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

Speech is violence? Not if we want a liberal, intellectual society

bigthink.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 480 posts

Re: Speech is violence? Not if we want a liberal, intellectual society

#251

Post by freejazz »

wonderwonder wrote: post #230
seydor wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how can convincing (not coercing) be harmful? What's the definition of harm

Woman convinced her boyfriend to kill himself and was convicted: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/michelle-carter-found-g...

She was convicted because she breached her duty of care after he informed her that he attempted suicide, and she told him to get back in the car and then proceeded to do absolutely nothing about it. The judge was spot in noting that by having the conversations with him that she did, at the time, she had a duty of care that she did not uphold. Your characterization of her liability is completely inapposite what the court found, it is misleading, and it is being done so to serve your own political beliefs regarding speech.

Re: Speech is violence? Not if we want a liberal, intellectual society

#252

Post by wonderwonder »

breadbreadbread wrote: post #144

I think this article comes very close to saying "don't let words affect you", which is fundamentally impossible to ask anyone to do and taken to it's logical conclusion I should also not absorb anything in the article. I also think this article also ignores the fact that hateful people often use the language of free speech to justify their own behavior and to punish their critics. Everyday on the internet I see trans…

"Everyday on the internet I see trans people threatened, disrespected, or legislated out of existence" Legislation in the US has actually made trans people vanish or are we using large amounts of hyperbole?

People have been saying mean things about other groups for millennia, as long as its just words, its fine. I'm a jew, I see the neo nazi groups with banners or Kanye ranting and just laugh. Who cares? Now if they want to come at me with physical violence then that's something else. I'll respond in kind. I don't see many jews running around screaming that speech is violence, we just get on with it. Same for black people dealing with those same white supremacists.

"don't let words affect you". Exactly! I am all for us as adults just not letting the words of people we will never meet affect us. I've sat down and had beers with open anti Semites and people with swastika tattoos while being very open about being a jew. Its fine, I had a good talk with them, nobody changed anyone's mind but we parted on good terms. I hope they find happiness. I in no way want them prosecuted for their beliefs or speech.

Trans people are for some reason the only large visible group yelling that speech is violence and saying mean things about them should be illegal. And its primarily M2F trans people (in my experience), I don't really see F2M people doing it. I wonder if there is something related to the giving up of male physical strength that leads to demanding that society now protect you in all ways including your feelings. You're trans, cool, get on with it. Stop asking for special treatment.

The only Nazis are actual Nazis.

Let the downvotes commence.

Re: Speech is violence? Not if we want a liberal, intellectual society

#253

Post by Joeboy »

realjhol wrote: post #248
Joeboy wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe there's something to that, but I think the main thing that happened was that we developed incredible new technology that allowed all of humanity to communicate openly in real time on an equal footing without gatekeepers or censorship. Then we looked at it and decided we didn't like it.

Who exactly is "we"?

"People".

Re: Speech is violence? Not if we want a liberal, intellectual society

#254

Post by filoleg »

geysersam wrote: post #117
bryanrasmussen wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the only thing I remember was then President Bush calling it a bad book while defending its freedom of speech. But yes he hardly qualifies as liberal-minded.

Wtf since when do presidents give book reviews?

No idea, but Obama has pretty good spotify playlists he keeps sharing updates on[0], and I feel like book reviews aren't that different.

0. https://pitchfork.com/news/barack-obama-shares-2022-summer-p...

Re: Speech is violence? Not if we want a liberal, intellectual society

#255

Post by tootie »

Who exactly is this article speaking to? Who right now is trying to put legal limitations on speech? Maybe Ron DeSantis? Most of the agitation against hate speech is not demanding formal punishment from a court. It's asking for platforms to choose not to amplify their messages. Or for the speakers to rethink their lives and choose to be different. The entire article is arguing against a point of view that doesn't really exist.

