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

151–160 of 284 posts

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

#151

Post by iSnow »

justsee wrote: post #131
iSnow wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 ex…

> Oh please. A proper root cause analysis is different from blaming everything on the West. That's another rule I forgot to mention: 5. Anyone pointing out the clear history of repeated violent actions by X against Y shall be labelled a: Y sympathiser, "blame-the-X" bleeding-heart liberal, anti-X, etc > It would have to include the idea that the current cultural clash is with an extremely violent religion as can be s…

> Anyone pointing out the clear history of repeated violent actions by X against Y shall be labelled You are constructing a straw man here. YOU specifically stated that "that violent military intervention coupled with Western political soundbites [...] are the real factors responsible for radicalizing elements", so you ARE knocking the West for everything that happens. I did specifically not label you as anything of the above.

>What metrics do we use to calculate which 'side' is more violent? Number of people killed, and number of countries invaded? On that basis the West is clearly far more violent, isn't it? I don't think so. How many wars between democratic Western countries vs. between Muslim countries? I do recall Iraqis and Iranians happily gassing each other as late as the 1980s.

>Injustice is oxygen for radicals at every strata of society, so my point is that if you serve your subjugated people more justice and less injustice, you are getting increased stability and security in return. Sure, that's why Western secular countries win this contest hands down. Saudi Arabia is not a US colony, they have a home-grown Muslim theocracy. They are subjugated by their own sheiks and their religion.

The West does deserve blame for destroying traditional societies during the 19th century. BUT, those societies were far from peaceful - and contrary to a lot of Asian states, a big part of Africa and the Muslim world never changed their violent ways post-colonialism. The West deserves blame for nurturing dictators like Hussein and Ghaddafi, but it's the Muslim population that - even in more or less free election - votes Islamic radicals into office.

I for one are getting irritated and tired of proponents of a peaceful Islam blissfully ignorant of the realities of violence in Muslim societies and Muslim migrant culture. I don't get it why it is so hard to take at least some responsibility and try to improve things instead of always blaming the West. This is a loser's attitude.

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

#153

Post by JeremyBanks »

cup wrote: post #20

This is really interesting in light of the recent reddit fiasco involving violentacrez and voyeuristic photos being published. I mean people were clearly up in arms about the invasion of privacy and supported subreddits like creepshots being banned despite the fact that they're perfectly legal. I wonder whether these same people see the similiarity between themselves and Muslims who want the blasphemous publication o…

The analogy only holds if you expect Reddit to behave like an open/libre platform. As a private organization, they have no obligation to do so. They have very strong motivations to crack down on activity that reflects badly on them (as these recents events threatened to), yet they do permit much more than many organizations would.

By contrast, the government is supposed to have free speech as one of their fundamental legal principles.

It's a poor argument to suggest that people advocating censorship on Reddit are very similar to those advocating censorship in society at large.

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

#154

Post by clavalle »

jessedhillon wrote: post #122
droithomme wrote: post #8

> The much-misconstrued statement of Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes that free speech does not give you the right to shout fire in a crowded theater is now being used to curtail speech that might provoke a violence-prone minority. This is very incorrect to say it is misconstrued. In Schenck vs US, the Court was prosecuting a pacifist who distributed pamphlets protesting the involuntary draft in World War I, arguing tha…

A more reasonable view would be to note that those who engage in lawless action should be responsible for their own actions, regardless of whatever speech or opinions they claim made them engage in criminal behavior. No one makes you engage in criminality. It is something you choose to do. This seems like a false dilemma: either blame the speaker or the doer -- not both? Moreover, the question is open as to whether o…

It is not a false dilemma. droithomme was offering an alternative to punishing a speaker for another actors unlawful action, not stating that one or the other must be done. No dilemma. No false dilemma.

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

#155

Post by Ygg2 »

guard-of-terra wrote: post #129
JonnieCache wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The minute that crude oil loses its relevance to the Western world, the Arabs will just go back to what they were before - a bunch of desert nomads with no real power. You forgot the thousand years when they were inventing mathematics while your ancestors were living in mud huts covered in their own shit. Europe wasn't even capable of syllogism until they stole the knowledge back from the arabs.

Why respect them for something they did a thousand years ago and then ceased to?

Because it never ceased. If you ever used an algorithm or algebra you owe it to "those nomadic" Arabs.

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

#156

Post by guard-of-terra »

Ygg2 wrote: post #155
guard-of-terra wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why respect them for something they did a thousand years ago and then ceased to?

Because it never ceased. If you ever used an algorithm or algebra you owe it to "those nomadic" Arabs.

How long do you think Gagarin will last?

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

#157

Post by Ygg2 »

guard-of-terra wrote: post #156
Ygg2 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it never ceased. If you ever used an algorithm or algebra you owe it to "those nomadic" Arabs.

How long do you think Gagarin will last?

I hope longer than this fad with Christ lasts.

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

#158

Post by JasonFruit »

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.…

Did you stop reading halfway through? Note the points about hateful, discriminatory, and deceitful speech, which comprise a significant portion of the article. Yes, hypersensitivity to religious criticism by some Muslims is a part of the reason for the problem, but much more than that was discussed.

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

#159

Post by randomchars »

white_devil wrote: post #113
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…

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.

    > They're massively over-represented in crime statistics.
Can you show data?

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

#160

Post by clavalle »

JeremyBanks wrote: post #153
cup wrote: post #20

This is really interesting in light of the recent reddit fiasco involving violentacrez and voyeuristic photos being published. I mean people were clearly up in arms about the invasion of privacy and supported subreddits like creepshots being banned despite the fact that they're perfectly legal. I wonder whether these same people see the similiarity between themselves and Muslims who want the blasphemous publication o…

The analogy only holds if you expect Reddit to behave like an open/libre platform. As a private organization, they have no obligation to do so. They have very strong motivations to crack down on activity that reflects badly on them (as these recents events threatened to), yet they do permit much more than many organizations would. By contrast, the government is supposed to have free speech as one of their fundamental…

I don't think it is a weak argument at all.

Sure Reddit is a private organization but being so makes it a softer target for censorship advocates. They can try different techniques and arguments in that sandbox and get an amplified, but not dissimilar, return on their actions. It can also serve as a morale booster for those groups.

As they hone their message and techniques against a large, democratic, and heterogeneous population, they can use those same tactics in society at large to provoke the same change in more inertial government.

Post reply on HN