Turns out there are plenty of things more worthy of fighting for than enabling fascists and terrorists to lure in vulnerable people and harass marginalized people

  • Azzu@lemm.eeEnglish
    286·
    1 year ago

    People do not understand that free speech only applies to governments, because governments are supposed to have a monopoly on violence. Violence between citizens is illegal, however violence by the government onto the citizens is perfectly legal. The government has all the right to force you to go to prison against your will with a lot of allowed means.

    There’s (mostly) no such thing between citizens. There’s stuff like self-defense but that’s pretty much it. So free speech is necessary as a governmental concept since otherwise citizens may feel the full force of the government’s wrath just for saying something the government doesn’t agree with.

    But between citizens, theoretically if everyone adheres to all laws, there’s nothing really bad that one citizen can do to another. Yeah you might be shunned socially, which definitely can be incredibly bad, but it’s more easily manageable than being shot or put into a dark cell for the rest of your life.

    So the “free speech” concept is not really something people should try to apply to their lives except when dealing with the government. If someone says some nasty shit, everyone else is free to start ignoring them or not letting them come into their spaces. That’s how it should be, it’s not even remotely desirable to let them continue spouting their nasty shit without consequences.

    • Artemis@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      7·
      1 year ago

      +1

      “Be nice” is a very effective rule if you can only choose one. No need for anyone to start getting all philosophical or inflammatory. We request that you be nice or get the fuck out

  • qwamqwamqwam@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    124·
    1 year ago

    How is this a showerthought, as opposed to a random political screed? Whatever gets the karma I guess.

    Edit: Also, this position only works because corporations happen to be aligned with you politically right now. I doubt many of you would be as enthusiastic about censorship in social media if we were talking about Reddit trying to ban anarchists and communists as well as Nazis.

  • Holyginz@lemmy.worldEnglish
    118·
    1 year ago

    I think the issue is that free speech needs rules to it or else you will always have hate like the nazis festering in some corner somewhere. It needs to be understood that hate, discrimination, racism, etc. Are the things NOT tolerated so everything else can be safe.

  • somePotato@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    85·
    1 year ago

    The concept of free speech is being intentionally misused by right wing trolls, it doesn’t mean “you can say anything without consequences”. It means “you can’t to jail for saying stuff”, but depending on what you said, there’s cases where you should definitely be ridiculed, banned or punched for it.

    IMO the USA’s “no exceptions to free speech” approach is a big mistake.

    Hate speech shouldn’t be free speech, because people’s rights to not be attacked for no reason should override bigots’ rights to say whatever garbage they think.

    Dangerous misinformation shouldn’t be free speech. Without all of the COVID denialist conspiracies the pandemic could’ve ended a year sooner and avoided millions of pointless deaths

    Also worth remembering that the echo chambers that scream non stop about FREEZEPEACH don’t actually have any. Try disagreeing with anything in r/conservative and you’ll get an instant ban

    • liontigerwings@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      14·
      1 year ago

      americas reasoning for allowing for all forms of free-speech isn’t because we think all sorts of free-speech are worthy of actually being allowed. It’s because we do not trust our own government to apply this ruling without bias. having a rule at all allows for the potential for it to be abused. imagine if Desantis is elected and banned the use of non traditional pronouns. Basically just think of trump or Desantis being in charge of deciding what can or cant be said. Do we like the outcome? I’d rather idiots be legally allowed to say whatever they want and have them be publicly shamed.

  • /home/pineapplelover@lemm.eeEnglish
    75·
    1 year ago

    Same thing with democracy. It seems perfectly reasonable until you realize there are some very ignorant out there

    • sonofbattles@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      24·
      1 year ago

      If someone says

      I am Nazi, heil Hitler. Here is a swastika it is my symbol.

      Yes ban them

      I think that depends on whether or not that person actually believes that. If it’s just low quality edgelord shitpost spamming the community yeah get rid of it, but if this person is actually willing to have a good faith discussion on their ideals I think the conversation being had for better or worse seems preferable to just outright banning/silencing.

  • nanoUFO@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    613·
    1 year ago

    Except reddit just got rid of the alt right racists but then doubled down on the leftist racists. Remember the whole you can’t be racist against a minority but you can be against a majority global rule? They didn’t get rid of racism, they just switched it around. But in all honesty American politics ruined that site the same way /pol/ ruined 4chan.