Should there be liberty for the intolerant?

[Secret Chief]

Well, of course, there are other forms of intimidation based on other things, whether it's religion, gender, sexual orientation, disability, or whatever it might be. But as I understand it, there are statutes which specifically mention racial or ethnic intimidation. But that would not imply that other forms of intimidation are legal.

In UK law there are named "protected characteristics" in respect of discrimination (in various scenarios inc. harassment). The list is:
(From the government website)

- Discrimination: your rights

Types of discrimination ('protected characteristics')
It is against the law to discriminate against anyone because of:

• age
• gender reassignment
• being married or in a civil partnership
• being pregnant or on maternity leave
• disability
• race including colour, nationality, ethnic or national origin
• religion or belief
• sex
• sexual orientation

 

[Stevicus]

Rather than having separate laws against intimidation
of this or that group, it would be better to just illegalize
intimidation in general. But I digress.

It's not so much about groups, but about the basis for intimidation and the motives behind it. I think there are laws against intimidation in general, although enforcement and punishment might vary by degree.

 

[Azrael Antilla]

I'm glad we have our more liberal standard.

You merely value the unfettered liberty of free speech over the value of de platforming those who publically disseminate opinion that deleteriously disaffects innocent people and or opens them up to potential stochastic threats as another poster mentioned earlier. Such as homophobia and racism. Different strokes for different folks I guess.

Ultimately, to protect the liberty choice and political freedom of persecuted minority groups.

It is possible that we Eurostanians could come across as basically advocating censorship, well, to a degree, that is true.

As Qanon and other anti government conspiracy movements show, bad ideas, can spread very quickly like a virus, through a disillusioned dissatisfied uneducated population.

Is it worth defending unfettered free speech over political stability and national security? is it worth the continued existence of the United States?

 

[Revoltingest]

You merely value the unfettered liberty of free speech over the value of de platforming those who publically disseminate opinion that deleteriously disaffects innocent people and or opens them up to potential stochastic threats as another poster mentioned earlier.

Lotta big words there.
But you're wrong about one thing.
We do have some fettering.

Such as homophobia and racism. Different strokes for different folks I guess. Ultimately, to protect the liberty choice and political freedom of persecuted minority groups.
It is possible that we Eurostanians could come across as basically advocating censorship, well, to a degree, that is true. As Qanon and other anti government conspiracy movements show, bad ideas, can spread very quickly like a virus, through a disillusioned dissatisfied uneducated population. Is it worth defending unfettered free speech over political stability and national security? is it worth the continued existence of the United States?

Yes, our continued existence is worth it.
I don't trust government to enforce the
right to not be offended by mere speech.

 

[Azrael Antilla]

Lotta big words there.
But you're wrong about one thing.
We do have some fettering.

Yes, our continued existence is worth it.
I don't trust government to enforce the
right to not be offended by mere speech.

I didn't mean to post deletrious and dissafect in the same sentence...that's a bit unnecessary.

It's not about offence bro, that's lazy. It's about preventing the dissemination of hateful opinion that leads to violence and persecution.

 

[Azrael Antilla]

Facts should be unfettered, substantiated facts, but hateful discrimanatory opinion speech? That promotes social unrest crime and disorder? I don't see it. No-one trusts their government. No-one with an ounce of sense.

 

[Revoltingest]

I didn't mean to post deletrious and dissafect in the same sentence...that's a bit unnecessary.

It's not about offence bro, that's lazy. It's about preventing the dissemination of hateful opinion that leads to violence and persecution.

Is is possible that the wrong President, Congress,
or SCOTUS just might mis-use such power? And
that governmental prosecution might be worse than
private persecution?
I prefer to err on the side of less government regulation.
But I can see that Euorstanians, given their 20th
century history, would want more speech censored.

 

[Azrael Antilla]

But I can see that Euorstanians, given their 20th
century history, would want more speech censored.

Oh I see. Uhuh. Well my American cousin. As the spawn of two of the main combatants in the last little internal spat we had. British German, I took a great interest in the circumstances that led to Hitler becoming Reich chancellor and the resultant fallout from that.

I can tell you I see a similar situation occuring on a large continent not a million miles to the west of these windy little damp islands. Trump's antics in particular were very reminiscent indeed.

Good luck. Let us know if you need anything.

 

[Stevicus]

Oh I see. Uhuh. Well my American cousin. As the spawn of two of the main combatants in the last little internal spat we had. British German, I took a great interest in the circumstances that led to Hitler becoming Reich chancellor and the resultant fallout from that. I can tell you I see a similar situation occuring on a large continent not a million miles to the west of these windy little damp islands. Trump's antics in particular were very reminiscent indeed. Good luck. Let us know if you need anything.

Different continent, though. At least, ideologically and politically, America's traditions and roots followed a completely different path than that of Germany or other Continental European nation-states. It doesn't make us any better or that we're above falling into the same kind of morass which affected Germany. But there's still the remnants of the Civil War and the frontier mentality which still lingers within the political culture.

