Is it time to re-think free speech?

BartenderElite said:
It's weird to even type that. It's one of our most sacred principles.

But the original arguments for it & the marketplace of ideas had at its foundation the idea of a mature, educated populace. The theory was that by allowing all speech, the truth would filter everything else out & rise to the top.

That's not happening. I don't think it's really disputable that allowing ALL speech - especially in the internet age, which the founders could not have foreseen - is hurting us as a population, as a society & as a planet. Belief in lies and conspiracy is becoming widespread and ingrained.

If possible, try not to knee-jerk this one. I'm interested in other thoughts on it. It just isn't working as intended.
Click to expand...

One idea is to preserve free speech, with regard to the government, but to have rules that make it easier for private individuals to recover damages in situations where someone abuses those rights to cause personal harm. Like when wingnuts falsely claim that someone helped steal an election, have it be possible to recover attorneys fees and some statutory damages in those cases, rather than people just relying on difficult-to-prove actual damages, while bearing their own litigation costs.
 
Flash said:
I said nothing about Trump.

I am arguing against any attempt by anybody to restrict free speech more than current law allows.

We don't need any entity deciding what "hurts" us as a society. The left will want to restrict any conservative speech and the right will limit liberal speech as harmful.
Click to expand...

Trump wants to limit free speech. So does the right. Now you understand?
 
No. It is not time to "rethink" one of our most important and longstanding of our rights which have been "endowed by our creator." People get to say crap that Brandon fans dislike.
 
Mina said:
One idea is to preserve free speech, with regard to the government, but to have rules that make it easier for private individuals to recover damages in situations where someone abuses those rights to cause personal harm. Like when wingnuts falsely claim that someone helped steal an election, have it be possible to recover attorneys fees and some statutory damages in those cases, rather than people just relying on difficult-to-prove actual damages, while bearing their own litigation costs.
Click to expand...

oh stop it.

that's ridiculous bullshit.

we have slander and libel laws.

file a suit. or stfu.
 
Damocles said:
No. It is not time to "rethink" one of our most important and longstanding of our rights which have been "endowed by our creator." People get to say crap that Brandon fans dislike.
Click to expand...

Sure thing. It's only "Brandon fans" who dislike violent extremist groups putting out all kinds of hate & inspiring despicable acts that harm our society as a whole.

That's only Brandon people, for sure. Good call.
 
BartenderElite said:
That's not happening. I don't think it's really disputable that allowing ALL speech - especially in the internet age, which the founders could not have foreseen - is hurting us as a population, as a society & as a planet. Belief in lies and conspiracy is becoming widespread and ingrained.

If possible, try not to knee-jerk this one. I'm interested in other thoughts on it. It just isn't working as intended.
Click to expand...

This is not even a new problem before us - the same concerns you claim today were aired in the 1800's

https://www.theatlantic.com/technol...-telegraph-was-too-fast-for-the-truth/375171/

make no mistake - the fear has always been about losing control. It is what you fear - in that you can't control election outcomes. it is what the media fears as well
 
AProudLefty said:
Trump wants to limit free speech. So does the right. Now you understand?
Click to expand...

I sure do. And, based on some of the statements in this thread, so do some on the left like Bartender, Evince, Mina,...etc.

It is scary when both sides want to restrict speech because it is in our interest.

Being a fascist requires a lot more than just restricting speech--but, that is an element.
 
zymurgy said:
This is not even a new problem before us - the same concerns you claim today were aired in the 1800's

https://www.theatlantic.com/technol...-telegraph-was-too-fast-for-the-truth/375171/

make no mistake - the fear has always been about losing control. It is what you fear - in that you can't control election outcomes. it is what the media fears as well
Click to expand...

The thread has nothing to do w/ "election outcomes," or "Brandon" (as a previous poster was saying).

This is not a partisan issue.
 
BartenderElite said:
The thread has nothing to do w/ "election outcomes," or "Brandon" (as a previous poster was saying).

This is not a partisan issue.
Click to expand...

it is a whiny bitch issue - and is larkely partisan - in that snow flakes like you worry about speech

I don't think it's really disputable that allowing ALL speech - especially in the internet age, which the founders could not have foreseen - is hurting us as a population

my link made similar claims in the 1800s about the telegraph
 
zymurgy said:
it is a whiny bitch issue

I don't think it's really disputable that allowing ALL speech - especially in the internet age, which the founders could not have foreseen - is hurting us as a population

my link made similar claims in the 1800s about the telegraph
Click to expand...

Well, I don't think the telegraph is really comparable to the internet.

If you don't think the internet has changed us radically in just a couple of decades, this thread probably has no interest for you. I think it has the potential to make things very dystopian, very quickly.
 
BartenderElite said:
Well, I don't think the telegraph is really comparable to the internet.

If you don't think the internet has changed us radically in just a couple of decades, this thread probably has no interest for you. I think it has the potential to make things very dystopian, very quickly.
Click to expand...

it is comparable - communication that was greatly improved with technology.

the internet also lowered the barrier to entry - which is the crux of the matter. your control over the narrative is being removed - you only see it as bad because you like centralized power. I don't - so the internet is a blessing
 
BartenderElite said:
Sure thing. It's only "Brandon fans" who dislike violent extremist groups putting out all kinds of hate & inspiring despicable acts that harm our society as a whole.

That's only Brandon people, for sure. Good call.
Click to expand...

Well, folks that don't like Brandon have to sit around listening to you spread misinformation about them and pretend that they are the same as the guy spreading racism.

What is a good call? It is to let folks disagree.. vociferously. You get to set the record straight, we get to set the record straight and both of us can hate all over the racists, but the reality is folks get to say stuff you disagree with and even stuff you think is wrong because they have a right to free speech. We will not be updating the constitution so the government has no power whatsoever to stop it from happening.
 
Damocles said:
Well, folks that don't like Brandon have to sit around listening to you spread misinformation about them and pretend that they are the same as the guy spreading racism.

What is a good call? It is to let folks disagree.. vociferously. You get to set the record straight, we get to set the record straight and both of us can hate all over the racists, but the reality is folks get to say stuff you disagree with and even stuff you think is wrong because they have a right to free speech. We will not be updating the constitution so the government has no power whatsoever to stop it from happening.
Click to expand...

Can you cite the misinformation I have spread? Or the times I have pretended that they're the same as the guy spreading racism?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top