The Secret of Universe

[email protected]

Only people I see trying to make this point are ones trying to hand wave shitty behaviour.

Also I'm free to say it.

[email protected]

Pretty sure getting banned from a community is feedback.
I have found that the people who scream "free speach" don't want feed back, they want to hate and they want to hurt others.

[email protected]

i believe you overestimate people. IMO, more often than not hatespeech is caused by stupidity not malicious intent

[email protected]

You'd be more accurate if you just called them a conspiracy theory wacko

[email protected]

I get what you are saying, and I agree that it is accurate.

Doesn’t quite have the same pop though.

[email protected]

It does mean freedom from a lot of consequences though, like getting harassed, beaten or incarcerated, or anything else beeing covered by law. In that sense, it does cover hate speech,

[email protected]

That doesn't make sense. If someone at a Nazi rally shouted "actually Jews are alright" and got arrested for it, would you say that's compatible with free speech? Because while they might have experienced consequences, "free speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences", so since they were able to say what they intended to they had free speech?

[email protected]

No it really doesn't.

[email protected]

Nowhere in any writings about free speech does it mention that you are free from consequences.

[email protected]

Why does he get arrested for shouting "actually, jews are alright"?

macniel

no, it really doesn't, besides Americas interpretation of free speech is not universal either.

[email protected]

A free human may live to their heart's content without infringing upon the freedom of a fellow human. As such, free speech includes expressing any opinion without infringing upon the freedom (or any other fundamental right) of a fellow human.
If those boundaries are, for whatever reason, crossed, the law will have to step in and decide who is in the right and who will have to suffer an infringement of their rights. This step is what differentiates a just state and law from an unjust state.

If you spread lies about a person ("The Czechs are poisoning our wells!"), the state may step in and stop this infringement of the victims rights by curtailing your freedom of speech. A less just state may let it slide, therefore permitting the infringement of the victims rights and (usually) protecting yours against counteraction.

Now tell me, is this so hard to understand?

[email protected]

It's feedback that says: What you have said is unacceptable here and you have been shown the door because of your actions as we will not tolerate those actions.

[email protected]

What the fuck do you think it means then? Because otherwise everyone, everywhere has the freedom to do everything, but for some of them you don't have freedom from consequences...

[email protected]

You are never free from consequences.

[email protected]

Except you are free from some consequences, that's exactly why there are laws in place, to delimit what you can do without retaliation, and what you cannot.

[email protected]

So there are consequences with free speech?

[email protected]

A better truism by someone actually wise is that there is no such thing as free speech.

[email protected]

Yes, there are, some fairly harmless, some much more impactfull. Getting a dislike from a comment is a consequence, although very benign. Getting boycotted or banned from a platform is another consequence, which could be quite devastating.

[email protected]

So you admit that certain types of speech when used have consequences even though free spech exists.