(no title)
KIFulgore | 3 years ago
I don't like it. Which is why I choose to continue living in the US. It's not perfect by any stretch but people have different priorities. Freedom of speech is of the highest priority for me.
It should be noted, even the US has lines that can't legally be crossed. Slander, libel, panic-inducing expressions (yelling "fire" in a crowded theater) are examples.
lm28469|3 years ago
Also, depending on the metrics, the US isn't anywhere close to the top countries in term of freedom of expression, but they sure are the one boasting about it the most.
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries...
I guess the US basically having no history plays a huge role there, we'll see how it is in 500+ years
renata|3 years ago
dessant|3 years ago
When you will be the one that is being targeted by those symbols, and by the people who adore them, you may develop a more nuanced set of priorities.
jdrc|3 years ago
brummm|3 years ago
In Germany, human dignity is the highest good and free speech ends where it would impede human dignity. Hence, there is good reason to ban Nazi salutes and symbols.
gameman144|3 years ago
The First Amendment grants freedom of speech.
The Second Amendment is useful because it lets you defend yourself against powers that try to forcibly take away that right to speech.
The Third Amendment and Fourth Amendment are useful because they keep the military from moving in (to your property) to intimidate or hinder your speech, or to drum up other charges or steal your property to punish you for your speech.
The Fifth Amendment is useful to keep you out of a Kafka-esque nightmare where you're not officially breaking speech laws, but the government punishes you via an unfair judicial system.
Etc. for the remaining Bill of Rights.
The reason that I personally value this freedom so highly isn't that others should be able to speak, it's that I should have the right to hear whatever I want that others have to say.
If I want to go listen to speeches by a neo-nazi fringe group to understand what drives them, I cherish that right and would begrudge any system that says I'm not allowed to. How can one expect to understand the world of they're not even allowed to hear the words or observe the true personal expression of those they disagree with most strongly?
Likewise, in America the skepticism of government is pretty deep-seated, so I have no faith that granting a government body regulatory rights over some speech which I don't like wouldn't soon snowball into government using those same rights against speech I do like. Better to never grant such decision-making to the government in the first place.
This is just my personal take, so take with many grains of salt, but thought it might be helpful in explaining some of the underpinning American ethos (since I know that stuff can be hard to translate cross-culture)
KIFulgore|3 years ago
glogla|3 years ago
jdrc|3 years ago
Banning free speech to improve healthcare is , at best, a cargo cult practice