4828
4829

German problems (i.imgur.com)

linesreadlines が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]goatcoat 961ポイント962ポイント  (573子コメント)

The context lower down is that the guy actually was giving the Nazi salute to a group of protesters he was trying to anger. Nevertheless, I believe in freedom of speech--not the freedom granted to people in the US by the US constitution, but the inalienable human right that inspired people to write the first amendment in the first place. He should be able to give his shitty salute all day long.

[–]SirMildredPierce 200ポイント201ポイント  (96子コメント)

I believe in freedom of speech--not the freedom granted to people in the US by the US constitution, but the inalienable human right that inspired people to write the first amendment in the first place.

You'll be happy to know that those guys who wrote the first amendment agree with you. The amendment doesn't grant rights, and it certainly doesn't grant them to just Americans. It prevents the government from restricting those rights. The language is very clear on that. It is very obvious, when you read those amendments, that they believed that the rights came from somewhere else other than just a document.

[–]Frog_Todd 123ポイント124ポイント  (89子コメント)

I wish more people understood this. The government doesn't grant rights, it recognizes the rights we have simply because we are human.

[–]PleaseBmoreCharming 69ポイント70ポイント  (12子コメント)

Yeah, that's the "inalienable human right" part that people tend to misinterpret.

[–]spamtripwire 36ポイント37ポイント  (5子コメント)

Kind of wish he has underlined "self-evident."

"... hold these truths to be FUCKING OBVIOUS..."

[–]disguise117 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

"... so fucking obvious that they don't apply to blacks or women."

[–]kadivs [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

well of course it only applies to people.

/s

[–]unproperNoun [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Well it is italicized. But to be fair so is the entire damn document.

コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

    [–]Poop_is_Food 2ポイント3ポイント  (3子コメント)

    How is it inalienable?

    [–]UmarAlKhattab [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

    No right is inalienable.

    コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

      [–]destroyerofjokes 23ポイント24ポイント  (42子コメント)

      You have exactly as many rights as society decides you should have, and only while it's convenient. Native and Black Americans didn't have those rights for the majority of America's history, and Japanese American's had them taken away during WW2. That couldn't happen if they were innate or inalienable.

      [–]Frog_Todd 18ポイント19ポイント  (25子コメント)

      I disagree. The fact that I as a private citizen could shoot someone doesn't mean that someone else doesn't have the right to life, it means that I violated that right. No different than a government. The logical conclusion of this is that the US government didn't do anything wrong, didn't violate any rights in their actions previously.

      Just because it was an officially sanctioned violation of rights doesn't make it any less a violation of rights.

      [–]ChesterAMillardPolk 4ポイント5ポイント  (6子コメント)

      A government's willingness to violate rights does not by extension negate the existence of these rights. Surely you see that?

      [–]68696c6c 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

      I think we understand what you're trying to say, and you make a point, but the way you've worded it makes it sound like rights do in fact come from government. I think the point he was making is that the man saluting in these photos has a natural right to freedom of speech regardless of whether the German government chooses to recognize that right.

      コメントをもっと表示する (6 返事)

        [–]Anagoth9 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

        The Ninth Amendment implies this as well.

        "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

        ie. human rights exist outside of the constitution. The constitution tries to protect specific human rights, yes, but that doesn't mean that something not mentioned by the constitution isn't a human right.

        [–]TheThirdBlackGuy 7ポイント8ポイント  (10子コメント)

        This sounds more poetic than rational. There is no innate right granted to you for being human. That is why different governments run things differently.

        [–]Frog_Todd 4ポイント5ポイント  (6子コメント)

        Or it means that various governments violate the innate rights of their citizens.

        What makes more sense: That white people had the right to own black people in the United States before 1865, or the U.S. Government was violating the rights of blacks people before 1865?

        [–]NeuroBill 12ポイント13ポイント  (3子コメント)

        You missed the other option, that neither had any 'rights' by any meaningful definition of the world, and people were just following laws. If people had 'rights' then you couldn't take them away as easily as you could. If you can take them away so easily, then how can they really be 'rights'? They're just things you can or cannot do given the current situation.

        [–]MangoFreak [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

        Who decides these "innate" rights? How are they determined? I don't agree that racists and fascists should be allowed to express themselves without limit. I'm more concerned for those they seek to oppress than their Nazi asses.

        コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

          コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

            [–]ToiletBowlKarl [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            Anyone who has studied a little bit of law understands this. The Bill of Rights is a collection of negative rights.

            コメントをもっと表示する (19 返事)

              [–]personalcheesecake 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yi6XV8yBFoU

              [–]Last_Jedi 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

              Wouldn't this apply to the 2nd Amendment as well?

              [–]SirMildredPierce [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              That's the theory. The Bill of Rights is not exclusive to just the rights mentioned in the Amendments or the Constitution itself. The 9th Amendment specifically addresses this:

              The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

              [–]Mablak [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              The idea of natural rights is really nonsensical to me, and obfuscates political/moral discourse. We don't literally 'have' natural rights. Nor would 'having a natural right' suggest we ought to do anything in particular. I have a kidney, but this fact alone doesn't imply anyone should behave in any particular way towards me.

              To say someone 'has a moral/natural right to X' is just a shorthand for saying that other people should behave (or refrain from behaving) towards them in certain ways. 'I have a right to be free from oppression' means 'It's immoral (or worse) for people to oppress me'. But this is all the statement means; a normative claim that others shouldn't oppress you. The purpose of discussing 'natural rights' is simply to get at what we should or shouldn't do, so I never see any reason to use the term; we're just talking morality.

              コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                [–]flippersforducks 20ポイント21ポイント  (2子コメント)

                Ironically, one of the critiques of the bill of rights by Federalists in the period of time when the Constitution was being written was that there was no need to enumerate the specific inalienable rights that the government had no right to infringe upon, e.g. freedom of speech, because it was implicit in the fact that the Constitution creates a government of limited powers, with all remaining authority left with the state and the people from whom that authority is derived.

