Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Freedom of expression is at a ten-year low globally, study says

cjr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 178 posts

Re: Freedom of expression is at a ten-year low globally, study says

#141

Post by linuxftw »

tomp wrote: post #138
a_band wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would such a declaration do? Religious speech should be protected as much as any other speech.

Not really. You can't be fired for religion. I wonder what would happen if someone (like Damore) said "I religiously believe that women shouldn't work".

You realize there are entire parts of the planet that operate this way, right?

> You can't be fired for religion

Therein lies the problem. Therein lies the problem. We've politicized religious speak. Who's the arbiter of what constitutes a religion and what religious views are tolerable in the workplace?

Some people want to take the rights of others to impose their preferred world view.

Re: Freedom of expression is at a ten-year low globally, study says

#142

Post by growlist »

downerending wrote: post #36
jerf wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the goal. Those seeking it would be advised to consider whether it's a power they really want Trump to have, or his successor, but there's a lot of people who seem to operate on the presumption that in the long term, their side is going to have complete control of the government indefinitely and the fact that some people they disagree with has some control at the moment is a momentary aberration. I would suggest…

You can like Trump or not, but he's probably one of the people in power who'd least care for this sort of censorship. He clearly revels in public debate, perhaps even to an unhealthy degree. It may not be Lincoln-Douglas stuff, but that's how democracy is supposed to work.

Indeed. From my observation it's the left that are looking intolerant and scary, attempting to force opinions in their preferred direction and delegitimise opposing views.

Re: Freedom of expression is at a ten-year low globally, study says

#143

Post by banads »

F-0X wrote: post #130
banads wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on if you think people have any free will or ability to think for themselves

I don't think it does. People share information and learn from each other. Hence, it is important to be responsible when providing information. We frequently see disclaimers on HN, Reddit, etc. like "IANAL", so as to put forward a point of view while warning it shouldn't be taken too seriously as actionable advice. It's the sensible thing to do. Anybody spreading anti-vaccination propaganda has been convinced of it t…

Assuming any random stranger on the internet is a licensed lawyer is stupid. Blaming other people for your own stupidity is a great way to avoid the responsibility of thinking for yourself. If we want adults to act like adults, we shouldn't treat them like children.

Re: Freedom of expression is at a ten-year low globally, study says

#144

Post by sdinsn »

manifestsilence wrote: post #58
corporate_shi11 wrote: post #43

Hate speech must be protected speech. Keep in mind that all groups suffer from hate speech attacks. Majority groups in Western countries ("white people") are some of the most publicly demonized people of the last few years, so saying that toleration of hate speech - which affects us all - is an opinion that can only be held from the secure position of being in the majority is nonsense.

No. There is a crucial distinction here. Hate speech that is only mean is one thing and should be protected. Hate speech that incites violence against a particular individual or group is not protected speech. This includes a few things said by the current POTUS, such as (approximate quote from memory), "maybe the guy should be roughed up", said of a guy who was currently being roughly physically removed from his rall…

> Hate speech that incites violence

"Hate speech that incites violence" is not "hate speech". I don't know why you are trying to force the connection between hate speech and violent threatening speech.

Re: Freedom of expression is at a ten-year low globally, study says

#145

Post by banads »

bilbo0s wrote: post #61
atonse wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree that there's a huge difference in effect. Yes they can't throw you in jail like a government could. But they could ruin your career, make you lose your job, and make you a pariah for years to come, throwing your life upside down.

But what are you suggesting? That you should have freedom of expression, but the twitter users should not have freedom of expression? I feel like that's what's being lost in this discussion. The acceptance of the fact that everyone has rights. Not just you. Or just me. Or just the politicians. Or what have you. But everyone .

People should attack the ideas that people have, not attack the people for having ideas.

Theres a huge difference between expressing disagreement with an idea and trying to ruin someone's life.

Re: Freedom of expression is at a ten-year low globally, study says

#146

Post by bilbo0s »

banads wrote: post #145
bilbo0s wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what are you suggesting? That you should have freedom of expression, but the twitter users should not have freedom of expression? I feel like that's what's being lost in this discussion. The acceptance of the fact that everyone has rights. Not just you. Or just me. Or just the politicians. Or what have you. But everyone .

People should attack the ideas that people have, not attack the people for having ideas. Theres a huge difference between expressing disagreement with an idea and trying to ruin someone's life.

Maybe. But again, so what?

People are free to be jerks. That's Freedom of Expression.

If people physically attack you, that's one thing. That's crime.

If people tell your company they aren't going to purchase your company's products because you work there, that's another thing entirely. That's just Americans exercising their freedom to associate with whomever or whatever they please. That's them exercising their freedom of expression and speech. There's nothing in those actions contrary to constitutional principles.

That's what's important, that absolutely no one's constitutional freedoms be restricted.

Re: Freedom of expression is at a ten-year low globally, study says

#147

Post by ikeyany »

will4274 wrote: post #106
ikeyany wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not factually correct. He revokes press credentials of journalists who criticize him. He encourages people to attack journalists, and some of his supporters have already done so. I advise caution against spreading false information so blithely.

He certainly does not revoke press credentials of journalists just for criticizing him. He did revoke the credentials of a single journalist who was apparently incapable of waiting his turn and repeatedly interrupted the press conference. I'd advise you to heed your own advice about spreading false information.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-white-house-has-...?

Do not make this a partisan issue.

Re: Freedom of expression is at a ten-year low globally, study says

#148

Post by ikeyany »

gotoeleven wrote: post #77
ikeyany wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not factually correct. He revokes press credentials of journalists who criticize him. He encourages people to attack journalists, and some of his supporters have already done so. I advise caution against spreading false information so blithely.

Im just curious what journalists you're talking about. He tried to revoke Jim Acosta's for being very uncordial (to put it lightly), and he revoked Bloombergs after they said they would only investigate him and not Democrats. Are there others? If he revoked the credentials of everyone who criticized him then there would be hardly any left...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-white-house-has-...?

Re: Freedom of expression is at a ten-year low globally, study says

#149

Post by Minor49er »

Miner49er wrote: post #108
umvi wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No one was trying to destroy the Linux Foundation, Linux itself, or the KubeCon conference. Right, because they acquiesced to the demands of the PC police. Had LF stood their ground and pushed back against the PC police, there may have been protests, etc. that caused KubeCon to be cancelled. Never underestimate the power of PC police whipping up a righteous maelstrom on twitter.

Again you can make up any scenario you want. You have no evidence that that is what actually would happen, because it didn't happen. Even if it did, I don't see the problem. People have the right to protest and say what they want about the Linux Foundation.

You were shown that it did happen, but continue to proclaim that it didn't? Incredible.

Re: Freedom of expression is at a ten-year low globally, study says

#150

Post by Minor49er »

bilbo0s wrote: post #146
banads wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People should attack the ideas that people have, not attack the people for having ideas. Theres a huge difference between expressing disagreement with an idea and trying to ruin someone's life.

Maybe. But again, so what? People are free to be jerks. That's Freedom of Expression. If people physically attack you, that's one thing. That's crime. If people tell your company they aren't going to purchase your company's products because you work there, that's another thing entirely. That's just Americans exercising their freedom to associate with whomever or whatever they please. That's them exercising their free…

How much information do you have about the employees in any of the companies that you purchase from on a day to day basis? People that you politically disagree with work for all kinds of companies and you normally have no idea. You should either demand that you know about the political leanings of all employees for every company that you purchase from or you should stop advocate targeting individuals through their employers.
Post reply on HN