German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account • Hacker News Board

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#201

Post by anigbrowl » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 8:28 AM UTC

abiox wrote: post #174

anigbrowl wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is incorrect. Logic and reason have value, of course, but most people are emotional animals rather than pure rationalists. The trick of political demagoguery is is to activate those emotions and then rhetorically direct them. This is why laws against incitement and suchlike generally require the potential harm to be imminent. It's one thing for someone to say 'really, I think out_group_X bears liability for cert…

> Logic and reason have value, of course, but most people are emotional animals rather than pure rationalists. there isn't an either/or situation... people are both. and people must obviously be sufficiently rational, a sufficient amount of the time, because civilization exists and society progresses. you don't get to the moon and back if your species is nothing but bloody barbarians. > incitement this discussion see…

It is an either/or situation. I said people are emotional animals rather than pure rationalists, who would by definition not be subject to irrational impulses. It is not a contrast between pure rationality or irrationality, but pure rationality vs partial rationality.

I'm not sure what point the rest of your comment is seeking to make, other than that you don't like my point of view.

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#202

Post by anigbrowl » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 8:37 AM UTC

Houshalter wrote: post #162

anigbrowl wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does this matter at all? How does the GDP of Germany change anything? If Germany was poor it would be different? If it were poor and were being coercively restructured by some outside hegemonic power (as many argue Tibet is) then yes of course that would make a difference. The native population is being completely replaced with immigrants. Germany's immigrant population is 10-12%, and last time I looked everyone…

>If it were poor and were being coercively restructured by some outside hegemonic power I don't think the outside power is relevant to the argument. The effect is the same whoever does it. To some conservative rural German, the government may very well seem like an outside hegemonic power. As far as economic success being relevant. Tibet's economy is growing rapidly. Eventually they will be as rich as Germany today.…

To some conservative rural German, the government may very well seem like an outside hegemonic power.

I can't help counterfactual perceptions.

40% of German under 5's are immigrants (http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/09/21/germany-40-percen...). They have a 2-3 times higher fertility rate than the native population. And the rate of immigration keeps increasing and is already unsustainably high. Germans will be a tiny minority of Germany in just 2 generations.

Breitbart is one of the poorest sources you could possibly cite and you do your credibility no favors. Some immigrants have higher fertility, but it's a distribution, not a monolith. Also, immigrant fertility tends to revert to the local mean within a couple of generations as fertility is inversely correlated with economic stability, which is why it's lower in the recipient population to start with.

Your idea that Germans will be a tiny minority of Germany's population within 2 generations is laughable. socioeconomic behaviors do not generally follow the exponential trends you imagine, but are often better mapped by a sigmoid function. I strongly suggest you try reading a textbook on demographics instead of getting your analysis from Breitbart.

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#203

Post by Razengan » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 8:38 AM UTC

sintaxi wrote: post #104

Razengan wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the moral dilemma Why is it so hard to codify “Don’t be a dick to anyone” into a law? (non-rhetorical question)

It already is, just some people want want to extend the law to force people to think & behave the way they want them to. American law covers everything necessary for every individual to live a civilized life where they can pursue happiness and meaning as they choose to define it.

Can see that happening right here; some people have been downvoting and flagging this comment thread, even though it doesn’t break any rules as far as I can see.

Why stifle discussion like this? Don’t let HN become like Reddit where the downvote button is basically “I don’t like this.”

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#204

Post by icebraining » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 8:42 AM UTC

Amezarak wrote: post #138

icebraining wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Accusing the police of trying “to appease the barbaric, Muslim, rapist hordes of men” by putting out a tweet in Arabic is not just "opposing immigration".

Here's the full context of her comments. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/02/world/europe/germany-twit... > In a tweet on Sunday, the lawmaker, Beatrix von Storch, questioned the decision by the police in the western city of Cologne to put out a message in Arabic, as part of a multilingual campaign to promote the theme of this year’s New Year’s Eve festivities: “Celebrate — with respect.” The message was also posted i…

the government is looking into charging her for this statement.

Where did you see this? From what I can tell, the government (public prosecutors) only said they received a bunch of complaints. Nowhere did I see they were looking into charging her - nor would that be possible without lifting her immunity.

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#205

Post by Razengan » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 8:52 AM UTC

stronglikedan wrote: post #164

Razengan wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the moral dilemma Why is it so hard to codify “Don’t be a dick to anyone” into a law? (non-rhetorical question)

The short answer: because "be(ing) a dick" is highly subjective.

Apparently every law is highly subjective. We have, to simplify, “Do not murder.” but it’s waived for militaries and law enforcement.

When even the taking of life doesn’t have uniform laws applicable in all cases, why make blanket rulings on speech?

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#206

Post by vk23 » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 9:25 AM UTC

Houshalter wrote: post #115

Frondo wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Racism is not a political opinion. Political opinions are along the lines of "are my taxes too high" or "do we spend more on parks or on police". A belief in the inferiority of another race isn't political, it's something else. I don't know what, but discriminatory and bigoted beliefs don't belong in political discussions or any discussions about how we govern ourselves or organize society.

