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

How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

krebsonsecurity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 994 posts

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#571

Post by computerthings »

al_borland wrote: post #360
esalman wrote: post #184

It started with the Free Palestine protesters. Tesla protesters are next. Citizens will be shipped to El Salvador, non-citizens to where they came from.

What many of them are doing isn’t a legally protected form of protesting. Free Palestine protesters have been shutting down roads with their protests, this is illegal. Tesla protesters are vandalizing the vehicles of private citizens and burning down dealerships. This is also illegal, and due to its political goals, it seems to fit the textbook definition of terrorism. > the calculated use of violence (or the threat…

[dead]

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#572

Post by vmladenov »

aprilthird2021 wrote: post #307
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an American, I agree - I'm pretty surprised at how nakedly transparent the whole thing has been. One basic example - I thought pretty much everyone agreed that at least some level of due process is just inherent to the rights of everyone in the US. When I hear administration figures arguing that flying the Venezuelans to El Salvadoran prisons is a good thing because "they're really bad dudes", I think "OK, and we'…

They started this tactic of "They're bad dudes trust us don't need a trial" during the Bush administration and many many people pointed out this would come to our shores soon, and it did and it's here again.

In the end it all comes back to the PATRIOT Act and GWOT

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#573

Post by kelseyfrog »

nine_k wrote: post #478
cammikebrown wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re literally banning The Handmaid’s Tale. Not good https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/02/margaret-a...

Quoting the article: > It’s shunning time in Madison County, Virginia, where the school board recently banished my novel The Handmaid’s Tale from the shelves of the high-school library. Note: a school library. A student can go to a regular library and check out this book, if they are really interested. If you want to see what real book banning looks like, read the list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_ban…

Redefining the definition of book banning is not a good look and not a way to win this argument. It's a hole you really don't want to dig.

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#574

Post by generalizations »

p1necone wrote: post #174
twright wrote: post #122

This is a really good compilation that should make any "free-speech absolutist" reconsider their support for the current administration. In my understanding, the commonplace interpretation of the first amendment is largely due to a series of landmark cases through the early to mid-20th century. A lot of expansions were provided to the amendment that have been taken for granted since then and we are now going to see c…

I'm not really convinced more than a vanishingly small percentage of people who self identify as "free speech absolutists" are using that term in good faith. Freedom of speech is just the easiest way to have plausible deniability when directly or indirectly defending otherwise indefensible positions. Anecdotally I've noticed these sorts of people much less often, at least on here as of late. Methinks their deniabilit…

> Anecdotally I've noticed these sorts of people much less often, at least on here as of late. Methinks their deniability isn't so plausible any more.

Been a lot more hysterical on here as of late. Methinks there's less reason to discuss political things now.

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#575

Post by slg »

davorak wrote: post #451
tetromino_ wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have yet to see a free speech absolutist express concern ... Hi there. You are seeing one right now. Well, seeing the words of one. I am a free speech absolutist. What this administration is doing is abominable. I have always seen anti-Israeli campus posters as idiots, but Trump's crackdown on them is, imho, unconstitutional and immoral.

> free speech absolutist An unfortunately overloaded term. 1) free speech absolutist meaning the government should not be censor private citizens speech in any way, 2) or twitter/similar is breaking the law by censoring X speech, 3) or twitter/similar should be considered a defacto public square and therefor the company twitter/similar can not legally censor speech on it, 4) or "I align with Elon Musk who calls himse…

You're still missing a good portion of the ambiguity of the term. Both "free" and "absolutist" are rather definitive terms with clear meaning. But what is "speech"? Does that count fraud, defamation, threats, or even the distribution of child porn? Almost everyone agrees at least some of that should be restricted. So an "absolutists" either needs to defend that type of harmful speech or debate the meaning of "speech" and once that happens the term has lost all meaning.

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#576

Post by galaxyLogic »

milesrout wrote: post #415
galaxyLogic wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be counter-intuitive if they defended the free speech of those who want to take away the free speech of others. Part of Free Speech is that it does not matter to have it if nobody hears you, maybe because your voice is drowned out by powerful media, serving the interests of the few. Therefore we need Equal Rights to free speech for everybody, especially when it comes to elections.

No it wouldn't. Part of freedom of expression is the right to express opinions of any kind. That includes the view that freedom of expression should be limited: that is a perfectly legitimate opinion. >Therefore we need Equal Rights to free speech for everybody Freedom of speech doesn't mean you are entitled to a publicly funded megaphone or that anyone is required to listen to you.

I understand, constitution gives you the right to speak against free speech as well. I'm just saying it wouldn't make sense for ACLU to support people who want to take away your right to free speech.

Also you're right that we can't give everybody the one hour of free speech on TV, can we?.

But it is in the interest of the country as a whole that all viewpoints are heard. But if one person can buy all TV-stations then he will have free speech and nobody else really does. If nobody can hear you because somebody else is speaking so loudly, it doesn't matter if you have free speech or not.

It used to be law that there are limits to how many millions one person or corporation can use to win elections. But seems that is no longer the case thanks to Supreme Court judges nominated by Republican presidents.

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#577

Post by croes »

jari_mustonen wrote: post #494

Free speech has been in retreat for years. The previous administration just targeted a different flavor of 'offending speech' and cracked down hard on it. As a European, I can confirm it’s at least as bad here, if not worse. We’re just gagged by a different set of taboo ideas. I bought into Trump’s campaign promise to 'restore free speech' — partly because he’d been censored so aggressively himself. I figured he’d ge…

There is no free speech without limits unless you think speech as such has no effect.

Otherwise the speech of one can silent the speech of orhers.

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#578

Post by more_corn »

milesrout wrote: post #405
sapphicsnail wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have yet to see a free speech absolutist express concern about the government and media suppressing Gaza protestors or LGBTQ books being banned or anything else that affects the left. Doesn't seem very principled to me.

Nobody is banning books. Removing inappropriate material from school libraries isn't book banning. Have you seen some of the books that are being removed? That books with graphic depictions of aren't appropriate for children is a view perfectly compatible with strong support for freedom of expression.

There’s a coordinated effort to ban books. Harry Potter has been banned. Parents are provided with the template letters to send and are trained to raise objections to books that don’t fit their religious ideology. I’d provide you with links but you could just google it yourself same as I could. Search for “coordinated effort ban books”

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#579

Post by kelseyfrog »

relatedtitle wrote: post #441
milesrout wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody is banning books. Removing inappropriate material from school libraries isn't book banning. Have you seen some of the books that are being removed? That books with graphic depictions of aren't appropriate for children is a view perfectly compatible with strong support for freedom of expression.

But the Bible's ok...

When our book says "There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses," it's ok. When yours say it, it's not. Simple.

1. https://biblehub.com/ezekiel/23-20.htm

Re: How each pillar of the First Amendment is under attack

#580

Post by amitport »

FilosofumRex wrote: post #565

[flagged]

"Trump is merely doing what he has been paid to do by pro-Israeli zionist lobby - who apparently were the highest bidders"

The concept of blaming the Jews on everything wrong in one's country is not new, and it never ends well.

Post reply on HN