                In other words, the freedom of speech in the constitution is the same as the inalienable human right.

                [–]natophonic2 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                My favorite part of the Constitution is the 9th Amendment:

                The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

                They weren't just thinking that enumerating rights was redundant, but that it would be dangerous in that people would think that only rights addressed in the Constitution were 'actual' rights.

                Based on the number of stupid arguments I've had with people who think that speech/religion/gun-ownership are rights because the Constitution mentions them specifically, while travel/marriage/privacy are just privileges because there's "nothin' in tuh Constitution 'bout it".... those Founders were absolutely fucking right.

                [–]drinkonlyscotch 11ポイント12ポイント  (0子コメント)

                the freedom granted to people in the US by the US constitution

                The constitution doesn't grant freedom — it prohibits the state from intruding upon it.

                [–]linesreadlines[S] 662ポイント663ポイント  (210子コメント)

                Yes, one of the worst things about modern liberal society is the thoughcrime mentality...even here on Reddit

                [USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST]

                [–]NoblePineapples 158ポイント159ポイント  (42子コメント)

                Soo.. lynch the mods?

                [–]esuohe 29ポイント30ポイント  (1子コメント)

                As is tradition

                [–]hiphopapotamus1 10ポイント11ポイント  (0子コメント)

                What a great day for Reddit and therefore the world.

                [–]safariG 128ポイント129ポイント  (37子コメント)

                So...blame Ellen Pao/admins too?

                Edit: and Obama

                [–]1silkyjohnson1 57ポイント58ポイント  (32子コメント)

                Blame Canada.

                [–]dewidubbs 37ポイント38ポイント  (26子コメント)

                Whoa now, sorry but we never did anything to cause any issues here.

                [–]linesreadlines[S] 115ポイント116ポイント  (16子コメント)

                http://i.imgur.com/9RWdYws.png

                We're on to you Canada.

                [–]bloody_duck 4ポイント5ポイント  (10子コメント)

                I'm high. Let's just get that out of the way. But I just had the thought of, what if Canada DID side with Russia/China/Iran/Best Korea in a war against the U.S. and attacked us...probably because we got caught being super duper mega pricks, or something. Canada would probably attack cities like Portland and Seattle first.

                Should I be scared?

                コメントをもっと表示する (5 返事)

                  [–]drjacksahib 19ポイント20ポイント  (4子コメント)

                  We must blame them and cause a fuss/Before someone thinks of blaming us

                  [–]dewey2100 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  Apologized by third word, Canadian checks out.

                  [–]lookingforapartments 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                  Only your hate speech laws the religious advocated...

                  コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                    [–]Cmrade_Dorian 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    With all their hockey hullabaloo!

                    [–]WiWiWiWiWiWi 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    Yeah, fuck Canada!

                    [–]karmichoax 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    sorry

                    [–]Unicorns-and-Glitter 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                    It seems that everything's gone wrong since Canada came along!

                    コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                      [–]gutter_rat_serenade 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                      Wait, I thought after she was fired we all admitted it wasn't her fault?

                      Are we back to blaming her again?

                      Fuckin christ you guys, I've already thrown away my pitchfork. Do you realize how expensive those things are? You can't keep changing your minds like this!

                      コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

                        [–]PitchforkEmporium 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                        Someone called?

                        コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                          [–]everythingisarepost 20ポイント21ポイント  (38子コメント)

                          I am so fucking curious to know what happened. I even attempted to ask why through a post but obviously it didn't have a year on it so it was taken down. Idk man. Documentaries has gone to shit.

                          [–]kromozone 22ポイント23ポイント  (1子コメント)

                          These guys showed up - https://i.imgur.com/iBxe0j8.png

                          Mass reporting spam until the mods just deleted everything.

                          [–]linesreadlines[S] 90ポイント91ポイント  (20子コメント)

                          I am so fucking curious to know what happened.

                          http://i.imgur.com/KQdQvfP.gif

                          [–]masheo 19ポイント20ポイント  (7子コメント)

                          Basically Israel was under attack from multiple Arab nations, one of them being Egypt, who were and still are a close ally of the United States of America. Long story short the Israelis attempted to blow the USS Liberty out of the water. Two theories at why are a.) oh shit wrong ship b.) The U.S. may or may not have been providing intelligence to the Egyptians and the Israelis did not take kindly to that.

                          [–]Iam_TheHegemon 33ポイント34ポイント  (6子コメント)

                          The third theory being that it was a false flag operation they were going to try to pin on the Egyptians to draw America into things.

                          [–]herefromyoutube 16ポイント17ポイント  (3子コメント)

                          Ding.

                          thats like mossad 101.

                          do it and blame it on your enemies.

                          [–]yoss250 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

                          Well Israel did do that in another instance. Except it wasn't the USS Liberty, but the bombing of American interests throughout Egypt in 1954. They tried to pin it on the Muslim Brotherhood and the Egyptian Government. They were found out and the Israeli Defense Minister was forced to resign. AKA the Lavon Affair.

                          Some more info: Basically, the US was getting too close to Nasser for Israel's liking. As a result of the new relationship, Britain was increasingly in a position to remove their troops from the Suez Canal. Israel didn't want Egypt to have control the canal and threaten them from the Sinai. The plan backfired and Israel became blacklisted for a while within the US government. In addition, this gave Nasser the basis to nationalize the canal and force the British out. In retaliation, the British, French, and Israelis planned an operation to take back the canal for the British and the Sinai for the Israelis. It went incredibly well and they almost achieved their secondary objective of decimating Egypt's military capabilities, but they didn't account for the US and the USSR intervening. Within a month of the operation, the British, french, and Israelis were forced to withdraw from the Suez. This later became known as the Suez Canal Crisis.

                          EDIT: Not PM, but the defense minister.

