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

Shut up and play nice: How the Western world is limiting free speech

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 284 posts

Re: Shut up and play nice: How the Western world is limiting free speech

#111

Post by hso9791 »

sliverstorm wrote: post #42
guylhem wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are right. My mistake. I fixed that. Freedom of speech is an essential liberty. The #1 most essential liberty, to allow science, progress and democracy

At which point the discussion simply derails into a debate over whether you believe limitations to freedom of speech are ever acceptable. As another note, don't forget to consider the second element- "temporary safety". If the safety purchased by showing greater deference to militant Islamism is not temporary, the quote is not applicable. I am not arguing that this is the case, merely reminding to think critically- h…

What safety is not temporary? And what liberty isn't essential?

Writing style has changed over the centuries, to me this reads like he's also reminding us that liberty is essential, and safety is temporary - and that it always must be so.

Re: Shut up and play nice: How the Western world is limiting free speech

#112

Post by nicholassmith »

bobsy wrote: post #107

What concerns me especially in Britain is the amount of times the police are getting involved in what appear to be free speech cases. In Britain 2 police officers were killed. The same day a guy wrote on his t-shirt something to the effect of "kill pigs for fun hahahaah." This is a stupid thing to do. I would have thought the police might confiscate his t-shirt. Nope, that wouldn't have been sufficient. He got 4 mont…

I agree, there's been a significant rise in cases being prosecuted over stupid, hurtful comments. They're often trolls, or parroting sickipedia, but that's no reason to arrest them, not even a little bit.

Re: Shut up and play nice: How the Western world is limiting free speech

#113

Post by white_devil »

potatolicious wrote: post #77
w1ntermute wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It would work, but is not very different from banning all white people in order to shut down the KKK. There's a big difference in that those white people are already in America, and getting rid of them would be impossible. Note that I'm talking about implementing stricter immigration policies going forward , not getting rid of people who are already here. > The proportion of Arabs to radical Islamic fundamentalists…

> "(although it has failed quite miserably so far when it comes to Hispanic and African Americans)." I wouldn't exactly describe African Americans as immigrants per se... It seems to imply a level of volunteerism that simply wasn't there. Anyways, that's a nitpick. > "Note that I'm talking about implementing stricter immigration policies going forward, not getting rid of people who are already here." Right, but how d…

Europe certainly does have a problem with Muslim immigration.

We've been tolerating and understanding the fuck out of them too, but that doesn't seem to have helped at all. They're massively over-represented in crime statistics.

There are talented people everywhere, but you won't find all that many Western people who killed their own daughters for showing too much skin.

Re: Shut up and play nice: How the Western world is limiting free speech

#114

Post by lloeki »

javajosh wrote: post #9

Why can't the article just come out and say what it means? Militant Islam scares the crap out of the West, and we're willing to pass laws and endure a certain level of self-censorship to avoid provoking violence out of these people. The simple lesson here is that if you want to stop non-believers from doing blasphemy, violent reprisals work . And really, self-censorship is a practical stance, if not a principled one.…

> when I wonder whether I'd be willing to take that risk, the answer is no.

Please, compute the odds. You have a higher chance of being struck by lightning, or being killed by one of your relatives, or suffering an airplane crash, or simply dying from lung cancer even if you don't smoke.

Violent reprisals work only if you get scared. This is the fundamental mechanism of terrorism, and terrorism has found a perfect echo chamber with modern media, be it broadcast TV or the web and their unquenchable thirst for drama, blowing the actual risk completely out of proportion[0]. Resisting the cognitive bias and refusing to be terrorized is the only winning move.

[0] http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/01/the_comparativ...

Re: Shut up and play nice: How the Western world is limiting free speech

#115

Post by iSnow »

justsee wrote: post #91
w1ntermute wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not looking at this from an impartial point of view, I'm looking at this as an American citizen who greatly enjoys the benefits of having been born in a developed nation with global hegemony. I have no illusions about the various immoral and unethical acts committed by the US government over the last 50-75 (and probably more) years in various 3rd world countries in the name of American interests, nor do I think t…

But failing to undertake a proper root cause analysis is harmful to your stated aims. You appear to believe that a resurgent radical Islam is primarily due to the rise of wealthy Arab states, and yet these states are aligned to the West, armed by the West, and also suppress the same radical elements you wish to neutralize domestically. A proper root cause analysis would reveal that violent military intervention coupl…

>A proper root cause analysis would reveal that violent military intervention coupled with Western political soundbites (which have a modern crusades theme to them) are the real factors responsible for radicalizing elements of Middle Eastern society.

