Free Speech

[Com Fox]

Am I the only one thinking these posts of PM are just a facade of what he really thinks.

What he did at the awards has always made me very sceptical.

I mean seriously, @prisonermonkeys you STATED that Milo says that anyone who disagress with him hates free speech, statements need to be backup otherwise its a bunch of bollocks. @Imari even showed sources to go against your statement.

I feel like you've never watched a Milo video and just hear that he is an 🤬 (which isn't wrong but nothing to do with his views on free speech) and is apparently "alt-right" (even though he denies this)

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Which once again brings up the question why the hell you think you're any better than what you're accusing (but not proving, still) Milo of doing.

Because I don't encourage others to hate or to fear anyone or anything that's different.

 

[Imari]

Because I don't encourage others to hate or to fear anyone or anything that's different.

Let's count the posts in which Prisonermonkeys employs Prisonermonkeys Diversionary Tactic #5: I'm pretending you never asked.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

He asked me a question. I answered it. By all means, continue moving the goalposts.

 

[Com Fox]

Because I don't encourage others to hate or to fear anyone or anything that's different.

Milo doesn't, Milo just trolls, riles people up (which judging by how you react he is an expert at it) and give his opinions. He doesn't say go and hate someone, the closest is Islam but he never says you should hate Islam, he says that HE is scared of Islam and that he thinks it should be reformed.

 

[Imari]

He asked me a question. I answered it. By all means, continue moving the goalposts.

Oh look, we're back to PDT #2: Deflect to incidentals.

You're still refusing to provide any justification for what you've accused Milo of then, I take it?

 

[Roger the Horse]

I feel like the term freedom of speech has lost all meaning as more and more people just use it as an excuse to harrass, bully, and threaten others. "It's just a prank bro!" they shout, as they leave others in genuine distress or fearing for their own wellbeing.

This is exarcerbated by people claiming that others criticising them are somehow attacking their free speech, rather than expressing the same freedom of speech they themselves claim to be expressing. In an extraordinary case recently the Daily Mail claimed that they had been "censored by the left" after a headline was broadly condemned as offensive (whether or not it was is another matter) despite the fact that the headline was able to appear on their front page in newsagents across the country without restriction (and also the fact that Britain currently has a right wing government, so it is unclear which leftists would be supposedly censoring the headline).

It's a shame, as freedom of speech is a noble concept, but one which is made all too complex by issues such as defining what can and cannot be considered defamation, assault, or incitement of violence. Actually enforcing this in law is made all the harder as those involved in the judicial system are likely to be swayed by the just world hypothesis into believing that an accused actor must have been acting in good faith, "because how could someone possibly actually think something so awful?"

In the end, the only reasonable proposal is that only I should have freedom of speech and everyone esle should just have to listen to what I say, since what I say is obviously the best thing 10/10 IGN.

 

[Famine]

It's a shame, as freedom of speech is a noble concept, but one which is made all too complex by issues such as defining what can and cannot be considered defamation

Not a criminal matter and so nothing to do with freedom.

assault

Not speech.

or incitement of violence.

'Freedom of x' is not 'immunity from consequences of x'.

So none of these things make the concept of freedom of speech more complex.

 

[Roger the Horse]

Not speech.

Verbal assault is pretty inherently speech.

The line between what can be considered any one of those criminal acts and a statement made in good faith can be incredibly blurry and often relies on value judgements on the part of whoever writes the laws or attempts to enforce them within the judicial system.

 

[polysmut]

Verbal assault is pretty inherently speech.

The line between what can be considered any one of those criminal acts and a statement made in good faith can be incredibly blurry and often relies on value judgements on the part of whoever writes the laws or attempts to enforce them within the judicial system.

However, as @Famine has pointed out many times, the only part of it that defines whether or not free speech is the issue is whether or not the state can punish you for what you say.
It seems incredible that people who have read that will muddy the issue without challenging that definition.

 

[Famine]

Verbal assault is pretty inherently speech.

It's also not assault.

 

[Roger the Horse]

It's not battery. Assault is a threat to or attempt to commit battery.

 

[Famine]

Assault is a threat to or attempt to commit battery.

Not quite. A threat doesn't constitute assault unless there is reasonable grounds to believe the threat will be imminently carried out.

'Verbal assault' (whatever the hell that is) isn't 'assault'.

I'm not quite sure why you're creating irrelevances to muddy what you think 'freedom of speech' means when there's no need to do so.

 

[W3H5]

I feel like the term freedom of speech has lost all meaning as more and more people just use it as an excuse to harrass, bully, and threaten others. "It's just a prank bro!" they shout, as they leave others in genuine distress or fearing for their own wellbeing.

Leaving other in distress or fear over a verbal discharge, barring threats of violence or inciting it, is the problem of the offended, not the verbaliser (not sure if that's a real word).

If somebody goes off on another in an aggressive verbal manor they don't have to be offended or distressed. If they're properly threatened with violence or violence is incited against them by a vocal opponent then they have a reason to be concerned for their well being if such threats are likely to be acted upon.

