UberNeuman
Lifer
- Nov 4, 1999
- 16,937
- 3,087
- 126
And what does any of this have to do with Germany? Can you provide that which that you have issue with....
Atreus21
Lifer
- Aug 21, 2007
- 12,007
- 572
- 126
- Mar 25, 2001
- 19,275
- 1,361
- 126
Once again, I disagree with the government telling you what you are allowed to think or say unless it has an imminent specific danger to someone. Can I provide what? My opinion on it?
I've got the feeling you're arguing just for the sake of doing so, so I'll refrain from future responses to ya unless you actually want to discuss.
- Mar 25, 2001
- 19,275
- 1,361
- 126
Oric
Senior member
- Oct 11, 1999
- 881
- 54
- 91
Free speech vs Hate speech is so anachronistic. Never in history was hate speech was so successfully delivered to the attention of the targeted group. It is like nanobots delivering poison to the individual cells in the body. The rising animosity between the opposing groups have to be stopped somewhere, otherwise social tensions end in riots and physical violence. That is an enormous potential to wage assymetrical warfare on other nations and it is being utilised heavily in the last decade.
UberNeuman
Lifer
- Nov 4, 1999
- 16,937
- 3,087
- 126
Atreus21
Lifer
- Aug 21, 2007
- 12,007
- 572
- 126
Haha. It seems our conservatard logic has taken root in the liberal wing of the supreme court.
It's good to see that they aren't prone to such silly reasoning as "it's offensive, therefore shutup."
Atreus21
Lifer
- Aug 21, 2007
- 12,007
- 572
- 126
UberNeuman
Lifer
- Nov 4, 1999
- 16,937
- 3,087
- 126
It's not fault of my own that you're unwilling to support anything that you've said.
- Mar 25, 2001
- 19,275
- 1,361
- 126
Which is what? Where does one draw the line from hate speech to just really dislike speech? Is one allowed to have opinions that are anti-anything?is it a good idea to legislate something like this?
Here in the US the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that "hate speech" is covered under free speech fyi. No special exemptions from the first amendment, even the most abhorrent of opinions is allowed to be expressed. That's the US and not Germany, but still worth noting again.
- Mar 25, 2001
- 19,275
- 1,361
- 126
They can't. There's no defending it, logically anyways. The best you can hope to get is a question posed back to you in a way as if they've made a point.
Your own thread is on Germany, not the US. It's very explicitly outlined so I have no fucking clue why you're pulling this same conservatard "what constitutes hatespeech" trite or how it's relevant to Germany.
Volksverhetzung:
Sounds like something your average Trumptard engages in, no wonder why you can't make a distinction between free speech and hatespeech.
What's German hatespeech laws have to do with anything you've just shat out here? Refer to above and next time try to keep up with what the thread is actually about, conservatard.
- Mar 25, 2001
- 19,275
- 1,361
- 126
inciting "hatred against parts of the populace"
That's a very broad stroke of the brush to make illegal.
As far as it being about Germany, yes the thread is and also about governments and their powers and interactions with their populace in general. It's possible to have conversations that take events in one country and draw parralels to another.
Calling someone a conservatard could be considered hate speech.
mikeymikec
Lifer
- May 19, 2011
- 17,721
- 9,611
- 136
Every developed country I'm aware of has limts on free speech. Consider that before you start banging on about things like "hate speech is free speech".
Communication is the most powerful tool known to man. You would have to be a complete idiot if you don't think it needs any limits. Civilised society comes with all kinds of limits, and for good reasons, basically without those limits, civilised society cannot exist.
If you acknowledge the value of speech, then you also have to acknowledge the damage it can do, because in doing so you're acknowledging both sides of the same coin. To deny either is to deny both.
IMO a problem with a ban on "hate speech" is that the devil is in the details. In the vast majority of cases, hate speech is incredibly easy to filter because most dickheads inevitably will drop the N word or something equally inflammatory. In such cases, the likelihood of finding anything of value (ie. that a reasonable person thinks ought to be protected) in such tirades is near zero. However, what happens if someone words their hate-filled speech eloquently enough to avoid such filtering? Would the comments they're making fly over the heads of most hate-filled people who want to blame their problems on people with a different colour of skin or religion or whatever and take a dump on them whenever possible, or would something else happen?