Oh please. A proper root cause analysis is different from blaming everything on the West. It would have to include the idea that the current cultural clash is with an extremely violent religion as can be shown by its teachings. It would further investigate the influence of the division of church and state on the moderation of Christian beliefs and (in most countries) lack thereof in the Muslim world.

>Why not wage peace, allocate more of the loot to local populations so they see a significant rise in living standards, and cultivate a widening middle class that has less reasons to be sympathetic to radicals?

9/11 as the showcase of the clash between the West and radical Muslims was planned by a descendant of a rich Saudi family. There were not many poor and underprivileged amongst those plane hijackers.

Re: Shut up and play nice: How the Western world is limiting free speech

#116

Post by marshallp »

w1ntermute wrote: post #14
javajosh wrote: post #9

Why can't the article just come out and say what it means? Militant Islam scares the crap out of the West, and we're willing to pass laws and endure a certain level of self-censorship to avoid provoking violence out of these people. The simple lesson here is that if you want to stop non-believers from doing blasphemy, violent reprisals work . And really, self-censorship is a practical stance, if not a principled one.…

> Militant Islam scares the crap out of the West, and we're willing to pass laws and endure a certain level of self-censorship to avoid provoking violence out of these people. This is such a stupid strategy. The right thing to do is to look at the root cause of all this. After all, there are lots of angry people all across the world that hate the Western world and want to hurt it, but most can't. What sets the Arabs…

You would like to limit immigration. What would companies like google like look after that? Would you advocate sending the head of youtube back to Iran? What about much of Detroit or New York?

You're conflating some poverty-stricken residents of impoverished parts of the world riled up by political rhetoric with a credible enemy (like a cold war style superpower).

You're arguments make as much sense as labeling all white people everywhere as Nazis because Hitler was a white guy.

Go to Liberia or the Congo or India. You'll see that people aren't civilized, they will eat each other if out of ritual. That was the case everywhere over a 100 years ago. You miss that it's not some kind of inherent badness, they are simply living in a different time, like 1800s europe for example. If children commit crimes they are not convicted in the same manner as adults, that's the correct analogy to take.

As civilized people and members of the global species that is humanity, it's a responsibility to take care of the weak. The problems you've outlined are (global) law enforcement problems. And they are disappearing, as time passes everyone on earth will become modern. Watch some Steven Pinker and see how today is the most peaceful time in human history.

Watch Carl Sagan's blue dot and realize it's not Us vs Them. That's the thinking of pre-space age man.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WibmcsEGLKo (Charlie Chaplin)

Re: Shut up and play nice: How the Western world is limiting free speech

#118

Post by lmm »

simonh wrote: post #87
potatolicious wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "(although it has failed quite miserably so far when it comes to Hispanic and African Americans)." I wouldn't exactly describe African Americans as immigrants per se... It seems to imply a level of volunteerism that simply wasn't there. Anyways, that's a nitpick. > "Note that I'm talking about implementing stricter immigration policies going forward, not getting rid of people who are already here." Right, but how d…

Our current government here in the UK is doing this at the moment. They even revoked a university's license to accept foreign students on a technicality. We make a fortune out of foreign students and with our demographics need them far more than the US, but according to the Daily Mail reading grey brigade if we packed them all off home, all our troubles would be over. Because simplistic, sweeping, poorly thought out…

It wasn't a technicality. While the response may have been disproportionate, we're talking about brazen corruption from LMU; I have very little sympathy for them.

Re: Shut up and play nice: How the Western world is limiting free speech

#119

Post by eli_gottlieb »

milfot wrote: post #57
spindritf wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> please rewrite your post to replace 'islamists' with 'militants'. No need to rewrite anything, it's both their hostility and philosophical differences that scare us. Overcoming that fear and reaffirming our values is the basis for one of the most important texts in the European culture — The Song of Roland. EDIT: I do know what you mean and I'm sorry but those are just feel-good platitudes. West quite obviously is…

At this risk of getting this all out of order (since you edited rather than replying).. The west is RUN by militant christians (and militant jews and militant atheists etc). They use armies to inflict their particular brand of extremism. They killed about a million iraquis. They murder people in cold blood by dropping missiles from drones from 50,000 ft up. Pretty fucking extreme if you ask me.

Could you please show us the militant Jews and atheists running the West?

Re: Shut up and play nice: How the Western world is limiting free speech

#120

Post by nnq »

..."zombie Muhammed"! ...I REALLY wanna see a photo of that, so if anyone has it PLEASE post it anywhere online!

(though, to be fair, resurrection was Jesus' thing, so he would go better with the zombie thing, and maybe the costumed guy got what he deserved for mixing things up...)

Post reply on HN