Backsliding on free expression around the world needs to end • Hacker News Board

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

#151

Post by colinmhayes » Thu, Sep 01, 2022, 6:10 PM UTC

ad404b8a372f2b9 wrote: post #121

hotpotamus wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see these complaints (generally from the right wing), and I think... so what? No one ever seems to have any action tied to resolve their complaints, presumably because it would ironically require creating laws that restrict speech - what is cancel culture other than a reflection of free speech in its own right after all? Of course, if you start talking about boycotting Israel, they'll be happy to send the law after…

Cancel culture is not the result of free speech, it's the result of a toxic social environment. Here are some actionable solutions that don't require limiting free speech: 1. Improve labor laws so craven employers can't just dump their employee because they said something online (unrelated to the company on their personal time) and people are complaining. 2. Regulate social media algorithms to prevent the feedback lo…

You don't think employers should be able to fire people who cost them money?

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

#152

Post by colechristensen » Thu, Sep 01, 2022, 6:12 PM UTC

MrsPeaches wrote: post #110

colechristensen wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The biggest threat to free speech around the world is the failure to lead by example of the western world, particularly by America. It doesn't matter that we're a few notches better than somewhere else, they see us doing the same things by popular demand so doing a bit more themselves is easy to justify. We're losing the high ground and the argument that nobody else should do the same things we're doing.

From my skimming, the article linked makes no such claim and I would like to see evidence of what you are claiming. To be clear the article is talking about States suppressing freedom of expression (not the ephemeral Twitter mob). You could make a case that Snowden and Assange are examples of America suppressing freedom expression but I am not sure how helpful it is to conflate woke/anti-woke debates with erosions of…

>To be clear the article is talking about States suppressing freedom of expression (not the ephemeral Twitter mob).

The point I am trying to make is an intolerant population is really easy to control by an intolerant state. The people in power at the top usually don't actually care very much about the topics of intolerance, but they are a useful tool for building and maintaining power.

Intolerance in a population is a weakness exploited by people in power. Fan the flames of that passion and now and then nudge it in a direction which is useful to maintain that power. How do you think Trump got a mob to storm the capital building?

People in America are almost begging for authoritarian solutions to their perceived problems with morality. They want the government to force their opinions on everyone. This is true across the political spectrum, and there are plenty of examples of it.

Countries don't fall victim to authoritarianism, populations consent and encourage it (and then afterwards get upset with the result when it's too late).

Hitler achieved power through popular election, he took what some people wanted, turned it into what many people wanted, and directed it towards his personal goals.

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

#153

Post by bcrosby95 » Thu, Sep 01, 2022, 6:12 PM UTC

vkou wrote: post #135

nostromo wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Popper is literally talking about Soviets and Nazis marching into your country and killing dissidents. It's ridiculous to extend his thinking to our modern and relatively mild transgressions.

I don't think Popper was so daft as to believe that only Soviets and Nazis are capable of the kind of intolerance that should not be tolerated. I'd daresay that democracies happily carrying out repressions, summary executions, lynchings, concentration camps, institutionalized slavery, etc, etc would meet that bar as well. You don't need to drape a swastika around you to be a fascist, you can get by just as well with…

The point is that he wasn't talking about people saying dumb shit on twitter. He's talking about people using intolerance to justify physical violence against people.

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

#154

Post by hotpotamus » Thu, Sep 01, 2022, 6:13 PM UTC

ad404b8a372f2b9 wrote: post #121

hotpotamus wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see these complaints (generally from the right wing), and I think... so what? No one ever seems to have any action tied to resolve their complaints, presumably because it would ironically require creating laws that restrict speech - what is cancel culture other than a reflection of free speech in its own right after all? Of course, if you start talking about boycotting Israel, they'll be happy to send the law after…

Cancel culture is not the result of free speech, it's the result of a toxic social environment. Here are some actionable solutions that don't require limiting free speech: 1. Improve labor laws so craven employers can't just dump their employee because they said something online (unrelated to the company on their personal time) and people are complaining. 2. Regulate social media algorithms to prevent the feedback lo…

Doesn't free speech mean the freedom to create a toxic social environment?

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

#155

Post by some-guy » Thu, Sep 01, 2022, 6:14 PM UTC

salt-thrower wrote: post #117

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…

Freedom of speech is literally just “the government can’t throw you in jail for expressing an opinion.” It’s always been only that. Media companies (TV, newspapers, radio, now social media) have always “deplatformed” people who they disagree with or consider dangerous. There is nothing new in any of your examples. If you agree with the views of deplatformed influencers, you can start your own blog about it. That’s fr…

McCarthyism, music censorship, Jim Crow, the MPAA, sodomy laws--the United States has always engaged in "cancel culture" and it has never been fully partisan.

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

#156

Post by some-guy » Thu, Sep 01, 2022, 6:15 PM UTC

josephh wrote: post #147

phillipcarter wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's an influx of right-wing people who are trying to rebrand "free speech" as being able to say reprehensible things with zero _social_ consequences. So you're unfortunately trying to reason with the wrong person. Their belief is that all speech in all forms should be free from any consequences, social, legal, or otherwise.

And what is your point? Let them face consequences. That is not a justification for suppressing such speech.

What is "suppression" in this case? What are the "consequences" in this case?

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

#157

Post by angst_ridden » Thu, Sep 01, 2022, 6:16 PM UTC

josephh wrote: post #147

phillipcarter wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's an influx of right-wing people who are trying to rebrand "free speech" as being able to say reprehensible things with zero _social_ consequences. So you're unfortunately trying to reason with the wrong person. Their belief is that all speech in all forms should be free from any consequences, social, legal, or otherwise.

And what is your point? Let them face consequences. That is not a justification for suppressing such speech.

What a lot of people call "cancel culture" is exactly that, though. For example, when a comedian says something that insults a class of people who are customers of the comedian's sponsor and the sponsor projects lost revenue from that class of people, they stop funding that comedian's work.

That's both "cancel culture" and the consequences of free speech.

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

#158

Post by shadowgovt » Thu, Sep 01, 2022, 6:16 PM UTC

debacle wrote: post #91

mikkergp wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of those examples are explicitly violent. Although vigorous we are still having that debate. You're not entirely wrong, but heads of state start assassinating journalists is a different spectra.

It took 40 years for growing antisemitism in Europe to lead to the Holocaust.

Good thing forum moderation can help nip such antisemitism in the bud by deplatforming those trying to normalize it in the 21st century.

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

#159

Post by greenthrow » Thu, Sep 01, 2022, 6:17 PM UTC

This is not talking about bogus "my freedoms" claims of people being kicked off Twitter, it's talking about actual loss of freedom of expression, where the government imprisons people for saying the wrong things. In the US we have loss sight of what real freedom of expression means.

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

#160

Post by cycomanic » Thu, Sep 01, 2022, 6:18 PM UTC

nostromo wrote: post #97

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…

Popper is literally talking about Soviets and Nazis marching into your country and killing dissidents. It's ridiculous to extend his thinking to our modern and relatively mild transgressions.

I'd like to point out that the US had people with literally Nazi flags walking through the streets attacking people who looked different, supported by a significant portion of the establishment (including a president). I would not call that minor transgressions. How do you think Hitler got into power?