As you say freedom of speech is being used to justify bullying, then you must also reason that it is being used against those who are deemed to be saying 'hurtful' things by those in positions of authority to shut down the opinions of those they don't agree with.

 

[Imari]

He asked me a question. I answered it. By all means, continue moving the goalposts.

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Prisonermonkeys Diversionary Tactic #1: Maybe if I don't say anything they'll forget about it.

Never forget. Never accept chocolate ice cream from a caged monkey.

 

[Vegard]

If you're not quite sure what an actual lack of free speech looks like, read this.

Absolutely absurd.

 

[Dotini]

Are you a member of, or interested in, the Intellectual Dark Web (IDW)? I think I am.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/08/opinion/intellectual-dark-web.html

 

[baldgye]

Are you a member of, or interested in, the Intellectual Dark Web (IDW)? I think I am.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/08/opinion/intellectual-dark-web.html

What a silly name, also how are those conversations not happening in public, if they are being had on YouTube, of all places... there is no reason (that I can see) that those conversations can’t and don’t happen anywhere else on the internet.

 

[Joey D]

The IDW seems super neck-beardy with a touch of fedora and a smattering of m'lady.

 

[TexRex]

The IDW seems super neck-beardy with a touch of fedora and a smattering of m'lady.

Rides a fixie, too.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Are you a member of, or interested in, the Intellectual Dark Web (IDW)? I think I am.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/08/opinion/intellectual-dark-web.html

I didn't not realize those guys and gals were all a part of an IDW. I thought it was just the web. It was an interesting read. Are you familiar with the walkaway movement? It's been popping up on my YT feed these last few days. I must have clicked on one of their videos on the weekend. Fascinating.

 

[Chrunch Houston]

I would love to know how big this #walkaway thing actually is. Those vids are all over my youtube. But, I have watched a few. And I do subscribe so some of those conservative dark youtubers.

 

[baldgye]

I didn't not realize those guys and gals were all a part of an IDW. I thought it was just the web. It was an interesting read. Are you familiar with the walkaway movement? It's been popping up on my YT feed these last few days. I must have clicked on one of their videos on the weekend. Fascinating.

Is that where these people go to the actual dark web, or would that require too much intelligence from them?

 

[UKMikey]

Is that where these people go to the actual dark web, or would that require too much intelligence from them?

Not exactly. Depending on who you talk to, it's either a movement started by gay people who are so repulsed by Muslims that they're being driven into the arms of Trump, or a bot assisted, artificially amplified astroturf campaign designed to make it look like liberal politics are unpatriotic.

https://arcdigital.media/pro-trump-...rats-in-new-astroturfed-movement-20359c1906d3

 

[baldgye]

Not exactly. Depending on who you talk to, it's either a movement started by gay people who are so repulsed by Muslims that they're being driven into the arms of Trump or an bot assisted, artificially amplified astroturf campaign designed to make it look like liberal politics are unpatriotic.

https://arcdigital.media/pro-trump-...rats-in-new-astroturfed-movement-20359c1906d3

oh.

Are you familiar with the walkaway movement? It's been popping up on my YT feed these last few days. I must have clicked on one of their videos on the weekend. Fascinating.

Given the above post, what makes it fascinating?

 

[Chrunch Houston]

The #walkaway videos I have seen were not bots, nor were they actors.

I #walkedaway from the Democrat party during Clinton's impeachment trial. The President broke the law, and the Democrat party lie was that it was just about sex. It wasn't. Now I see all of their lies.

 

[baldgye]

The #walkaway videos I have seen were not bots, nor were they actors.

I #walkedaway from the Democrat party during Clinton's impeachment trial. The President broke the law, and the Democrat party lie was that it was just about sex. It wasn't. Now I see all of their lies.

It does seem to be largely perpetuated by the right and bots however.

 

[UKMikey]

It seems strange to me that hundreds of thousands of democrats would become Trump supporting immigrant haters in a number of days but the US is a big country with a massive population.

Like @Chrunch Houston I'd like to know how big this movement really is as we all know the left has no monopoly on lying to the electorate.

 

[baldgye]

It seems strange to me that hundreds of thousands of democrats would become Trump supporting immigrant haters in a number of days but the US is a big country with a massive population.

Like @Chrunch Houston I'd like to know how big this movement really is as we all know the left has no monopoly on lying to the electorate.

I think the whole thing, crystallises the monumental problem with politics and especially American politics at the moment. It's one vs the other. And as such, intelligent debate is hampered by people choosing sides, rather than trying to figure out the best solution to each problem.

 

[UKMikey]

I think the whole thing, crystallises the monumental problem with politics and especially American politics at the moment. It's one vs the other. And as such, intelligent debate is hampered by people choosing sides, rather than trying to figure out the best solution to each problem.

It looks like people just like to get angry and social media isn't helping.

https://arcdigital.media/outrage-is...epest-core-value-it-shouldn-t-be-db777f41d208