Communication is the most powerful tool known to man. You would have to be a complete idiot if you don't think it needs any limits. Civilised society comes with all kinds of limits, and for good reasons, basically without those limits, civilised society cannot exist.
If you acknowledge the value of speech, then you also have to acknowledge the damage it can do, because in doing so you're acknowledging both sides of the same coin. To deny either is to deny both.
IMO a problem with a ban on "hate speech" is that the devil is in the details. In the vast majority of cases, hate speech is incredibly easy to filter because most dickheads inevitably will drop the N word or something equally inflammatory. In such cases, the likelihood of finding anything of value (ie. that a reasonable person thinks ought to be protected) in such tirades is near zero. However, what happens if someone words their hate-filled speech eloquently enough to avoid such filtering? Would the comments they're making fly over the heads of most hate-filled people who want to blame their problems on people with a different colour of skin or religion or whatever and take a dump on them whenever possible, or would something else happen?
Your very own thread is about Germany (nothing about "governments and their powers"), you can't draw "parallels" to 2 nations with differing laws, but good attempt at back peddling. As for "broad strokes," that is exactly how morons like you and buckshit like to interpret things when it harbours your cancerous conservative logic but what you've quoted is very explicit and any moron could understand what it means. Playing stupid isn't a good debating technique when you've already admitted that you believe "hate speech is free speech".
- Mar 25, 2001
- 19,275
- 1,361
- 126
Post number 3, about governments and its powers. I'm not backpeddling from anything. No matter, there's no reason to have to justify discussing the us in the thread.
For your second part Im not sure what to make of it, it just seems like a lot of hate speech to be honest. I'm a moron canserous conservative, got that. Inciting hatred is not very explicit, not when basing laws off it. A government can twist that to mean anything it wants.
I've admitted hate speech is free speech? Yes, ok, sort of. I've said that here in the US the Supreme Court ruled several times that "hate" speech however you want to define it falls into free speech. I've also said that I disagree with governments anywhere declaring what speech and opinions are acceptable to hold, so that I suppose is me saying that as well.
- Mar 25, 2001
- 19,275
- 1,361
- 126
Our US Supreme Court disagrees with you.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-mayor-says-hes-wrong/?utm_term=.1ea8bafad3f5
mikeymikec
Lifer
- May 19, 2011
- 17,721
- 9,611
- 136
An irrelevant factoid when considering that this topic pertains to developed countries in general, most notably (with regard to the topic) Germany. Fancy a stab at the rest of my previous post now?
If we trained people to recognize and resist propaganda, advertising would be a waste of money and the economy would likely collapse.
ch33zw1z
Lifer
- Nov 4, 2004
- 37,768
- 18,046
- 146
Grooveriding
Diamond Member
- Dec 25, 2008
- 9,108
- 1,260
- 126
Germany is also in the unique position of having Hitler and the Nazis in their history. This must create a degree of concern that is unique to them as a nation. I don't agree with their approach, but they have that unique history. Where if Hitler had not been so arrogant as to try and take on Russia and the UK at the same time, there is a fair chance the world would be speaking German and every Jewish person would have been exterminated. It must inform a more heightened disdain for hate groups in their country having a segment of dark history built on an ideology of hate. In such a climate, I can see this sort of action being considered, even if it's misguided.
Conside the future of the US, if democracy manages to survive the Trump regime and it is not a herald of a decline into fanaticism, expect to see new actions taken to confront narratives from demagogues there in the future.
The problem with any mechanisms like these, is that even if it is initially used with the best of intentions and delivers a net positive, all it takes is someone else at the reins to use it to silence anyone for any reason.
Conside the future of the US, if democracy manages to survive the Trump regime and it is not a herald of a decline into fanaticism, expect to see new actions taken to confront narratives from demagogues there in the future.
The problem with any mechanisms like these, is that even if it is initially used with the best of intentions and delivers a net positive, all it takes is someone else at the reins to use it to silence anyone for any reason.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
Facebook
Twitter