EU: It's not going well, let's limit free speech

[icehorse]

It sure isn't.

hard to know how to proceed from there...

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

hard to know how to proceed from there...

Perhaps by making some attempt at objectively differentiating 'not tolerating intolerance' from censorship?

Best of luck with that one.

 

[icehorse]

Perhaps by making some attempt at objectively differentiating 'not tolerating intolerance' from censorship?

Best of luck with that one.

There are a million ways to not tolerate intolerance. Protest, debate, boycott, educate, and so on

 

[Notanumber]

Would they have censored Nigel’s speech here?

Nigel Farage: Politician fined $4,000 for saying the EU president has 'the charisma of the damp rag' | Daily Mail Online

I notice the video has been pulled.

It is Orwellian and a form of Blasphemy control. The political ideology of Islam must be protected at all costs.

The sooner the UK gets out of it the better.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

There are a million ways to not tolerate intolerance. Protest, debate, boycott, educate, and so on

Well that's 4, yet all of those are 'allowing the existence of' as per tolerating something? Not tolerating implies shutting a thing down or at the very least, critical interference.

Regardless of that, that whole statement couldn't be more hypocritical. So by not tolerating intolerance, you are yourself intolerant and shouldn't be tolerated right? Who even decides where the line is between intolerance and criticism is?
You?
Some Imam somewhere?
The dark and shadowy liberal left PC police?

 

[icehorse]

Well that's 4, yet all of those are 'allowing the existence of' as per tolerating something? Not tolerating implies shutting a thing down or at the very least, critical interference.

Regardless of that, that whole statement couldn't be more hypocritical. So by not tolerating intolerance, you are yourself intolerant and shouldn't be tolerated right? Who even decides where the line is between intolerance and criticism is?
You?
Some Imam somewhere?
The dark and shadowy liberal left PC police?

I suspect we're agreed on principle but disagreed on semantics? I'm very close to being a free speech absolutist.

As an example, in the U.S. 30 or 40 years ago, we as a society became very intolerant of smoking. And we shifted how society felt about smoking. We were intolerant about smoking. No censorship was involved.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

I suspect we're agreed on principle but disagreed on semantics? I'm very close to being a free speech absolutist.

As an example, in the U.S. 30 or 40 years ago, we as a society became very intolerant of smoking. And we shifted how society felt about smoking. We were intolerant about smoking. No censorship was involved.

Here's the thing with that;the word censorship only applies to a delivered message. When it comes to a 'done action' like smoking, I would say the direct equivalent would be to prohibit DOING the thing.

Categorically the same thing.

 

[icehorse]

Here's the thing with that;the word censorship only applies to a delivered message. When it comes to a 'done action' like smoking, I would say the direct equivalent would be to prohibit DOING the thing.

Categorically the same thing.

But we didn't censor smoking. We made it harder and we banned it from certain venues.

Let's take the case of Neo-Nazis marching in Jewish communities. Where I'm coming from is that - reprehensible as such a march is - it's protected speech. The march should not be banned. But of course ridicule and derision should be heaped upon the marchers.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

But of course ridicule and derision should be heaped upon the marchers.

Why should it?

 

[icehorse]

Why should it?

Fair point - if you're a moral relativist then it shouldn't be.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

Fair point - if you're a moral relativist then it shouldn't be.

Not necessarily. You can simultaneously believe, as you have revealed yourself to believe, that 'neo nazis' should be protested against and that your own views don't reflect an absolute. I was more curious if you had any interesting reasons to believe that aside from the regularly scheduled propaganda.

 

[icehorse]

Not necessarily. You can simultaneously believe, as you have revealed yourself to believe, that 'neo nazis' should be protested against and that your own views don't reflect an absolute. I was more curious if you had any interesting reasons to believe that aside from the regularly scheduled propaganda.

I'm not sure how interesting my reasons are, this case seems like pretty standard fare: promoting well being and discouraging suffering. And yes, the relativist can argue those reasons, but I find debating with relativists to be a waste of time. If you're a relativist then I'll grant you that I know of no logical argument to counter relative-based arguments.