Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine are you having fun al? are you having van al? dei has never hurt anyone you jackass dei must go gaolang > your fav hi rej hi rejj hi rejjj is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? life goal sister harem real madrid reloaded is innocent tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you watch for haters weebs discussing politics lmao worst thread ever
I've been keeping a close watch on the far right for years now, but I don't know what I'm talking about.. sure 
Well.. if you think the far right is evil.. maybe don't promote far right values
But note that today's conservative are very close to the far right in terms of values in the majority of the countries of the west so.. yeah, even being a conservative wouldn't help you there.
Then you are being censored right now, therefore you don't have freedom of speech if we take your rethoric into account
But no. Freedom of speech is not a switch. its a spectrum. Like I said, in certain country you have 0 freedom of speech while in others, this freedom is only partially censored.
Which is literally called a defense of a genocide.
Well.. if you think the far right is evil.. maybe don't promote far right values
But note that today's conservative are very close to the far right in terms of values in the majority of the countries of the west so.. yeah, even being a conservative wouldn't help you there.
Then you are being censored right now, therefore you don't have freedom of speech if we take your rethoric into account
But no. Freedom of speech is not a switch. its a spectrum. Like I said, in certain country you have 0 freedom of speech while in others, this freedom is only partially censored.
Which is literally called a defense of a genocide.
I've been keeping a close watch on the far right for years now, but I don't know what I'm talking about.. sure
Well.. if you think the far right is evil.. maybe don't promote far right values
But note that today's conservative are very close to the far right in terms of values in the majority of the countries of the west so.. yeah, even being a conservative wouldn't help you there.
Then you are being censored right now, therefore you don't have freedom of speech if we take your rethoric into account
But no. Freedom of speech is not a switch. its a spectrum. Like I said, in certain country you have 0 freedom of speech while in others, this freedom is only partially censored.
Which is literally called a defense of a genocide.
Well.. if you think the far right is evil.. maybe don't promote far right values
But note that today's conservative are very close to the far right in terms of values in the majority of the countries of the west so.. yeah, even being a conservative wouldn't help you there.
Then you are being censored right now, therefore you don't have freedom of speech if we take your rethoric into account
But no. Freedom of speech is not a switch. its a spectrum. Like I said, in certain country you have 0 freedom of speech while in others, this freedom is only partially censored.
Which is literally called a defense of a genocide.
H
Yes. I don't have freedom of speech. I'm being censored right now. You finally got it. Is not a spectrum you either have it or not. Censorship is a sprectrum. You can censor some things or you can censor a small thing. I'd say I never saw a 100% censorship anywhere since that would be the people can't communicate at all.
Nope because you woke crazy people like to call genocide anything when it comes to a country you don't like.
Nope because you woke crazy people like to call genocide anything when it comes to a country you don't like.
- Antiwoke and antileftist
- Transphobe
- Progun
- Extremely violent in the language
- Great defender of Trump
- Confusionnistic
- Psychophobic
- Science denier (anti sociology)
I'm sure there is more. Those are the values and traits of the far right. Those are YOUR values and traits (everything here can be tied to what you said on this forum)
So tell me.. why can't you accept to be called a "far rightist" knowing that ?
Meaning that freedom of speech will also be on a spectrum because of that. One is linked with the other mate :)
I'm sure south africa will be glad to be called a woke country
I'm sure the UN are glad to be called a woke organisation
In reality, everything that challenges your point of view is "woke", right ?
- Transphobe
- Progun
- Extremely violent in the language
- Great defender of Trump
- Confusionnistic
- Psychophobic
- Science denier (anti sociology)
I'm sure there is more. Those are the values and traits of the far right. Those are YOUR values and traits (everything here can be tied to what you said on this forum)
So tell me.. why can't you accept to be called a "far rightist" knowing that ?
Meaning that freedom of speech will also be on a spectrum because of that. One is linked with the other mate :)
I'm sure south africa will be glad to be called a woke country
I'm sure the UN are glad to be called a woke organisation
In reality, everything that challenges your point of view is "woke", right ?
:laughmoji:
Hmmm, a sociologist might answer you more precisly to the question but basically no one and everyone. What is acceptable to say in a society with freedom of speech is basicaly what people in a society deem acceptable to say or not.
In a society with a mainly "normal" freedom of speech, there is not someone who will say what is right or what is wrong to say. It will be a mix of what the people think, their influences (media/power in place) etc. It will be like a needle evolving on a spectrum for different subject.
If IDF says that criticizing the action of Israel is not acceptable then ok, but we need to add that vision to the vision of the entierity of the world on the subject.
When we do that we notice that only some states, some medias/personnalities and Israel is saying that, the rest of the world disagree that it is not acceptable to criticize Israel. Therefore criticizing Israel is perfectly acceptable in our society.
(I'm not making a judment of value here, I'm just stating hat is acceptable for the society in time T and what is not)
Now...
We, the left, knowing that this process can lead toward problematic and hurtfull ideologies becoming acceptable in society, we are trying to add one more parameter to the balance and give it more weight than the rest : Science
We believe that by giving more weight to the conclusions of science (social or hard sciences), we will be able to better prevent problematic and hurtfull ideologies to reign over the field of free speech. Because when we look at scientific researches, we understand that language can become one of tools of oppression when uncontrolled.
This is why in definitive, we believe in free speech, but not absolute free speech.
For example, we known that giving a tribune for far right ideas (and therefore missinformations) in the medias will straighten said ideas. This will displace the overton windows radically to the right and make those ideas more acceptable in the mind of the public. Those ideas will be then more debated and in consequences even more normalized. This is one of the reason why the left explains that we must avoid debatting with the far right in huge public spaces and why we must absolutely avoid inviting far right personnalities in the medias.
In a society with a mainly "normal" freedom of speech, there is not someone who will say what is right or what is wrong to say. It will be a mix of what the people think, their influences (media/power in place) etc. It will be like a needle evolving on a spectrum for different subject.
If IDF says that criticizing the action of Israel is not acceptable then ok, but we need to add that vision to the vision of the entierity of the world on the subject.
When we do that we notice that only some states, some medias/personnalities and Israel is saying that, the rest of the world disagree that it is not acceptable to criticize Israel. Therefore criticizing Israel is perfectly acceptable in our society.
(I'm not making a judment of value here, I'm just stating hat is acceptable for the society in time T and what is not)
Now...
We, the left, knowing that this process can lead toward problematic and hurtfull ideologies becoming acceptable in society, we are trying to add one more parameter to the balance and give it more weight than the rest : Science
We believe that by giving more weight to the conclusions of science (social or hard sciences), we will be able to better prevent problematic and hurtfull ideologies to reign over the field of free speech. Because when we look at scientific researches, we understand that language can become one of tools of oppression when uncontrolled.
This is why in definitive, we believe in free speech, but not absolute free speech.
For example, we known that giving a tribune for far right ideas (and therefore missinformations) in the medias will straighten said ideas. This will displace the overton windows radically to the right and make those ideas more acceptable in the mind of the public. Those ideas will be then more debated and in consequences even more normalized. This is one of the reason why the left explains that we must avoid debatting with the far right in huge public spaces and why we must absolutely avoid inviting far right personnalities in the medias.