Twitter isn't a nation, nor is Spotify
in case you missed it https://hn.algolia.com/?query=A%20Declaration%20of%20the%20I...
I missed that thanks
Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
231–240 of 366 posts
Re: Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
#232The assumption here is that there ever was a state of cultural health to begin with. I really do not believe that that was ever the case, and if you start out from such a broken premise I really wonder if the decisions you make will move you in the right direction.
The bigger question for me is whether or not absolute free speech and true democracy are fundamentally compatible or not and I have not seen proof of that. Either camp is stuck in that it is either a prerequisite or that it is impossible without any movement towards a practical middle.
Re: Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
#233I Wil admit this will come off as "omg nazi" hysteria, however I've always felt that nazis alongside every other fascistic ideology (including bolshevism).
With that said, one of the problems I've heard about almost unlimited free speech is the same paradox about tolerating the intolerable, but in this case it's having political entities take advantage of their free speech and knowingly break the law to silence others speech.
And in a way I think it's what is happening here (although not always by breaking the law).
Even though I support USA free speech I can't argue with that point without doing mental gymnast ics or setting up hopeful premises.
Re: Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
#234I have a foreign wife and it really drives home one truth: America is a very nuanced place. We have this idea of almost unlimited free speech. Which sounds great, but in practice, it is not really true. Because ultimately, Americans do not have equal rights. We see this over and over in different aspects of society. The Frederick Douglas example from Boston in the article is a great example of why free speech is good…
I listened to a video from a guy who is most probably a white nationalist and most probably a fascist in the UK quite a while ago. While I find his view abhorrent he understands the free-speech debate better than anyone else. To paraphrase him: > Those who cry about free speech are weak, they don't have political power. Those that are strong (those in power) will censor. His view of free speech is that whichever grou…
No post body was provided.
Re: Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
#235I have a foreign wife and it really drives home one truth: America is a very nuanced place. We have this idea of almost unlimited free speech. Which sounds great, but in practice, it is not really true. Because ultimately, Americans do not have equal rights. We see this over and over in different aspects of society. The Frederick Douglas example from Boston in the article is a great example of why free speech is good…
liberty and free speech tends to overly concern Americans when they have more pressing and bigger problems. The big mistake with the title is "way back to cultural health", stop looking backwards. If you do want to look back to the idea that founded your republic, look back and see a whole bunch of people trying to look forward. Do that. Fix your system of government, a two party system is bad for you, you've become…
When the constitution was written, less than 25% of the US population had the right to vote. Basically only White male property owners could vote.
That was a very different political culture to how it is today.
It’s also interesting to see how the reading scores of presidential speeches have changed over time.
Re: Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
#236I think censorship actually could help us in a huge way back to cultural health; start censoring big data, rage cycle algorithms, sexploitation, advertising. Then on top of that giving people independent, client-based, advanced AI powered tools en masse, and making sure they know how to use them and why, for accurate elected censorship on their own devices of things they personally find detrimental to their mental he…
I believe big data can be disarmed best by strong privacy protections. Facebook already threatened to withdraw from Europe and it would be a shame to do away with free speech because of companies abuse some freedoms while speaking out against the freedom of others.
Re: Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
I listened to a video from a guy who is most probably a white nationalist and most probably a fascist in the UK quite a while ago. While I find his view abhorrent he understands the free-speech debate better than anyone else. To paraphrase him: > Those who cry about free speech are weak, they don't have political power. Those that are strong (those in power) will censor. His view of free speech is that whichever grou…
Quoted post unavailable.
He says exactly what he would do. I am under no illusions of what these people are like (my step brother is affiliated with such groups). That does not mean his analysis of the free speech debate is incorrect
If you are alluding to restricting people's speech of views that are unpopular. Those powers will be used against the general population when it becomes politically expedient or will be abused by the authorities.
This week a man was found guilty in Scotland of "grossly offensive" tweet. What is and what isn't grossly offensive has no objective standard.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/man-convicted-posting-...
Potential sentencing could mean that he could be jail for 6 months. Being in jail for 6 months for posting something that is inflammatory (and has no call to violence) is ridiculous.
This is the result of not protecting free speech rights for people that have abhorrent views. Fairly normal people that say stupid things are criminalised.
Re: Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
I doubt you will find any example where minorities suffered from too much free speech. The truth it that there are always some people who pretend to know better and put pressure on officials. These people are not friendly to any minority and should be disregarded. The people in power currently try everything to restrict speech, but it is also welcomed by a certain sheltered demographic whose worst part of the day is…
Didn't jewish minority suffer because of too much of free speech in Germany at some point? What about too much of free speech Hutu enjoyed in Rwanda at some point?
The Rwanda civil war was partially the outcome of colonialism by Germany and later Belgian administration, creating a class society where the rich minority group of Tutsi ruled supreme over the more poor Hutu. Belgium introduced identity cards classifying each individual as Tutsi, Hutu, Twa or Naturalised.
Pretty obviously, such state of affairs wasn't stable. After world war 2 there were several riots and violence, and the Belgium administration attempted to switch side and promote Hutu over Tutsi. A Hutu government emerged and declared themselves independent, and started to purge the Tutsi population. After a few years of wars with nearby countries, instability, and displacement of Tutsi, the Tutsi population formed a armed military force and a civil war broke out. After a couple of years of guerilla wars and temporarily peaces, with neither side winning, the Hutu army/administration decided on the idea of genocide as a final solution to the conflict.
Where in this process did free speech cause the genocide?
Re: Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
#239While I don't agree with censorship, I think that companies are smart in censoring any fringe ideas, even if those viewpoints ultimately the accepted norm. As soon as a business takes a political stand, then they paint a huge target on their back from legislators and the majority who are fine with them just toeing the line somewhere in the middle. Statistically (which I'm sure they've done studies) it doesn't work in…
Very true, people with demands of content removal are the real problem. Still, the best way to deal with this would have been to not ever give in to demands of removals. Otherwise you made yourself a slave towards everyone that asks for more. And it will never subside again as the critics have other problems and will never be happy.
Re: Our nation cannot censor its way back to cultural health
#240The article never once tries to define what it thinks would be good "cultural health". You can kinda infer that the current level of vitriol and animosity is bad, but what kind of society would that look like and how would we get there? I can see three versions. First is a homogenous culture where there is nothing to fight culture wars over. I don't think such a thing is possible, nor desirable, since the author's fr…
> but the truth is a disturbing minority of this country believes Trump
I believe this is just you looking for excuses to close yourself to other arguments and perspectives. I think there is quite an easy explanation for the success of Trump and that is that people were fed up with politics. Especially good weather topics like representation that are interesting for well-situated students that believe they don't get enough attention.
I don't condemn people that are against Trump, on the contrary. But I do condemn those that cannot explain his success and lack reflection on how that could have happened.