                          [–]beleca 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          Anyone who thinks this is hyperbole or doesnt happen in general (or in the US for that matter) should Google Emad Salem, the guy who recorded his FBI handlers admitting they provided the materials to make the bomb to the 1993 WTC bombing terrorists

                          And also Operation Gladio. It was official NATO policy to commit terror attacks and blame them on boogeymen in Cold War Italy for various political purposes

                          [–]Tb0n3 9ポイント10ポイント  (5子コメント)

                          Something something jews and 9/11.

                          [–]RIP_BerthaChampagne 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

                          It's crazy to think all jews were behind 911. It was Mossad.

                          コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                            [–]cc81 130ポイント131ポイント  (82子コメント)

                            I think entitlement is a bigger problem with modern society. People think that the world not only need to hear what they say but that they have the right to say those things on other peoples platform. It is like whining that you cannot talk about fishing on a hockey forum.

                            Create your own forum.

                            [–]Mazon_Del 83ポイント84ポイント  (47子コメント)

                            My social group is currently dealing with a guy that read some book about spreading awareness of social problems. It basically says that people won't pay attention, so you need to force them to. Any public place (IE: Any location that isn't invite only) can and SHOULD be used at every opportunity to make people converse about these issues so that we can finally talk about them and fix them. If anybody (such as a moderator....or the person running a kickstarter that has nothing to do with your issue) tries to stop you, they are literally as bad as Hitler and should be treated as such.

                            So basically he's showing up to all of our standard social events (gaming on Thursdays, movies on Tuesdays, etc) and trying to make people talk about a variety of topics, such as "We should ban Kickstarter because they allowed someone who made material harmful to sex workers to have a Kickstarter, and thus they condone and endorse such actions!", etc etc. When you say "Steve (not his name), we are playing a game of Battlestar Galactica, this is not the time or place for this conversation." he goes ballistic.

                            It is not going terribly well.

                            [–]You-Are-Really-Dumb 136ポイント137ポイント  (3子コメント)

                            Maybe he's just mad that you call him Steve instead of his real name.

                            [–]sterreg 48ポイント49ポイント  (25子コメント)

                            Honestly, why the hell do y'all keep inviting him? Tell him he's being an annoying cunt, and that he's not welcome until he stops trying to hijack y'all's get togethers for his own bullshit.

                            [–]Mazon_Del 28ポイント29ポイント  (22子コメント)

                            It's not a closed event. It is held in a public space at the college and in an unreservable area (but public, as we like walk-ins), meaning we have no authority to have campus police remove him unless he actually begins doing things that break the rules of the area.

                            As far as the rest of it, we pretty much have been. What is the most annoying thing about the whole bullshit is he's recently said "I've tried the whole facebook, G+, etc setup. No reposts, no +1s, nothing. Since my damn friends have failed me, I have to go to the friends of my friends." And so he's started trying to find people we are connected to on social sites to start throwing info at.

                            Some have been considering going through the school harassment reporting process.

                            [–]Azzmo 28ポイント29ポイント  (6子コメント)

                            "Steve. Look. We're all very aware that you read a book and believe in the message but none of us do. And we won't. We're here to have fun and enjoy our lives. It's awesome that you're passionate about making the world a better place, but what you're actually doing is making it worse for all of us. We're here to have fun together and forget our troubles for a while. We're making the world a better place through happiness and what you've been doing is making us not want you around anymore."

                            Drop that on him.

                            [–]BingBoy 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                            The voice of reason. Thank you.

                            [–]Fighterhayabusa [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

                            Or, you could just tell him to eat a dick? No one has to play with him or even interact with him just because he shows up somewhere. There is only one thing worse than assholes, and that's self-righteous assholes.

                            [–]Azzmo [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                            Most people aren't willing to stand toe to toe and say "eat a dick" because that leads to fighting, backstabbing, or just feeling kinda guilty.

                            This is a more realistic option.

                            [–]Reasonable_Thinker [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                            But then you would be the asshole, not Steve...

                            [–]MrMulligan [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                            It's awesome that you're passionate about making the world a better place, but what you're actually doing is making it worse for all of us

                            This sounds way harsher than it is. I can just see his smile rising then immediately turning to a frown.

                            [–]sterreg 8ポイント9ポイント  (12子コメント)

                            I see. That really sucks. Maybe y'all could just drive him away? Get a few people to play the part of contrarians until he leaves. He wants to talk sexism, throw out the most absurd, sexist, misogynistic shit you can think of. If there's one thing I've learned about those kind of people, its that they are almost never able to pick up on sarcasm. Hell, y'all could turn it into a game, and place bets on who's most likely to make him snap and/or leave lol. Anyways, best of luck, hope you figure out a way to get that twat to leave y'all in peace.

                            Edit: now that I think about it... If you could bait him into starting a physical altercation it would almost certainly get him expelled/banned....

                            [–]BingBoy 21ポイント22ポイント  (9子コメント)

                            Or you know save the passive/aggressive bullshit and be honest.

                            [–]sterreg 8ポイント9ポイント  (6子コメント)

                            Maybe you should re-read the above comments, because it clearly sounds like they tried that.

                            [–]thang1thang2 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

                            Have they tried the "this is not appropriate at all and while we realize you have the freedom of speech to say what you want to, we'll exercise our freedom to beat the shit out of you if you ever speak about these topics around us again" approach?

                            コメントをもっと表示する (4 返事)

                              [–]dewey2100 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                              Nah, passive/aggressive then start cracking up when he cracks and full on break it down on him. Once he realizes he's the butt of the joke he'll either stop or move on. Win/win.

                              [–]ooburai 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                              Exactly. College age guy all of a sudden finds an issue that is important to him and wants to tell the world. This isn't exactly something new.

                              If it's really as irritating as it sounds then sit down and explain to the guy why, though it might be his right or even a noble gesture, it's socially problematic.

