We MUST have Freedom Speech regardless of arguments against.
How else are we to determine who the idiots are?
Franklin
1 Like
Then there is the paradox of tolerance.
4 Likes
Why ask why about freedom of speech.
Many countries already enact laws in this vein, freedom of speech and expression has always had consequences if misused, so things like inciting racial hatred (in the UK) can now face criminal charges.
Prohibited Conduct: Offences include using threatening, abusive, or insulting words or behavior; displaying, publishing, or distributing written material; and performing plays or broadcasting recordings that are inflammatory.The “Intent” vs. “Likelihood” Test: For racial hatred, a person is guilty if they intend to stir up hatred OR if, given the circumstances, racial hatred is likely to be stirred up by their actions.Scope: These laws apply to both public and private places, except for behavior within a private dwelling that is only heard or seen by residents of that or another dwelling.
Penalties and Legal RequirementsSentencing: Convictions can lead to a maximum of 7 years’ imprisonment, a fine, or both.Attorney General Consent: Prosecutions for “stirring up” hatred in England and Wales require the personal consent of the Attorney General.Aggravated Offences: Under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, other crimes (like assault or criminal damage) can receive higher sentences if they are “racially aggravated”.
Personally I don’t think this infringes a great deal on freedom of speech and expression, despite the lies of those who do, Charlie Kirk for example.
3 Likes
Hate speech or incitement to violence seems to be the most obvious exceptions to free speech in Europe. In Norway, discriminatory (skin colour or ethnicity, religion or non-religion, sexual or gender orientation/expression, and disabilities) or hateful speech (including symbols) uttered on purpose or with gross negligence can be punished with fines or prison time.
As for Germany and Austria, they have — for obvious historical reasons — banned the (public) expression of hate speech, nazi propaganda, and Holocaust denial. Public display of nazi symbols is also banned. Again for obvious reasons.
There seems to be some confusion around as to what freedom of speech actually is. Yes, it allows you to say unpopular things without being punished for it, but it doesn’t require others to listen to it. Nor does it make you immune to criticism and/or critical analysis and/or fact checks. Which means that you are only protected against repercussions from governments. Private entities (such as an internet forum like this one) need not grant you the same liberties. Which to me sounds quite fair.
2 Likes
Freedom of speech must increasingly take deceptiveness into account, I suspect:
Hate speech is not just terrorizing your minority neighbors with threats, it is also spewing disinformation and ideologies like racism into the social consciousness.
IMO, irresponsible or malicious use of social media algorithms should also be subject to criminal liability. I’m not sure how that would work properly but it would have to involve, ahem, requiring a grounding in facts and evidence rather than bare assertions. Yes, one would have to be careful venturing into these waters not to chill unpopular speech. It just seems that we need to be doing more than nothing in this regard.
And it is not just politics. Another headline I noted this morning (behind a paywall at Apple News so I’m not linking to it) is large multinational companies posing online as e.g. small struggling sole proprietorships making specialty products in their bedroom, to get you to buy certain products from sympathetic vendors.
1 Like