Status in Question Player removed from Hall of fame?

[Soggy2112]

I'd say FOS just means you won't be arrested/detained for something you've said. Not giving someone a platform, to have their say, doesn't go against that. They're 'free' to express their views, no one is obliged to give them a means of expressing them.

People also need to understand that words are not just words, they have impact.

If you’re responsible for platforming a nazi, that Nazi converts someone to their ideology and that person commits a crime in that ideology’s name then you have to accept some responsibility for it. When people criticise you for that, or suggest removing you from certain positions of influence because of your actions, hiding behind “freedom of speech” is not acceptable.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I'd say FOS just means you won't be arrested/detained for something you've said. Not giving someone a platform, to have their say, doesn't go against that. They're 'free' to express their views, no one is obliged to give them a means of expressing them.

People DO get arrested / detained and then go to court for espousing views. And the beauty of democracy allows people to speak freely and then have the consequences for that speech.

And just as much as we don't like newman having the freedom of choice to have a platform that these aholes can espouse their views is also a democratic principle, as much as it is a flaw of democracy, it's a hill I'm willing to die on. And just as vehemently barrack for the warranted consequences / deterrents to that freedom of speech.

Why? Because allowing some and not others whether it's freedom of choice or freedom of speech, is at best hypocritical and at worst undemocratic.

Some may say 'oh you're supporting nazis or you're a nazi', uh uh, that don't fly, I'm just defending a democratic principle.

 

[Carringbush2010]

People also need to understand that words are not just words, they have impact.

Not always.

If you’re responsible for platforming a nazi, that Nazi converts someone to their ideology and that person commits a crime in that ideology’s name then you have to accept some responsibility for it.

Then that's a fault of democratic principles, as well as the person using their freedom of choice to platform it.

I'll say this again, disallowing some and allowing others freedom of expression is at best hypocritical and at worst undemocratic.

So is sam a nazi sympathizer hiding behind 'freedom of speech'?, not likely, more likely just creating a platform to gain attention / click bait. Sure, it's disingenuous but not likely coz he's a nazi or nazi sympathizer. I realise that's not the pertinent bit, none the less. My second sentence is the pertinent bit.

 

[H00t]

People DO get arrested / detained and then go to court for espousing views. And the beauty of democracy allows people to speak freely and then have the consequences for that speech.

And just as much as we don't like newman having the freedom of choice to have a platform that these aholes can espouse their views is also a democratic principle, as much as it is a flaw of democracy, it's a hill I'm willing to die on. And just as vehemently barrack for the warranted consequences / deterrents to that freedom of speech.

Why? Because allowing some and not others whether it's freedom of choice or freedom of speech, is at best hypocritical and at worst undemocratic.

Some may say 'oh you're supporting nazis or you're a nazi', uh uh, that don't fly, I'm just defending a democratic principle.

Hate speech has never been protected under free speech.

 

[Soggy2112]

Not always.

Then that's a fault of democratic principles, as well as the person using their freedom of choice to platform it.

I'll say this again, disallowing some and allowing others freedom of expression is at best hypocritical and at worst undemocratic.

So is sam a nazi sympathizer hiding behind 'freedom of speech'?, not likely, more likely just creating a platform to gain attention / click bait. Sure, it's disingenuous but not likely coz he's a nazi or nazi sympathizer. I realise that's not the pertinent bit, none the less. My second sentence is the pertinent bit.

My point is that there is a line, where what you say or what you choose to give a platform to goes beyond “freedom of speech”.

As the analogy goes, you can’t yell fire in a crowded room. There clearly is a line where what you say puts people in real danger and cannot be allowed, and I think a lot of Nazi ideology is crossing that line.

I do agree that we need to be very careful when you start restricting speech, but I think it is equally damage to not have some restrictions.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Hate speech has never been protected under free speech.

Again, that's a fault of democratic principle, like it or not.

So how to stop free speech, remove democracy then.

 

[Carringbush2010]

As the analogy goes, you can’t yell fire in a crowded room.

But you can, unless someone can read your thoughts and then physically gag you beforehand. No one should yell fire in a crowded room, but you can't stop it.

It's consequence deterrence after the fact that is important.

but I think it is equally damage to not have some restrictions.

Again, you can't restrict, you can only apply consequence / deterrence after the expression of speech. < That is a fault of democracy.

This is copied from the top of the page.

'
Think before you post.

You are the publisher of your words. You could be held personally liable for what you post here or on any other platform. Details here >>'

So BF is guilty of being a platform for posters to post what they want, THEN consequences come from that, not the other way around. If it was, then BF and other social media wouldn't exist.