                              When I read the first post I thought this was a private event, but in a public space you need to be willing to put up with people's nonsense, but being passive-aggressive is no better. Part of being an adult is tackling difficult issues and taking responsibility for solving social problems. I doubt that it's his intention to piss everybody off, in fact I find people who are compassionate about social issues tend to be fairly receptive to a well reasoned explanation of why something about their behaviour is irritating.

                              He's not wrong, he just needs to understand that there's at time and a place for political and social activism and generally speaking game night probably isn't it. (Unless your games are extremely exclusive or offensive!)

                              [–]CptFixIt 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

                              Bad ideas all around, sorry. I would NOT suggest goading him to violence and trying to antagonize him hardly seems like taking the high road.

                              コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                                [–]FreyWill [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                                y'all's

                                Really?

                                [–]sterreg [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                If y'all've got a problem with that, you can kiss my ass.

                                [–]Wonderingperson 14ポイント15ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                Well, he sounds like a social reject, don't get me wrong i'm trying to say this in the nicest way, but tell him to fuck off if he's doing this.

                                [–]Caelinus 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                It honestly might be the best option for him as well. He is smothering his own message in the noise.

                                Social norms may be somewhat arbitrary and stupid from the outside, but in that society they may as well be law. And in order to convince anyone of anything you need to play the game well. He needs to know that if he actually cares about his causes.

                                [–]IcarusDrake 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                Damn kids these days don't understand the power of a well placed telling them to fuck off

                                [–]paper_liger 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                If he wants to act childishly give him a time out. Tell him the next time he starts spouting non sequiters he gets a week off from your social gatherings. Escalate the punishment.

                                Social gatherings aren't just forums for debate, they have actual functions, and if he tries to continue to subvert time you've set aside for socializing or relaxation or leisure he's no helping anyone, he's putting his own will above the groups, and the group should take steps.

                                Long story short, it's not your lack of concern for social issues, it's his selfishness that is the problem.

                                [–]blarg_dunsen 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                Get everyone to stop what they are doing whenever Steve enters and just start making chicken noises. Keep doing this vigorously until he leaves.

                                Do not let up, do not feel sorry for him. If everyone joins in and keeps at it, it would take maybe 2 or 3 times before he moves on.

                                Also encourage everyone to block him on social media. If he can't see you he can't see your contacts.

                                [–]axclover[🍰] 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                Sounds like Steve

                                [–]GlobindobinButler 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                Fuck that guy.

                                Then don't call him.

                                [–]cvnovice 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                Just throwing this out there, but if you think the issues are important and his points are valid, why not just let him know its not a good time to talk at your gaming event, then schedule another time to sit down and have a more in depth discussion about this issues at hand?

                                [–]scamperly 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                Given how long it takes to setup a game of BSG that guy is literally worse than Baltar if he's ruining a game.

                                PS I have this friend too. I think you and I might know each other.

                                [–]tatertitzmcgee 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                Seems overly alpha, but this should give you what you want. "Steve, seriously man, no one here wants to listen to your bullshit. You will never change the mind if anyone here. You're making us all miserable. So go and fuck off. Seriously, get the fuck out"

                                If Steve is a big guy with a temper you might want to reword accordingly.

                                [–]Involution88 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                If anybody (such as a moderator....or the person running a kickstarter that has nothing to do with your issue) tries to stop you, they are literally as bad as Hitler and should be treated as such.

                                Then when those people become moderators, they actually end up becoming their conception of a moderator. They tend to overcompensate and project. SJW lunacy.

                                コメントをもっと表示する (6 返事)

                                  [–]butheactuallydoes 25ポイント26ポイント  (14子コメント)

                                  Create your own forum.

                                  http://i.imgur.com/z9Il6Mp.jpg

                                  [–]cc81 29ポイント30ポイント  (8子コメント)

                                  But I strongly believe in it. That is why I say people should start their own forums!

                                  I don't believe in silencing or forcing people on the Internet and therefore it would be wrong to force reddit to accept content they don't want.

                                  [–]huge_hefner 15ポイント16ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                  There's no arguing that Reddit doesn't have the right to decide what content appears on its site, but I think the general "start your own forum" mentality is dangerous. It's exactly what herds people into polarizing, comfortable echo chambers in which they will never be challenged with other opinions (or reasonably explained versions thereof) or information that doesn't fit their subscribed narrative.

                                  コメントをもっと表示する (6 返事)

                                    [–]bigtfatty 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                    I think his point was more along the lines of "you have the right to speak your mind, not the right to be heard"

                                    コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

                                      [–]speaksthetruthalways 9ポイント10ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                      they have the right to say those things on other peoples platform

                                      You LITERALLY just described the whole modus operandi of Reddit.

                                      It is like whining that you cannot talk about fishing on a hockey forum.

                                      That's not what a lack of free speech is at all. Reddit isn't dedicated to one subject.

                                      [–]cc81 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                      You LITERALLY just described the whole modus operandi of Reddit.

                                      Obviously not, right?

                                      [–]Michuu 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                      Should we create separate forums for literally every opinion, political affiliation, or social views then we'll just end up with a bunch of echo chambers where no real discussion takes place.

                                      [–]_Kaijo 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                      As opposed to a platform with voting mechanism making only the popular opinion visible? I would say reddit is way more dangerous than echochambers.

                                      [–]TheVegetableSalad [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                      Wait, this sounds familiar!

                                      [–]dowhatuwant2 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                      I see the entitlement on a different side of the coin, people seem to feel they are entitled to never be offended. Fuck those people.

                                      コメントをもっと表示する (11 返事)

                                        [–]DaHolk 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                        If your body has made a move, it's not a thought crime any more.

                                        I really don't get why people keep confusing what a "thought crime" is. It's not illegal to THINK anything about the third Reich nor Hitler.

                                        You don't get sanctioned for what you think. You get sanctioned for what you do.

                                        [–]ademnus [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                        Shh your facts get in the way of his liberal-bashing.

                                        [–]LaGeG 18ポイント19ポイント  (14子コメント)

                                        I disagree.

