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

Backsliding on free expression around the world needs to end

thenewhumanitarian.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 299 posts

Re: Backsliding on free expression around the world needs to end

#81

Post by AnimalMuppet »

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #29
jessaustin wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely Popper wasn't so sloppy as that? There is an obvious difference between toleration of expression, which "society" certainly should practice, and toleration of more physical actions that in theory could be up for a vote. Somehow I grow suspicious of attempts to obscure that obvious difference...

By the time it's physical actions, it's too late. You have to stop, at the very least, calling for violence, for example.

In fact, if you read the context, that's exactly where Popper drew the line. When a side replies with fists or guns, then you quit being tolerant. Not before. (I'm not sure that he mentioned direct calls for violence one way or the other, so I won't dogmatically claim he put that on either side of the line. But he did not accept ideas - any ideas - as "intolerant".)

Re: Backsliding on free expression around the world needs to end

#82

Post by dleslie »

golemotron wrote: post #65
dleslie wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Popper also sets the limit fairly clearly in his description of the paradox, and it's: > But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer argu…

The thing Popper misses is that once you rationalize your own intolerance, others will rationalize theirs, missing the nuance of his limit. And, indeed, that has happened. I can't remember ever seeing anyone other than you mention the limit, and that includes quite a few people quoting Popper to justify their intolerance. I'd argue that Popper left his wheelhouse when he formulated this. It was at the moment when WW2…

He's not advocating for a world free of intolerance; in fact, he advocates for the use of intolerance when necessary, and describes when it is necessary. Intolerance can be rational, after all; and intolerance can be moral.

FWIW, I am aware of the full quote because I've seen it elsewhere; but then, I used to spend quite a lot of time arguing on the intarwebs.

Re: Backsliding on free expression around the world needs to end

#83

Post by OrangeMonkey »

Every time a topic comes up reminding folks that suggesting free speech was once a good thing, every person who wants to silence others starts spamming "The Paradox of Tolerance."

You see - we have to silence people because reasons.

Lets see - havent tested yet. CTRL-F, PARADOX: ok, we are sitting at 26 times mentioned.

I welcome the return of the days when wanting free speech is lauded - but I am afraid at what is going to have to happen to get us to that point.

Re: Backsliding on free expression around the world needs to end

#84

Post by kitsunesoba »

wikitopian wrote: post #73
kitsunesoba wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Problem is, there’s been an active war against critical thought across multiple fronts for a while now, which includes campaigns in social and traditional media and attacks on the education system. Youth and unwitting adults alike are being trained to stay angry and act on impulse rather than address situations as thoughtful, well-rounded members of society would. I won’t claim to have a solution, but there are clear…

I understand you believe there's a compelling case for placing your hand over my mouth. I'm sure you earnestly believe your case, and think placing your hand over my mouth is the moral, right, and just thing to do. Time will tell if you're capable of holding it there.

I guess what I’m getting at is that if we’re to eliminate all traces of censorship, other actions must be taken in parallel to not allow the negative effects of doing that spiral out of control.

A starting point might be to restore Fairness Doctrine and other policies that help prevent traditional media from becoming hyper-polarized Nielsen-rating-chasing entertainment rather than legitimate news sources, as well as holding social media directly responsible for the problems brought by bot farms and other types of amplifying manipulation.

Re: Backsliding on free expression around the world needs to end

#85

Post by honkdaddy »

ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #8
colechristensen wrote: post #3

"I find people who don't think exactly like me to be intolerable" is the bread and butter for controlling a population. People look at the past and think to themselves "those people in the past were wrong, that's why the one acceptable way to think being enforced with power was immoral, on the other hand, my opinions are right, so the ends justify the means". Intolerance is intolerance, regardless of how morally just…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant. Karl Popper described it as the seemingly self-contradictory idea that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must retain the right to be intolerant of intolerance.

Most of the time when I see people reference this principle it’s because they’d like a convenient way to hate Christians or republicans while still considering themselves a good person.

Re: Backsliding on free expression around the world needs to end

#86

Post by Georgelemental »

hexator wrote: post #48
hunglee2 wrote: post #35

the article is an example of orientalism, presenting the case as if there is no urgency on the matter in the Western world. Cancel culture, de-platforming, algorithmic dampening, account mislabelling, brigading on-platform, account suspension and deletion - all of these things are happening in the Western world, on US platforms. I used to have sympathy with the the argument that 'private company's can do what they li…

There's quite a bit of difference between the government banning free expression and a private company deciding that they don't want intolerable people on their platform — which itself is an example of their free expression.

That logic relies on the fact any single private corporation controls at most a small part of public discourse, so no single platform can impose speech codes on all of society. But modern tech monopolies benefit from network effects and actively collude with and lobby government to crush would-be competitors. So the old rules no longer apply to them

Re: Backsliding on free expression around the world needs to end

#87

Post by mistermann »

dleslie wrote: post #47
ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant. Karl Popper described it as the seemingly self-contradictory idea that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must retain the right to be intolerant of intolerance.

Popper also sets the limit fairly clearly in his description of the paradox, and it's: > But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer argu…

> for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols

How this typically works out in the real world is a lot like the pot calling the kettle black though - ideologues and casuals on both sides (yes, I said it!) can be easily observed in massive quantities refusing to address valid points of disagreement, often via clever rhetorical techniques (memes, thought terminating cliches, etc) like JAQing Off, SeaLioning, "bad faith", "irrelevant/word salad/meaningless", etc - if you don't believe me, try searching HN for some of these terms and examine the surrounding context.

Re: Backsliding on free expression around the world needs to end

#88

Post by lxe »

etchalon wrote: post #23

The article, and its data, is almost specifically about actual authoritarian regimes and actual restriction of speech by governments against citizens. But I predict this thread will very quickly nose dive into "Twitter banned me for saying COVID is a hoax and something something first amendment."

Your prediction came true! Would be cool if reading the article was a requirement before posting a comment. Maybe use a summarizer AI to create a short quiz that people would need to answer before posting?

Re: Backsliding on free expression around the world needs to end

#89

Post by Natsu »

OrangeMonkey wrote: post #83

Every time a topic comes up reminding folks that suggesting free speech was once a good thing, every person who wants to silence others starts spamming "The Paradox of Tolerance." You see - we have to silence people because reasons. Lets see - havent tested yet. CTRL-F, PARADOX: ok, we are sitting at 26 times mentioned. I welcome the return of the days when wanting free speech is lauded - but I am afraid at what is g…

The Paradox of Tolerance said that people have, based on their right to self-defense, the ability to defend themselves against those who would shut down speech with fists or pistols.

In short, it's aimed at protecting people from literal brown shirt tactics of assaulting people for speaking. Those invoking it now are pretty far afield from what it espouses.

Re: Backsliding on free expression around the world needs to end

#90

Post by russdill »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #56
hexator wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's quite a bit of difference between the government banning free expression and a private company deciding that they don't want intolerable people on their platform — which itself is an example of their free expression.

Step 1 - governments privatises /sells all public squares and large streets in your city Step 2 - private companies that own them hire private security firms Step 3 - if anyone protests, stands with a banner or says anything in convenient anywhere in the city, they get violently removed. Step 4 - folks like you yourself defend it under the guide of 'but it's not a government!' Vioala, no free speech to worry about! Y…

I mean, this is already the case and most people seem ok with it and it seems to be working out. If I go to the mall which is a very public space where people congregate there are limitations that can be put there by the owner of the facility on speech. They can cancel me, deplatform me, ban me, etc.
Post reply on HN