So when you used the word “absolute”, you didn’t actually mean that. Got it.
No, silly. It’s quite simple. Restrictions that Sam happens to agree with are just common sense and not actually restrictive at all, so they don’t violate absolute free speech. Meanwhile restrictions that Sam disagrees with are terribly restrictive so they violate Sam’s deeply held free speech principles.
I hope that helps clarify matters.
It does. Stupid me for thinking that words have meanings.
And sexual obscenities, and copyright infringement and state secrets, etc etc.
I will.
To many Americans, they see their free speech laws as “absolute” and all the many exceptions are all fine and nothing to do with free speech (as we’ve seen in this thread).
But hate speech laws, no siree, those are absolutely against free speech.
But in practice the dividing line between incitement and hate speech is small to non-existent, and that’s why most Western countries have at least some hate speech laws on the books. There’s a difference between having racist beliefs say – which is fine and you can write books or whatever – and standing in a public space with Hakenkreuz and racial pejoratives…very obviously trying to intimidate others, and not to try to win hearts and minds.
I absolutely agree with this, 100%.
Free speech absolutism is libertarian nonsense that stems from a fundamental distrust of the institution of democracy, which among actual functional democracies is largely an American phenomenon. The idea is that anyone should always be able to say whatever they want, because if not, evil governments will use their villianous powers to censor information that’s unfavourable to them. Unfortunately, the reality is that this denies the existence of democratically elected governments that serve the people, and instead allows actually evil entities to use that right to promote disinformation and blatant lies in support of their own interests, their own prejudices, and their quest for power.
When dealing with a deliberately uninformed and misinformed electorate, democracy itself is in peril, and the following question rises to the front and center: how well is free speech absolutism working out in the US, which may now be on the verge of becoming, not just badly governed, but quite literally a fascist autocracy controlled by a narcissistic psychopath?
“I’m not a fascist you guys, I’m just saying that if we don’t let them say whatever they want whenever they want about people who don’t look just like me, democracy is over.”
-Every old white guy hiding behind free speech absolutism.
@wolfpup and @Johnny_Bravo
Both put better than I could, agree entirely
Lie that one person cheated on his wife and its slander which should which must be outlawed. Lie that a million people are pedophiles who are coming after your kids? Well that has to be protected.
A single lie is a tragedy. A million lies are a statistic.
The WEF seems to have at least temporarily eclipsed Bill Gates and George Soros as an object of fascination/revulsion for far-right conspiracy theorists.
Well, except for that stuff in textbooks we don’t like.
Wait, did Sam Stone endorse his being pitted over and over and over again as right and fair? After all, it’s free speech. So he’s never again going to complain about being piled on, hated, dragged through the mud for his many lies and misrepresentations? To do otherwise would be, wait, hypocritical!
I may need to take him off ignore!
I wouldn’t.
Well it’s seems like Elon has Sam fully on board with the Great Replacement conspiracy.
I wonder if he’s also refusing to board planes with Black pilots too?
This sort of reminds me of a scene in the 1632 Flint book where the old scholar is having a heart attack and his daughter sees the black doctor coming to the rescue. Oh, Thank God, a Moor! They have some idea of real medicine…!
Oh, also according to Sam regarding securing the border,
Biden wants those migrants coming through.
No cite for this of course, nor is any reason given as to why Biden wants migrants which have become a huge political liability for him to come through, and since @Aspenglow shut down the hijack in the Texas border thread I guess we’ll never know.
Oh, he could offer a cite in any number of other general immigration policy threads on the board and simply link back to the post asking for one.
Don’t ask me if I think he will.
Have y’all considered the possibility that Sam isn’t ignorant or being victimized by the right-the he is spreading lies deliberately?
I have.
Seeing as how the Great Replacement theory claims it’s a conspiracy by the Jews to poison the blood of the white race, normally I’d question potential antisemitic motives on Sam’s part. But as we all know, Sam is the most consistent pro-Israeli poster on this board. That has Israelis who post here.
His post is his cite?
I’m pretty sure it’s some rabid ultra-libertarian podcast or some nonsense.
Or he skimmed a headline somewhere and only half paid attention to it, and didn’t read the actual article at all.
Say what you want about Sam (and I’ve said a lot in this thread for sure) but I never got an indication that he’s a racist.
Will he defend a racist, I think that’s not just possible but likely depending on the circumstances. But I’ve never gotten a hint that he is one himself.