                                        You can afford discussion on sensitive issues. In fact it should be encouraged. I don't believe that people have the right to publicly or privately harass someone else to satisfy their opinion.

                                        That is just being a cunt.

                                        [–]NothappyJane 3ポイント4ポイント  (13子コメント)

                                        Hate speech by broadcasters, harassment and inciting violence is banned in my country, and I'm satisfied with that. I don't believe our institutions or figures of authority should have the right to do that.

                                        [–]gamercer 10ポイント11ポイント  (12子コメント)

                                        The problem with that is that your government defines "hate".

                                        [–]EnigmaticHats 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                        Depending on where he lives, the government might very well, in essence, be the people.

                                        [–]gacis 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                        I'm pretty sure everyone would agree that statements like "all race x are criminals/lazy/dirty and should be killed/deported" are hate speech.

                                        コメントをもっと表示する (9 返事)

                                          [–]SkeeverTail 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                          This guy wasn't committing "thought crime" though. He was deliberately trying to incite an angry response. It really isn't much different from shouting obscenities in public (especially in a country where this gesture is as culturally charged as Germany).

                                          [–]SpankingViolet 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                          Do I blame the users?

                                          [–]NetPotionNr9 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                          Not if you think approved thoughts. Don't be unreasonable.

                                          [–]Hammerhart 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                          Yeah, it's common knowledge that the mods of /r/Documentaries and /r/worldnews are douche nozzles.

                                          [–]Brigante87 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                          That's just shitty mods isn't it? Or admins, I forgot the difference, the volunteers.

                                          [–]PrimeIntellect 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                          i just had a somethingawful flashback

                                          [–]sjsharks510 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                          I was wondering what that was all about, any other info?

                                          [–]CourierOfTheWastes 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                          Context? What's is?

                                          [–]srbb3 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                          Shit I really want to see that post.

                                          [–]ntropi [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                          surprisingly, this comment by /u/camjam80 managed to get past the censorship...

                                          You can view all the deleted comments using Uneddit. http://uneddit.com/

                                          [–]baconmastah [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                          Wait, if everyone else's comments but yours seem banned, does that mean I'm banned?

                                          コメントをもっと表示する (16 返事)

                                            [–]DeltaBlack 23ポイント24ポイント  (27子コメント)

                                            It's a result of the Allies demand of Denazification from Germany and Austria after WW2, so that's really ironic.

                                            [–]Big_Baby_Jesus_ 13ポイント14ポイント  (4子コメント)

                                            Germany has been a sovereign democracy for a while now. They're responsible for their own laws.

                                            [–]HokusSchmokus [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                            We cannot overturn the Grundgesetz as dictated by the US/the Allies. That's a huge afaik though.

                                            コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

                                              [–]jheohdgs 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                              Frankly, after World War II I don't think the US was too terribly concerned for the civil liberties of Germans, just so long as they were strong enough to resist the USSR, firmly in the Western camp, and kicked the pesky genocidal habits

                                              [–]DeltaBlack 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                              Yes, that's pretty much it. They needed a bulwark against the Soviets and that was more important than anything else.

                                              コメントをもっと表示する (20 返事)

                                                [–]Bickus 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                I think the US and Germany can deal with respective demons as each sees fit.

                                                [–]albacore_futures 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                Germany's interpretation of "free speech" is not as black and white as the US's. It is not an end unto itself, as we see it here, but is instead a priority to be balanced against other priorities, and for good reason.

                                                I am not German, but I do know many Germans, and from what I have learned there seems to be a collective consciousness - unique, as far as a I can tell, of any country that has committed genocide - that the German people are capable of atrocities, as evidenced by the two world wars and the holocaust. The logic continues that Germany, the entire country, needs to be cognizant of this dark demon hiding in its closet that can come out, because only by knowing that this thing exists there can they seek to restrain it. The best way to restrain that demon is to restrain German expansionism via multilateralism and the EU, abandoning the German empire, and suppressing things like Nazism and Aryanism and other things which give that demon free access to their society.

                                                I will add that the German emphasis on shackling itself so that it can't commit more evil is extremely influential in their support for the EU post-WWII. Their enthusiasm for the entire EU project is not economics, but is instead politics (or, at least, used to be). Only by participating as part of an EU coalition can Germany now pursue foreign policy goals without being judged as Nazi imperialists (Greek protest posters withstanding). Don't forget that the basis of the EU was a steel-sharing agreement between Germany and France, an agreement intended to assuage the fears of warmongers in both countries about a "steel race" that might lead to strategic imbalance inside Europe. A very, very large influence on why the EU exists at all is Germany's fear that it might conquer Europe again. Numerous German politicians have been unequivocal in that argument. Germany's demon needs containing.

                                                Given that context, America's emphasis on free speech as a universal doesn't really make sense. Free speech, if freely allowed in Germany, gives the German demon the freedom to come out. Germany's overarching goal is to suppress that demon, and if that means suppressing the freedom of speech of a few neo-nazi idiots, then pragmatism wins and they don't give a fuck. The bigger priority wins.

                                                I do not think we can blame them for that line of reasoning. America's logic is not universally applicable to every circumstance.

                                                [–]newtizzle 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                I agree with you, but I also see why they arrest you for this. The entire world hated the fuck out of them because of what they did. They are doing their best to distance themselves from their past when they almost wiped an entire race of the planet.

                                                [–]Born_Ruff 10ポイント11ポイント  (10子コメント)

                                                The most annoying thing about the idea of free speech is that whenever you try to question abhorrent comments and behavior by certain people, they always try to turn it into a debate about the general idea of free speech.

                                                If the best argument you have to defend your point of view is that it isn't literally illegal to say it, you probably are not on very solid ground.

                                                You can't really have an intelligent discussion about anything if everyone can't accept the basic fact that there are always some limits to speech and that freedom to express yourself does not mean freedom from consequences for saying those things.

                                                [–]guer_j 16ポイント17ポイント  (146子コメント)

                                                Yeah but it is illegal to do that salute in Germany. For very good reasons.

