Free Speech

  • Thread starter A2K78
  • 1,024 comments
  • 62,633 views
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)
 
Tornado
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.
Click to expand...
Because I don't encourage others to hate or to fear anyone or anything that's different.
 
prisonermonkeys
Because I don't encourage others to hate or to fear anyone or anything that's different.
Click to expand...

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

Gordon-1.jpg
 
prisonermonkeys
Because I don't encourage others to hate or to fear anyone or anything that's different.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.
 
Roger the Horse
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
Click to expand...
Not a criminal matter and so nothing to do with freedom.
Roger the Horse
assault
Click to expand...
Not speech.
Roger the Horse
or incitement of violence.
Click to expand...
'Freedom of x' is not 'immunity from consequences of x'.

So none of these things make the concept of freedom of speech more complex.
 
Famine
Not speech.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Roger the Horse
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Roger the Horse
Assault is a threat to or attempt to commit battery.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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
Click to expand...
I didn't not realize those guys and gals were all a part of an IDW. I thought it was just the web:lol:. 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.
 
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.
 
Johnnypenso
I didn't not realize those guys and gals were all a part of an IDW. I thought it was just the web:lol:. 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.
Click to expand...
Is that where these people go to the actual dark web, or would that require too much intelligence from them?
 
baldgye
Is that where these people go to the actual dark web, or would that require too much intelligence from them?
Click to expand...
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
 
Last edited:
UKMikey
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
Click to expand...

oh.
Johnnypenso
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.
Click to expand...

Given the above post, what makes it fascinating?
 
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 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.
 
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 

Latest Posts

Back