It's not Hitler and the Reich, but more like Andrew Jackson or Jefferson Davis. I'm not saying they're any better, just different.

Both Germany and Britain strike me as very ordered, overly class-conscious, and disciplined societies, whereas Americans have been largely undisciplined and chaotic in our history. I think of the Germans in their sleek, Hugo Boss uniforms, all marching down the street in a straight line, whereas we in America can look up to "The Dirty Dozen" or the "Black Sheep Squadron" as our heroes.

 

[Secret Chief]

Both Germany and Britain strike me as very ordered, overly class-conscious, and disciplined societies, whereas Americans have been largely undisciplined and chaotic in our history.

We certainly know how to queue, unlike those vulgar Germans. And as for Americans, I bet they can't even spell "queue"

 

[Revoltingest]

We certainly know how to queue, unlike those vulgar Germans. And as for Americans, I bet they can't even spell "queue"

Brits can't spell "line".

 

[Secret Chief]

Brits can't spell "line".

It's not just the language is it

 

[Stevicus]

And as for Americans, I bet they can't even spell "queue"

Q

 

[Secret Chief]

Q

View attachment 57317

As I suspected.

 

[Azrael Antilla]

Different continent, though. At least, ideologically and politically, America's traditions and roots followed a completely different path than that of Germany or other Continental European nation-states. It doesn't make us any better or that we're above falling into the same kind of morass which affected Germany. But there's still the remnants of the Civil War and the frontier mentality which still lingers within the political culture.

It's not Hitler and the Reich, but more like Andrew Jackson or Jefferson Davis. I'm not saying they're any better, just different.

Both Germany and Britain strike me as very ordered, overly class-conscious, and disciplined societies, whereas Americans have been largely undisciplined and chaotic in our history. I think of the Germans in their sleek, Hugo Boss uniforms, all marching down the street in a straight line, whereas we in America can look up to "The Dirty Dozen" or the "Black Sheep Squadron" as our heroes.

Interesting how things work out. Considering the two largest European ethnic groups in the USA originate from what is now the UK and Germany. As for those Hugo boss uniforms they've of course been shelved. I prefer the unadorned pragmatic utilitarian British army uniform myself. A soldier ought not to be too fancy looking, otherwise it glorifies the dirty business of war, imo.

 

[Azrael Antilla]

We certainly know how to queue, unlike those vulgar Germans. And as for Americans, I bet they can't even spell "queue"

Vulgar Germans! How dare you insult ze people of ze fatherland! English swinehund. Your name is now on our list sunshine. ( I jest but my pops is German, Bohemia, I tell you what the Gemans do do better than the Brits, Christmas! And of course Beer)

 

[Secret Chief]

Beer

I've slipped into derangement in my dotage and now drink only alcohol free beers. Some of the very best ones are German.

 

[Azrael Antilla]

I've slipped into derangement in my dotage and now drink only alcohol free beers. Some of the very best ones are German.

You poor soul. Alcohol free...what a world.

 

[Revoltingest]

Vulgar Germans! How dare you insult ze people of ze fatherland! English swinehund. Your name is now on our list sunshine. ( I jest but my pops is German, Bohemia, I tell you what the Gemans do do better than the Brits, Christmas! And of course Beer)

I'm part German.
I once worked for a German company (Knorr Bremse).
After that experience, I sliced open me wrist to let all the Hun blood run out.
I feel much better now.

 

[Yazata]

Either I've been spending too much time on Reddit, or there is an uprising in a certain political agenda that I believe would lead us straight to fascism. It's typically known as the "woke culture". I'm sure it's been talked about on here before.

I agree with you most emphatically, Sum of Awe.

But I'm not sure that I would call it "fascism". That's a particular political ideology and I would prefer that the word continue to refer to that ideology, and not be given a new meaning as a term of abuse. Too often that's all it means in today's rhetoric, just another way of saying "f*ck you!".

A better word to describe what's happening might arguably be 'totalitarianism'. As Wikipedia puts it:

"Totalitarianism is a form of government and a political system that prohibits all opposition parties, outlaws individual opposition to the state and its claims, and exercises an extremely high degree of control and regulation over public and private life. It is regarded as the most extreme and complete form of authoritarianism."

Except that today's new-style totalitarianism isn't coming from the government so much as from the media and educational establishments. But it does seem to be attempting to enforce thought control, where any and all expression of what is perceived as wrong-thought is punished severely. All forms of substantive disagreement are vigorously suppressed.

The way I see it, the fundamental fault of "wokism" is in how it moralizes controversial issues where disagreements arise. People who once might have been perceived as being wrong are now perceived as being evil. One mustn't compromise or seek common ground with evil, one must always seek to destroy it. So situations that used to be occasions for reason and persuasion have become occasions for suppression of all disagreement, through social shunning, loss of careers, or even (increasingly) physical violence.

We are heading into a period not so unlike earlier times in European history when religious heretics were burned at the stake. I think that the psychological motivations today are very similar to what they were then.