                                                [–]gloryday23 4ポイント5ポイント  (77子コメント)

                                                For very good reasons.

                                                Why, is it like Facebook likes, if so many people do the salute it will resurrect Hitler? Are Germans really so afraid that if they see a swastika too many times they will all become Nazis again?

                                                Restricting speech is wrong, period, you can't be pro freedom of speech, but support banning some speech because it makes you uncomfortable.

                                                You might remember this:

                                                When the Nazis came for the communists, I remained silent; I was not a communist.

                                                When they locked up the social democrats, I remained silent; I was not a social democrat.

                                                When they came for the trade unionists, I did not speak out; I was not a trade unionist.

                                                When they came for the Jews, I remained silent; I wasn't a Jew.

                                                When they came for me, there was no one left to speak out.

                                                [–]elos_ 37ポイント38ポイント  (63子コメント)

                                                "Hey you don't like nazis? Guess who else didn't like people..."

                                                Is the vibe I'm getting from this thread. Fringe hate groups operate on "just asking questions" and that kind of immunity. They operate on abusing free speech and taking advantage of those who don't know better like children and troubled teens. No allowing the nazi salute won't resurrect Hitler but denying hate groups a voice denies them the ability to spread lies to fill the ranks of organizations inherently designed to incite violence.

                                                I'm sorry but I have zero issue removing the ability for people to recruit to groups whose end goal is genocide and for said groups to spill their bile without recourse publicly. The end. You can say I don't believe in free speech all you want. I do. Thats like saying you can't support a trade market unless you're for anarcho capitalism.

                                                [–]gloryday23 6ポイント7ポイント  (50子コメント)

                                                Thats like saying you can't support a trade market unless you're for anarcho capitalism.

                                                It's not at all, you don't support free speech, you support speech you approve of, and if that's your view it's fine, but please don't tell me I can say what I want, but not that, or that, or that other thing as well.

                                                By the way, I understand what you are saying, freedom is dangerous, the more free you allow people to be the more danger you allow them to live in. This extends past speech, drugs, guns, alcohol, fireworks etc. I get why it can be attractive, but the danger in restricting essential freedoms is too high in my opinion.

                                                [–]mitojee [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                                I'm with you, bro. The answer to hate speech is to drown it out with positive speech, not to suppress the bad speech. Instead of taking away, edify, educate, keep up positive discourse, etc.

                                                Anyways, I'd rather hear the haters speak out so I know who to avoid.

                                                コメントをもっと表示する (49 返事)

                                                  コメントをもっと表示する (12 返事)

                                                    [–]unproperNoun [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                                    For very good reasons.

                                                    One reason is PR. Germans already have a bad rap for worst human being in history, they don't need more idiots making them look bad. Bad for business. And Germans love them some business.

                                                    [–]goatcoat [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                                                    Why, is it like Facebook likes, if so many people do the salute it will resurrect Hitler?

                                                    Backs away from the Facebook Like button.

                                                    [–]Thortsen [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                                                    Are Americans afraid that the confederate flag will resurrect general Lee?

                                                    [–]gloryday23 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                                    I think some of them might be, that is equally stupid as well.

                                                    コメントをもっと表示する (8 返事)

                                                      [–]MrKequc -1ポイント0ポイント  (62子コメント)

                                                      I really prefer it that way. It's the same thing with scientology, the westborough baptists, and so on. What possible benefit to society is allowing hate speech, or the overt fleecing of old people out of all of their money?

                                                      Nothing.

                                                      [–]Nibib123 17ポイント18ポイント  (24子コメント)

                                                      The benefit to society is that people's rights are being protected, I wouldn't call that nothing. I think it's far healthier for a society to fight hate speech with more speech, criminalising words or hand gestures just seems draconian.

                                                      [–]Vik1ng 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                      The benefit to society is that people's rights are being protected

                                                      That completely depends on what rights you define. You value the right of free speech other my value a right that people are not being harassed. Americans value the right to defend themselves very high, Germans value a human life higher.

                                                      [–]daimposter [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                                      He's clearly speaking with American bias. A significant number of Germans are perfectly fine with the existing laws to prevent such hate speech.

                                                      [–]Brawldud 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                      Not true. Even the US already makes certain kinds of speech, e.g. death threats and libel, illegal. It's kind of narrow-minded to suggest that you either protect people's rights or don't, as if there is no middle ground. Germany is very liberal about free speech and press freedom, and its citizens enjoy widespread liberties including easy access to healthcare and education.

                                                      There's no reason to believe it's draconian unless you're trying to start shit, really. The Germans learned first-hand that some speech is too dangerous to be allowed to propagate, and that it's a far better idea to stamp that shit out before it catches on and suddenly Nazism sees a wide-spread revival. This is especially important during times of crisis or economic depression when people are looking for someone to blame.

                                                      Defending Nazi symbolism and Holocaust denialism is not the hill you or any free speech advocate wants to die on. Germany is very conscious about never losing sight of how Hitler's demagogy caused so much needless suffering. Unfettered speech allowed Nazism to propagate rather than arresting it; it's dangerous, and some level of restriction is needed.

                                                      [–]daimposter [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                                      There's no reason to believe it's draconian unless you're trying to start shit, really. The Germans learned first-hand that some speech is too dangerous to be allowed to propagate, and that it's a far better idea to stamp that shit out before it catches on and suddenly Nazism sees a wide-spread revival.

                                                      Nibib123 clearly is speaking with an American basis ignorant of German culture and the people's concern about repeating history.

                                                      [–]AL_DENTE_OR_NOTHING 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                      It prevents the spread of thinking that infringed on people's rights farrr more than this

                                                      [–]daimposter 1ポイント2ポイント  (16子コメント)

                                                      I think it's far healthier for a society to fight hate speech with more speech, criminalising words or hand gestures just seems draconian

                                                      Says somebody that doesn't live in a country where that speech spread like crazy, formed the nazi party, and started a world war.

