next time you lose the election.
Now I will grudgingly concede that the landscape has changed, that the coming of the information age has shifted the way everything works, that the mechanisms and underlying rules are changing, and that the principles of absolute freedom of speech that made sense in my youth no longer get you the same results. The internet is a big scary machine, and its ability to create filter bubbles and viral trends and cliques and misinformation and just general ugh… is pretty damn terrifying. Just look at the damn antivaxers, climate change deniers, the rampant and increasing transphobia, the fascist assholes getting their hooks in everywhere - clearly the marketplace of ideas is a mob town now, and we can’t just expect it to run itself.
How do we fix it? I don’t fucking know. Both sides seem to lead some pretty terrible places - is there a middle path somewhere? How do we trust anyone to steer it?
I agree on a lot of points, although it seems I have a more pacifist outlook while you have a more active outlook which if I am honest does more for progress.
I see freedom of speech - in the general sense - as a means to be able to express yourself and your opinions and I feel that if people could express that without outright spreading a feeling of hatred and rage then I feel pretty much anything goes within reason. As even innocuous well meaning ideas can lead to dangerous outcomes.
That doesn’t mean people should expect the status quo, but sometimes I look at chimps and their “gang wars” and think we aren’t that much different sometimes.
For reference: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gombe_Chimpanzee_War
We are primed to respond most strongly with hatred and rage… perhaps some deep primitive instinct and that gets taken advantage of.
Humans nature seems to be a violent one and if I look at history it is unfortunately violence that seems to be the most effective means to get through our thick human psyche to advance. Ancient Egypt, Alexander’s Legacy, Rome’s rise and fall, The Crusades, French Revolution, British Empire, American Independence, The World Wars.
We are forever doomed to repeat history it seems until history can no longer repeat
It is like humanity must experience great suffering and that suffering must reach a tipping point before we as a collective species change
What the next big tipping point will be that forces a change, if we last that long, I don’t know as well
deleted by creator
Well, if you’re saying things everyone agrees with, you probably won’t have problems, and it won’t even come up whether you have the right to speak. Freedom of speech only comes up as a concept when it is in conflict with other interests.
Many legal issues are defined by their extremes. That doesn’t mean they only encompass extremes. Just that it’s the extremes that delineated the actual boundaries.
Popular speech doesn’t require defense.
I wish people didn’t confuse the right to do something with the necessity to go do it. I fully support people’s right to be removeds, but I honestly don’t understand why anyone would want to be an removed
Cuz whats abhorent to one only makes sense to others. For me, I think abortion is murdering babies. To others, unborn babies don’t have rights.
On many internet communities, Im a REMOVED but I truly believe what I say.
I feel like this mostly happens online, and relates to “Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory”
In addition, the phenomenon of social media has made everyone decide that what they have to say is just as important as a Nobel Prize Winner or president because all of our tweets and posts look the same. Everyone gets a virtual podium. To relatively insignificant people, the notion that they can shout back at a famous person or expert and appear to be on equal footing is too enticing to resist. A great example is someone who never spent a single day in med school trying to tell our nation’s health experts that they were wrong about COVID for instance. The number of people with absolutely zero qualifications that thought their argument was worth making was depressing. Most would never do that in public and if they did, would simply be escorted out of the room and forgotten.
Thank you for your insight
It invokes any number of people from all around the spectrum to be an arse.
If you’re trying to be neutral or just don’t much care for some particular political issue (what’s political or not is an interesting question in itself, but nowadays anything is), you see just as much toxicity from all the ends of the spectrum.
I still can’t believe all the fights that were ensuing regarding wearing masks. But once something becomes a symbol…
I’d even argue the “left” is faster to call names and dump baseless accusations on anyone quite at random, to be honest.
I mean, just watch the downvotes on this comment from the “if you’re not with us, you’re a nazi” crowd.
I won’t be getting into it more in public. It’s just hard for me to leave posts like this alone.
There is no such thing, if you’re “neutral” you’re merely defending the status quo. The right defends the status quo, the left opposes it.
Read this quote by one of the greatest heroes of the world, Martin Luther King:
Bleh, it seems ideology is unavoidable😂, seems that can be applied to the world over actually if it examined where countries try not to rock the boat too much to ensure their best interests are not disrupted too much
I guess that’s not wrong, but I can passionately care about some other matter where the status quo is borked, and I can choose to fight that, and not some other random thing you care about. That doesn’t make me an ass or something other.