First of all muslims aren't really a "race". Debates about race are completely irrelevant, they are criticizing islamic culture and religion. No one would care about someone mocking christian beliefs of culture. Second you are right. Beliefs about differences between races aren't political. They are scientific. These are scientific question that are completely beyond politics. Your morality or political opinions have…

The whole "islamic culture" thing is just a populist move. In the end they dont care if the refugees are islamic or christian (there are actually a lot of christian people in the arabic speaking region)

Also they are constantly talking about saving the german/north european culture/people. This is more about race and racism than anything else.

Regarding the second part: Its obviously true that there is a scientific base to racial questions but discussions about it are rarely based on scientific research. Most of the time its a political / cultural conflict.

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#207

Post by tuxxy » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 9:32 AM UTC

King-Aaron wrote: post #167

danschumann wrote: post #57

The problem with hate speech laws are, it means you can't insult everyone equally. If you call someone stupid, they could accuse you of a crime, but you're not calling them stupid because of their race. And I want people who actually are racist to talk, so I know who I don't want to be friends with. If they're all keeping their racist opinions to themselves, I might waste a bunch of time being their friends. And I ca…

> If they're all keeping their racist opinions to themselves, I might waste a bunch of time being their friends I have several friends who I know hold some less-than-sociable opinions, and they do tend to keep them to themselves. I don't quite know how to frame what I'm about to say, but I feel it's equally dickish to think that becoming someone's friend is a "waste of time" just because you don't agree with their op…

I don't think that not wanting to be friends with someone because they want your kids to die for being Jewish is necessarily a dickish thing.

It's an extreme example, yet an unfortunate practical one today.

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#208

Post by mbid » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 9:52 AM UTC

Grollicus wrote: post #66

dilap wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no dilema. It's just an excuse for control. Letting Nazis speak will not actually convert modern society into Nazis.

Actually you should look at the flip side of the coin: We - Germans - just decided that letting Nazis not speak their hurtful lies harms nothing of value.

Actually you should look at the flip side of the coin: We - Germans - just decided that letting Nazis not speak their hurtful lies harms nothing of value.

A majority deciding something doesn't make it just, as you as a fellow German should know best.

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#209

Post by InternetUser » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 10:00 AM UTC

Retra wrote: post #199

wernercd wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I want people who actually are racist to talk, so I know who I don't want to be friends with. It's more important and wide than "I don't want to be their friends"... How can you attack ideas if they aren't brought out into the open? How can you convince the racist? Or the people that have those thoughts but don't mention them? They corner stone of freedom is discussing ideas. I want the most vile pieces of shit to…

>How can you attack ideas if they aren't brought out into the open? You attack ideas by suffocating them, not by repeating them. Children learn words by hearing them spoken. Nothing more needs to happen; the brain is quite good at drawing the intended implications out. To promote an idea, you need only put it in people's heads over and over again. The major problem with hate speech laws is trying to separate propagan…

> To promote an idea, you need only put it in people's heads over and over again.

As a voracious consumer of news, I spent hundreds of hours from summer 2015 to November 2016 having my mind exposed to headlines, articles, images, and videos on TV (both on TV news programs and late-night comedy shows), and on news websites (NYT, WaPo, Yahoo, MSN), and on social media (in 'Trending' sidebars of Facebook and Twitter) telling me that Trump is a crazy, racist, misogynistic, fascist maniacal idiot who is totally unqualified to be president, and whom "everyone" hates except for white racists and uneducated rednecks. Well, it didn't convince me, and didn't convince a majority of voters in 30 other states. That being said, I'm very open to consuming just as much anti-Trump and pro-Democrat content as soon as the Democratic primary begins in early 2019, or even before then. Maybe I can be persuaded that time around.

Re: German hate speech law tested as Twitter blocks satire account

#210

Post by InternetUser » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 10:06 AM UTC

danschumann wrote: post #57

The problem with hate speech laws are, it means you can't insult everyone equally. If you call someone stupid, they could accuse you of a crime, but you're not calling them stupid because of their race. And I want people who actually are racist to talk, so I know who I don't want to be friends with. If they're all keeping their racist opinions to themselves, I might waste a bunch of time being their friends. And I ca…

I have been and still am friends with people who have all sorts of prejudiced views, ranging from those who hate particular ethnic groups and nationalities (including my own), to those who disparage and insult those with different interests of educational backgrounds (such as one friend who is an I.T. guy and who constantly refers to non-I.T. people, even within his own family in shocking misanthropistic terms). Everyone has their own views, and I believe in acceptance. If someone expresses or suggests violent impulses, that is one thing, but to just express hatred is part of humanity. Do you hate anyone? To turn it around, there are plenty of people who hate themselves, but are all of them physically masochistic and/or suicidal?