                                                      [–]Nibib123 1ポイント2ポイント  (14子コメント)

                                                      Germans must not think very much of their fellow countrymen if they think that government has to silence certain viewpoints. It's the age of information, fight bad ideas with good ideas.

                                                      コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                                                        [–]MostlyUselessFacts 3ポイント4ポイント  (5子コメント)

                                                        I really prefer it that way. It's the same thing with scientology, the westborough baptists, and so on. What possible benefit to society is allowing hate speech, or the overt fleecing of old people out of all of their money?

                                                        Ok, let's institute your plan: now who gets to decide what is illegal and what isn't? Not a good road to go down.

                                                        [–]fuzzydunloblaw 2ポイント3ポイント  (19子コメント)

                                                        What kind of weak society can't stomach discussion on topics they disagree with? I'd prefer that someone with ideas disagreeable to me speak out so I can identify them. Otherwise you still have just as many people with disagreeable opinions only now they work in the shadows. Better to speak out and have an open dialogue than squelch things we don't like.

                                                        [–]MrKequc 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                        It doesn't ever really turn out that way does it. People with loud mouths just keep spouting off until the end of time and meanwhile other people get the idea that what they're saying is ok and now you've got more of them.

                                                        By contrast, when a society finally stands up and says "right well that is pretty much disgusting and we've been hearing it for long enough. look at all the damage it is causing."

                                                        What happens isn't that people lurk around in the shadows with their terrible ideas. They are forced to consider the society they live in. People live in societies, and the society wants to benefit as much of the society that it can. A couple of loose cannons, unchecked, can ruin that for a lot of people.

                                                        It isn't like countries start out with hate speech laws, those are added eventually.

                                                        [–]fuzzydunloblaw 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                        It doesn't ever really turn out that way does it. People with loud mouths just keep spouting off until the end of time and meanwhile other people get the idea that what they're saying is ok and now you've got more of them.

                                                        I disagree and think that things go the other way. By far everyone I know isn't racist or bigoted beyond perhaps minor stereotyping. And that's in a society that protects the rights of people to say horrendous things. There's not some groundswell of racist and bigots overrunning my country. Things are getting better and better imo.

                                                        What happens isn't that people lurk around in the shadows with their terrible ideas. They are forced to consider the society they live in. People live in societies, and the society wants to benefit as much of the society that it can. A couple of loose cannons, unchecked, can ruin that for a lot of people.

                                                        You're posting this comment underneath a picture of a fellow throwing out a nazi salute in a country where that's illegal. If people are openly doing that, you'd have to imagine there's many with similar ideas that just don't speak or act out.

                                                        It isn't like countries start out with hate speech laws, those are added eventually.

                                                        I think its unfortunate. We're all adults. We can handle mature discussion of uncomfortable topics, and we can teach our children that some people are misguided or backwards-thinking.

                                                        コメントをもっと表示する (17 返事)

                                                          [–]mindbodyproblem 0ポイント1ポイント  (9子コメント)

                                                          First, who says that my speech has to benefit society? Maybe it just benefits me. Maybe it doesn't benefit anyone. Maybe it's just an idea or opinion I have that I want to express for my own pleasure. Maybe I just want to "sound my barbaric yawp over the roofs of the world" to proclaim my individual existence.

                                                          Or maybe my speech is intended to be destructive to the society that I live in because I think that society is fucked up. Conversely, some bad governments restrict all kinds of speech on the basis that it is detrimental to their society. Gay "propaganda" in Russia, religion in China, atheism in Saudi Arabia -- all penalized for not benefiting society.

                                                          Second (or maybe third, I've lost track), if you ask Westboro Baptist whether they think their speech benefits society, they're gonna say yes. Who's to say that they're wrong?

                                                          Edit: a the

                                                          [–]MrKequc 1ポイント2ポイント  (4子コメント)

                                                          Second (or maybe third, I've lost track), if you ask Westboro Baptist whether they think their speech benefits society, they're gonna say yes. Who's to say that they're wrong?

                                                          This isn't all that hard. The people who say they're wrong is everyone else in a developed society, backed up with demonstrable evidence. Such as the severe amount of grief caused to the families of people who recently died.

                                                          This isn't even difficult. Canada blocked the westborough baptists on those grounds, from crossing the border. Scientology is illegal in a number of different countries. Are those societies falling apart at the seams because they were able to think?

                                                          Hate speech is illegal in a lot of places, and what it means is that the things you are saying are inciting violence. That isn't really all that large of a grey area.

                                                          Are you suggesting that just because you might want to incite violence, that is more important than other people's right not to have violence incited upon them? I mean how much of a pussy does a person need to be in order not to take a stand there.

                                                          "Oooh, but my precious talking about shit nobody wants to hear."

                                                          [–]mindbodyproblem [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

                                                          Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be saying that because people get mad and want to punch members of Westboro Baptist, that Westboro Baptist is inciting violence?

                                                          [–]MrKequc [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

                                                          They are delivering the message that god wants gay people to die and that the death of gay people should be celebrated. In fact that's just about all they ever talk about. Loudly all the time. How do you not know their message? Saying that gay people should die is incitement of violence.

                                                          Cross post to explain it like I'm 5

                                                          コメントをもっと表示する (4 返事)

                                                            [–]Denny_Craine 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                            Because what's considered "hate speech" is subjective

                                                            [–]Realik [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                                            No it's anti-free speach. it's wrong

                                                            [–]SanityInAnarchy [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                                            What reasons? Americans used to do the exact same salute during the Pledge of Allegiance.

                                                            [–]hunterbelmont [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                                            There is no good reason to violate human rights.

                                                            コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                                                              [–]badsingularity 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

                                                              Oh look, the rare redditor who understands freedom of speech is an ideal, not a law.

                                                              [–]scy1192 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                                                              but but but xkcd said so!