It’s a really interesting thing how the so-called “left” and “right” have chosen to fight over a handful of random things, and just as randomly chose to support one or the other side of the argument.
Almost as if, I dunno, these things weren’t even all that divisive in the first place, but it just might be in someone’s interest for people to fight over and not notice potentially worse things that are going on.
Randomly? This has never happened even once in the entire history of the human race.
But I see it where you’re coming from, neoliberal propaganda convinces its viewers that politics is something out of touch for the masses, it’s their way of taking your out of the fight because you educate yourself, you’d become their enemy.
Sometimes it does feel pretty random to be honest. There are lots of cases where a political issue has become reversed as to which side is supposed to support it (support for unions in the US, as an example that comes to mind).
It’s also way too often the case that one side starts support for some issue, and the other side begins to vehemently oppose it, frankly for no good reason than just because they can’t be seen agreeing in public. This is really the main reason why I stopped giving a fuck about politics, as it’s really almost all about just who’s a top dog and not much else.
Without public support there can’t be any big changes, you’re the reason why the conservatives stays in power. You’re a conservative by proxy.
I’m sorry, I wasn’t aware there’s a conservative party in our parliament, much less in power. My bad I guess? Or are you just proving my point about accusing someone of something random without knowing anything?
There either is or someone else did your job for you. Thank them!
The good part about democracy is that not everybody is clueless like you.
Not an American, so the whole America politica is not my thing
My personal opinion or stance if I had to take one is one has the freedom to express themselves, but to also take into to try respect another’s beliefs and reasoning
So in this case, you have the right to express your opinions, you have made some assumptions, but still showed some level of restraint. Therefore I am, personally, going to respect your right to expression - seems sanctimonious for me to write that case but yeah… I do not know I am trying not to get into any ideology facets just trying to explore a question that has been bubbling in my mind.
( if you want my take on masks and you are free to disagree, is that during covid masks would lessen viral aerosol load… so not foolproof but I find dealing with a 10000 viral load easier to deal with than 100000000 viral load)
Meh, confirmation bias here anecdotal notions. As someone on the left I can say I argue with people all the damn time without calling them nazis Assuming of course they aren’t pushing for the genocide of a people.
A lot of people in both the left and the right argue with the other side all the time withour abusing the other of being a Nazi. However there are a number on both sides that assume anyone not in perfect agreement with them must be a Nazi. (Hint there are now two people on earth 100% agreed on everything, so such people tend to accuse a lot of people of being a Nazi)
People seems to be under the impression that freedom of speech means freedom from consequences, that you’re free to spout all sorts of hateful nonsense and not have to deal with the hurt they cause.
Because literally their only excuse for what they’re saying is that the government can’t legally stop them from saying it
It’s very simple. It’s because people falsely mistake freedom of speech for freedom from consequence.
In other words, you have the right to be an asshole, but if you do it too much, others can invoke their right be assholes right back to you.
People constantly thinking they can say what they want until they encounter that person that’s willing to get arrested for assault when the wrong thing is said to them. That’s freedom
Or arrested for saying free stuff that calls for harm of other people. Your freedom ends where someone elses freedom starts vice versa. If you harm someone you are no longer protected
It’s because there are, like many things, 80% of us who get what the intentions were, while there is 20 percent who abuse it or mishandle it. It’s not the a majority are asses though, just the crazies get more airtime, and then it becomes an echo chamber.
Makes sense keep forgetting how a minority make enough noise and saturates things to a point where it appears more common than it seems
I desperately want to see bans for excessive bad faith and unnecessarily abusive accounts. I’m getting stressed out with the amount of abuse and garbage floating around by a hyper-vocal minority or bots/bad actors.
Feels like each day Lemmy becomes more like r/the_donald.
“The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one’s time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.”. ― H.L. Mencken
Leave it to him to say it better than I ever could.
Yeah - I never even bother trying to explain some point I know he’s already addressed, since anything I might come up with is going to be inferior anyway.
Very poigant post
I may be mistaken, but wasn’t it Mark Twain who said that ever American has a God given right to make a total fool of themselves? Americans famously take a notion to doing that and flipping a very public bird to each other. The last great bird flipping was of course the election of Trump…