^Democracy at work. Like it or not.

 

[H00t]

Again, that's a fault of democratic principle, like it or not.

So how to stop free speech, remove democracy then.

How?

No one is taking their right to vote or arresting them for their views.

They simply aren’t being allowed a platform. They can speak all they want doesn’t mean anyone else has to listen to them.

Also this is a pretty strange thing to defend strongly. Maybe your energy might be better spent not defending the platforming of Nazi’s.

 

[Carringbush2010]

No one is taking their right to vote or arresting them for their views.

There's been examples of people using free speech and then being arrested.

They simply aren’t being allowed a platform. They can speak all they want doesn’t mean anyone else has to listen to them.

The beauty of democracy.

Maybe your energy might be better spent not defending the platforming of Nazi’s.

Read my posts again, I'm not defending the platforms, I'm the defending the freedom of choice to have those platforms.

 

[H00t]

There's been examples of people using free speech and then being arrested.

The beauty of democracy.

Read my posts again, I'm not defending the platforms, I'm the defending the freedom of choice to have those platforms.

Hate speech people have been arrested. Which has never been protected. Also protestors have been arrested but they are at the other end to Nazi’s.

It’s not an either or thing. If you defend the choice you are defending the platform. You are defending the right for people to amplify the Nazi’s call for the death of people they deem inferior.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Hate speech people have been arrested

As I said.

You are defending the right for people to amplify the Nazi’s call for the death of people they deem inferior.

Uh uh, I'm defending the right to freedom of expression, if you oppose that then you're opposing a democratic principle.

Like it or not, up to you.

 

[H00t]

As I said.

Uh uh, I'm defending the right to freedom of expression, if you oppose that then you're opposing a democratic principle.

Like it or not, up to you.

Attempting to cover it with semantics doesn’t fool anyone. This is what you are defending.

Also list these democratic principles for me. Because I can guarantee whatever list it is Nazis won’t follow pretty much all of them.

You are making a conscious choice to defend Nazi’s.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Attempting to cover it with semantics doesn’t fool anyone. This is what you are defending.

Also list these democratic principles for me. Because I can guarantee whatever list it is Nazis won’t follow pretty much all of them.

You are making a conscious choice to defend Nazi’s.

This is your incorrect perception.

I am NOT defending nazis, I'm defending the democratic principle that is freedom of expression, that is my conscious choice, not what you think it is.

This is a warning, do NOT claim I'm defending nazis again. It is offensive and incorrect.

 

[H00t]

This is your incorrect perception.

I am NOT defending nazis, I'm defending the democratic principle that is freedom of expression, that is my conscious choice, not what you think it is.

This is a warning, do NOT claim I'm defending nazis again. It is offensive and incorrect.

List these democratic principles then.

You want to defend these democratic principles then you have to defend them against people who actively seek to take them away. Allowing their message to spread is incredibly harmful.

I have never said you agreed with Nazi ideology. What you have done is come into a thread about the platforming of Nazi’s and argued that it is undemocratic to deplatform them.

You’ve also claimed to be for consequences. Yet against those very consequences (deplatforming) for people who spout horrible views.

Maybe if you want to defend democratic principles pick a thread not about Nazis?

 

[Carringbush2010]

List these democratic principles then.

Read the post you replied to. Freedom of expression IS a democratic principle

Allowing their message to spread is incredibly harmful.

But you can't stop peoples thoughts, if they want to espouse their garbage there's nothing to stop them.

You don't like it, I don't like, but because democracy allows it, you can't stop people expressing anti social views, you can only apply punishment to them.Which is the way it should be.

I have never said you agreed with Nazi ideology.

Never said you did, what you did post is that I'm defending nazis, uh uh, that ain't gonna fly. Do it again FAFO.

'You are making a conscious choice to defend Nazi’s.'

Yet against those very consequences (deplatforming) for people who spout horrible views.

Again, you can't stop anyone creating a platform, you can only punish, once one has created a platform, blame democracy. Or maybe you should where there isn't democracy.

Seems more you speed, rules for some but not for others.

 

[Profop]

Freedom of expression is fine but it's also fine for society to not like what's expressed and for there to be consequences for both making hate speech and also spreading hate speech by giving it a platform

That's what this is about really. In an ideal world there is no neo-nazism but while it does exist if you host them on your podcast (that bizarrely has a following) you are open to things you have or have received being taken away

Now not taking their freedom away (although there are provisions for that) but rather through societal ostracisation and I'd contend anyone suggesting there shouldn't be any societal push back is defending the beliefs (not jut the right to have them)