                                                              [–]badsingularity [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                                              It's almost like someone with a degree in physics shouldn't be your source for political ideology.

                                                              [–]lstwheel 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                              Do you believe in copyright?

                                                              [–]TheRyverMan 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                              But if I punch you in the face after that's punishable?

                                                              [–]truth_artist -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                              Freedom of speech, protesting, and provoking others to anger purposefully are three things that are all too commonly lumped together in the same discussions. Antagonizing people because you don't like what they stand for is not protesting, it's being an asshole. Just like the guy that burned the confederate flag in from of the confederate flag support rally. It's not that his motives were wrong, he's just an asshole. And he should have gotten punched in the face.

                                                              [–]urbn 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                              Well as much as people dislike it you also have to accept that some people will use that freedom to be a dick to others in an effort to piss them off by being an asshole and doing the nazi salute.

                                                              [–]Javbw 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                              Yea, and the restaurant owner (if he's at a restaurant) should be able to kick him out for it too.

                                                              [–]rahtin 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                              Just be glad there isn't some sort of "Confederate Salute"

                                                              Think the flag shit is bad?

                                                              [–]iForgot_MyPWagain -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                              You don't agree with the Supreme Court rulings limiting freedom of speech? Inciting Riot? Libel? Slander?

                                                              [–]downwardisheavenward -1ポイント0ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                              I think the rules are different in germanland

                                                              [–]IVIauser -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                              When does freedom of speech end though? When are reprecusions for your words jusitified and when are they censorship? The salute the guy was doing was honoring a party and a man that literally brought Germany to ruin, killed millions of their own citizens, and then at the end had the nerve to say the Germans weren't worthy which is why they failed. If I was Germany i would make it mandatory that a picture of Hitler be printed on every piece of toilet paper till the end of time.

                                                              Point is there is also a right to live without racial discrimination, a man throwing up the nazi salute is pretty bold, it comes with a load of baggage and he should know that. The same way if I walk into a NAACP meeting just singing "Down in Dixie" - I know its wrong and my freedom of speech does not overwrite their right against blatant racial discrimination. (I say "blatant" because even I agree that the PC crowd goes too far, I will still say the word nigardly and read Tom Sawyer.)

                                                              [–]AGRRRAA -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

                                                              I believe it is his right to do the salute. I also believe there is nothing wrong with the officer/soldier politely stopping him from doing it.

                                                              Your rights should end where those of others begin. If every one agrees the salute is a bad thing for germany as it harms their reputation, then they have the freedom to do so.

                                                              [–]leonryan 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                              by the same token the guy in the uniform should be free to object and stop him. he could have been acting out of personal interest rather than in his capacity as an officer.

                                                              [–]ReasonablyBadass 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                              When you guys allow people to say fuck on tv, we can talk.

                                                              [–]Upintheair84 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                              Completely disagree. Freedom of speech? Yes, that's extremely important. However, do you know what that symbol means? How many people were tortured, physically, emotionally, psychologically? How many people were slaughtered? All the pain, anger, hate and violence this brought on to the world?? Freedom of speech is extremely important but I'm not about to make a mockery out of all those people who died and suffered because some idiot should have his "freedom of speech" moment.

                                                              [–]EnigmaticHats 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

                                                              Naivety can be adorable.

                                                              [–]nile1056 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                                              Their main inspiration was probably all those other countries/empires that instituted it long before them. You made it sound like the US invented the concept. I liked inalienable though, and of course they weren't just copycats since I'm guessing they actually valued liberty.

                                                              [–]ChrisNomad [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                                              Too bad more redditors don't think like you do...they think they do but in fact they do not.

                                                              [–]NoSpicyFood [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                                              I believe in freedom of speech--not the freedom granted to people in the US by the US constitution, but the inalienable human right that inspired people to write the first amendment in the first place.

                                                              Those are exactly the same thing. The US is the only nation on Earth that has free speech - at least on the piece of paper you mentioned. With free speech-quashing organizations like the NSA, it can certainly be argued free speech is restricted here, but it is fully recognized on paper. Canada, Australia, and Europe, on the other hand, all have some form of 'hate speech' (whatever that is) laws on the books, entirely in contradiction to the ideal of free speech recognized in the First Amendment.

                                                              [–]hunterbelmont [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                                              To many people don't understand this. Freedom of Speech is not a law; it's a philosophic belief. You are born with the right of Freedom of Speech. It's a human right, whether governments recognize it or not.

                                                              [–]TheWarDrums [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                                              I get what you're saying, but it's the distribution of a hateful belief, regardless if it's just a salute. Even if it's one guy and it's just a shitty salute, it's oppressive nonetheless.

                                                              [–]Death_Star_ [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                                              Except what he did is dangerously close to fighting words, which is not a protected form of speech.

                                                              [–]Roflkopt3r [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                                                              If you let certain ideas brew for long enough that they manifest themselves in crime, it is already too late. That's the lesson us Germans had to take from the Nazi era.

                                                              The other should be that capital interest and corrupt politics are nothing to scoff at. The story that the NSDAP rose to power purely through brilliant demagougery and widespread antisemitism is ridiculous. The NSDAP came to power the exact way politicians get to power year after year in our times - through support by economic elites, back then mostly in form of the weapons and steel industry, which manifests in political relations (Hitler being nominated by politicians as chancellor in a "surprising" move that was not justified by popular vote, and all German "centrist"/conservative parties supporting the Ermächtigungsgesetz for "party-strategical reasons") and PR. So look out for your Kochs and Fox News and Bloomberg all that jazz.

                                                              Once the legitimacy of a constitutional system is undermined sufficiently by crisis and private capital interest diverts the attention of the systemic crisis to ethnical conflict, the risk for fascism on a state level emerges. "Fascism is Capitalism in decay" turned out to be an accurate statement. That is what is going on when our billionaires have our media and figures Trump go after immigrants, minorities, and critics of capitalism on a public stage.

                                                              コメントをもっと表示する (42 返事)