Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Opinion: The left’s embrace of censorship is a great political tragedy

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Opinion: The left’s embrace of censorship is a great political tragedy

    The left has made many mistakes in recent years. Throwing its lot in with the middle-class misanthropes of the green movement. Lining up with that Byzantine bureaucracy and plunger of the Greek working classes into penury, the European Union. But its greatest error, the one from which it will struggle to recover, has been its abandonment of freedom of speech. The consequences of the left’s vacating of the field of free speech will be dire and will be felt for many years, not only on the left itself but across the political sphere.
    http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite...-speech4/21351


  • #2
    ‘He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.’

    Fantastic post. Thank you for sharing.

    Comment


    • #3
      Nowadays neither side is any good.

      The Nomansland where I sit is cozy, though.

      Comment


      • #4
        Really good article. Great stuff in the comments, too.

        Comment


        • #5
           

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Hildemel View Post
            Nowadays neither side is any good.

            The Nomansland where I sit is cozy, though.
            I frankly beg to differ.

            I frankly, and seriously, beg to differ.

            Infringing freedom of speech, and by that I mean it is way beyond the American-constitution definition of the thing, is something in which the left is excessively invested in.


            Neither side is any good? No. You are wrong. Very, very wrong.

            So far, the only political side/affiliation that is actively silencing any and all dissenting voices/opinions is the left.

            Comment


            • #7
              The Left does support freedom of speech, just as long as you support their ideals and don’t contradict them.

              Ideally the left would disavow their antifas and blackbloc fanatics among them, just like Trump disavowed David Duke, the KKK and various elements of the Alt-Right like Richard Spencer and made the FBI shut down SpermFront 14/88.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Ivan le Fou View Post

                I frankly beg to differ.

                I frankly, and seriously, beg to differ.

                Infringing freedom of speech, and by that I mean it is way beyond the American-constitution definition of the thing, is something in which the left is excessively invested in.


                Neither side is any good? No. You are wrong. Very, very wrong.

                So far, the only political side/affiliation that is actively silencing any and all dissenting voices/opinions is the left.
                So why do right wing people constantly try to prevent me from taking God's name in vain? Both sides have there 'your not allowed to say that' moments. In the USA though it seems there is a bigger problem with the left for sure, but here in Canada I have had to deal with that bull from both sides just over different topics.

                Alas from a centrist nomansland point of view both sides have lost it over many other issues besides free speech. Or at least the 'far' left and right have.

                Comment


                • #9
                  The article isn't about left wing speech repression vs. right wing but rather about how now there is no side with a commitment to the ideal of free speech. Which from a freedom aspect is a very bad thing.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by The Archwizard View Post
                    So why do right wing people constantly try to prevent me from taking God's name in vain?
                    'cause they're daft. I'm curious though: Do you really think this analogy was good? Calling someone out for "taking God's name in vain" and prosecuting people over scientifically correct statements are matters worlds apart. We live in a culture where it's possible to speak out facts and lose one's social standing and job over it, in addition to the distinct possibility of being prosecuted with legal fiat.

                    Gender identity disorder is an illness according to medical guidelines? You can't say that, that's transphobic!

                    Statistically speaking, immigrants commit way more crimes than the autochtonous? That's racist!

                    Referring to women as physically inferior to men on average? You sexist swine!

                    Describing terrorism as a primarily Islamic phenomenon in accordance with objective data? That's islamophobic!

                    Questioning the methods of climate sciences? You're an enemy of nature!

                    It's a virtually endless list. There's been right-wing censorship in the past; lots of it, make no mistake. If the appropriate response was tilting the pendulum fully into the opposite direction, I'd say fuck that though. In my estimation there's not a shadow of a doubt left wing politics pose the greatest threat to free speech nowadays. Additionally, by preventing open-ended debate on urgent public issures they're a very objective threat to society.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by TheKiwi View Post
                      The article isn't about left wing speech repression vs. right wing but rather about how now there is no side with a commitment to the ideal of free speech. Which from a freedom aspect is a very bad thing.
                      This right here I agree with completely.

                      muck an attack on freedom of speech is an attack on freedom of speech regardless of the nature of the attack.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Both sides have subsumed their oppositions most effective (and least rational) cries.

                        "That's offensive"

                        "Think of the children"

                        "You can't say that"

                        Bollox to the lot of them.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by The Archwizard View Post
                          muck an attack on freedom of speech is an attack on freedom of speech regardless of the nature of the attack.
                          If I understood rightly what you're implying, I couldn't disagree more. Yes, slapping someone in the face and stabbing them with a kitchen knife a fifty times could both be described as "attacks" and yet comparing the two seems utterly misplaced to me. Asking someone not to curse is nowhere near forcing them to deny scientific reality.

                          I do not need no option to deny the Holocaust, for example; it's no constituent of my freedom. Calling a spade a spade, however, is. You could argue that giving any ground as in the aforementioned case will lead to unjustifiable and unbearable restrictions in the future; that'd be a solid argument.

                          I'm not buying into such deterministic thinking, though. Even in the United States running about town naked or voicing threats is illegal, though they're technically free expressions of one's thoughts. Not a single place on this earth grants free speech truly without limits, so in my estimation it's a fallacy.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by muck View Post

                            'cause they're daft. I'm curious though: Do you really think this analogy was good? Calling someone out for "taking God's name in vain" and prosecuting people over scientifically correct statements are matters worlds apart. We live in a culture where it's possible to speak out facts and lose one's social standing and job over it, in addition to the distinct possibility of being prosecuted with legal fiat.

                            Gender identity disorder is an illness according to medical guidelines? You can't say that, that's transphobic!

                            Statistically speaking, immigrants commit way more crimes than the autochtonous? That's racist!

                            Referring to women as physically inferior to men on average? You sexist swine!

                            Describing terrorism as a primarily Islamic phenomenon in accordance with objective data? That's islamophobic!

                            Questioning the methods of climate sciences? You're an enemy of nature!

                            It's a virtually endless list. There's been right-wing censorship in the past; lots of it, make no mistake. If the appropriate response was tilting the pendulum fully into the opposite direction, I'd say fuck that though. In my estimation there's not a shadow of a doubt left wing politics pose the greatest threat to free speech nowadays. Additionally, by preventing open-ended debate on urgent public issures they're a very objective threat to society.
                            ​I would say its pretty damn good analogy if we talk about right wing in the general western world. Same as calling spade a spade. Given that you made at least one mistake in above statements.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Asheren View Post
                              ... Given that you made at least one mistake in above statements.
                              Such as? ?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X