Re: Speech is violence? Not if we want a liberal, intellectual society

#256

Post by listless »

disembiggen wrote: post #206
listless wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Everyday on the internet I see trans people threatened, disrespected, or legislated out of existence... Granted that there is an overreaction happening but that seems largely in response to a rather hostile approach from that community. “If you deadname me I’ll have you banned”. “If you refuse to use my pronouns I’ll have you fired.” “If you say that there are only two genders I’ll drag you”. This is no way to solv…

>If you say that there are only two genders I’ll drag you is my drag not free speech too? If one insults me (or says something to me I consider insulting), I should be allowed to insult them right back, right?

Yes. I’m just pointing out that what I see as the backlash against trans (which is often unhinged) is simply a response to trans activism, which is likewise unhinged. And that, suppressing the speech of either of those groups is a bad idea.

Re: Speech is violence? Not if we want a liberal, intellectual society

#257

Post by monkey_monkey »

rootusrootus wrote: post #181
anigbrowl wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No u, since we've apparently abandoned argument in favor of just making claims.

Also, contacting someone's employer is far from a slam dunk freedom of speech case. It could easily run afoul of several criminal statutes, not to mention the obvious civil liability. One more nail in the coffin for Internet anonymity.

So, you do want some speech to be proscribed.

Re: Speech is violence? Not if we want a liberal, intellectual society

#258

Post by freejazz »

henrikschroder wrote: post #28
giantg2 wrote: post #2

"To be sure, that doesn’t mean that deliberately offending people for its own sake is morally acceptable, or that people should be entitled to use speech to incite violence, harass, or threaten." The difficulty is knowing what the intent was. Usually there are ways of "non-violent" communication. But it seems a lot of it is subjective. By far it seems the most restrictive places are primary and secondary schools.

> The difficulty is knowing what the intent was. It's not a coincidence that the postmodern thoughts that underpin a lot of this bullshit simply does away with intent, declaring it to be completely useless, and saying that the only thing that can be used to judge a message is how it affected the recipient. Combine that with "words are violence", and you can manufacture physical abuse out of thin air. It's really not…

Completely ignorant use of the word "Postmodern" for 1000, Alex

Re: Speech is violence? Not if we want a liberal, intellectual society

#259

Post by anigbrowl »

rootusrootus wrote: post #188
anigbrowl wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what you dislike is groups of people coordinating their speech, it appears. How is this any different from coordination using price signals?

So you're okay with mob justice, then? You feel pretty confident they'll never come for you ?

The courteous response would be to answer my question rather than deflecting from it.

But since you ask, I am not okay with it in many contexts and my confidence estimates are applied to individual situations rather than being general. I have had experience of being attacked by mobs, both online and physically. I have scars from being kicked in the head and stabbed in the leg during such an attack. I've separately been arrested and jailed on specious charges over political activity (more than once) and obtained dismissal of charges in court. And I have been the target of both verbal and physical violence on many, many occasions, often both on the same occasion. So I come at this question with very extensive first hand knowledge of how such arguments can play out.

So now, would you care to respond to the question I asked: how do you think coordinated speech in a marketplace of ideas differs from coordination of buying or selling in response to price signals?

Re: Speech is violence? Not if we want a liberal, intellectual society

#260

Post by flangola7 »

rajin444 wrote: post #171
Zetice wrote: post #127

Sigh, every single time this comes up, people gloss over the part of freedom of speech that involves free association. I’m free to say, “i hate ”, and you’re free to refuse to associate with me as a result of that. It’s so simple. The government can’t, but you can. As long as we all agree with that, then yeah freedom of speech is great, you just don’t get to stop applying it when you feel satisfied.

This argument always comes up too and you end up with certain people trying to force others to bake cakes a certain way. The whole idea of “protected classes” spits in the face of free speech. I think free speech is a noble goal but can only really exist when we don’t live in a zero sum world. Until then: > "When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean. Neither more or less." Alice responded to Humpty Du…

The cake thing isn't about speech but public accomodations.
Post reply on HN