Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: How much speech does it take?

554 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 12 13 14 15 16 23 Newer→ Last

  • Sacha, in reply to DCBCauchi,

    way to engage with the topic

    Apologies for my tone. I'm too busy to relitigate the last few millenia today.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19699 posts Report Reply

  • merc, in reply to Sacha,

    Yep, Lorca springs to mind.

    Since Dec 2006 • 2471 posts Report Reply

  • DCBCauchi, in reply to Russell Brown,

    I think you mean “extending my personal definition of harm”. The idea that vulnerable groups can suffer harm isn’t exactly novel.

    Not all speech has the same reach, and not all responses are heard remotely as well as the original claim.

    Can you really not grasp that speeches that, say, defames an ethnic minority might have significant, even disastrous implications for that minority?

    Of course I can grasp that. All I'm asking, which no-one has bothered to address, is where is the line?

    I've even offered a specific example. Robinson's picture: valid free speech or not ok?

    And I am explicitly not meaning my 'personal definition' of harm. I'm specifically talking about the definition of harm that forms the basis for legislative restrictions on freedom of speech. How hard is that to grasp?

    Since Feb 2011 • 320 posts Report Reply

  • DCBCauchi, in reply to Russell Brown,

    No one, to my knowledge, has ever set out at night to injure or kill any anarchist painter they can find.

    The painter Max Beckmann left Germany and never returned for a reason. That very reason in fact.

    Since Feb 2011 • 320 posts Report Reply

  • son of little p,

    Here is a swift attempt to briefly state a bit of how this thing looks to me. Islam, to put it bluntly, is the religion of (mobilized) lastness. It is the religion, in other words, of those arriving upon a scene already fully-formed, and its conception of things is thus flooded with the "justified"resentment-of the-excluded from the beginning.. The essentially Christian scenic-content that the Q'ran must draw upon, is therefore proclaimed as "uncreated", the 'true take' on something forever continuing to eclipse what Muslims must now believe is their ontological priority. Such a book in its very structure is hardly subject to the quite endless 'deviation by interpretation' that the Bible, as engine of ever-evolving ethical conceptions, quite obviously remains. If you simply eliminate any consideration of same from the contemplation of Islam, then yr destined methinks for an epic fail.. I trust Mr Kracklite has enjoyed my syntactic entanglements..

    Since Apr 2011 • 38 posts Report Reply

  • DCBCauchi, in reply to Islander,

    When I am dictator of the Known Universes, all people shall learn their histories.

    Oh, and in all the hurly-burly I forgot to mention that this is one of the best lines I've ever read.

    Since Feb 2011 • 320 posts Report Reply

  • giovanni tiso, in reply to DCBCauchi,

    What I don’t understand is why the cost of someone possibly being offended by something should outweigh the benefit of anyone else using that thing to create something new?

    Nazism and Fascism aren't "something new". Italy and Germany have laws against the use of the language and symbols of those historical movements. They are imperfect laws, and they are powerless of course to prevent the rise of various neo-fascist and neo-nazis groups. But I'm still glad we have them. I'm glad it's actually against the law to wave a fascist or nazi flag, if only for the pain that they bring to victims' descendants and the remaining survivors.

    Wellington • Since Jun 2007 • 7473 posts Report Reply

  • merc, in reply to giovanni tiso,

    And Norway's WW2 past, specifically the children of German occupying soldiers, estimated to be 40,000 in number.

    Since Dec 2006 • 2471 posts Report Reply

  • giovanni tiso, in reply to DCBCauchi,

    The painter Max Beckmann left Germany and never returned for a reason. That very reason in fact.

    If Beckmann had actually been an anarchist (was he? I didn't think so), surely his persecution would be a subset of the persecution of all political radicals under Nazism. I think the point is that degenerate artists came in for special treatment because they were artists - which, it seems to me, serves to prove your point rather better.

    Wellington • Since Jun 2007 • 7473 posts Report Reply

  • DCBCauchi, in reply to giovanni tiso,

    I think the point is that degenerate artists came in for special treatment because they were artists

    That was exactly my point. Artistic freedom – and freedom of speech more generally, for the same reasons and according to the same principles – is a precious thing that people have literally fought and died for.

    It's not just an anarchist thing or an artistic thing. It's the very bedrock of a free, open, and tolerant society.

    Since Feb 2011 • 320 posts Report Reply

  • giovanni tiso, in reply to DCBCauchi,

    Artistic freedom – and freedom of speech more generally, for the same reasons and according to the same principles – is a precious thing that people have literally fought and died for.

    The freedom to paint Guernica and the freedom to shout “kill all Jews” are two fundamentally different freedoms, it seems to me. I still don’t get the connection.

    Wellington • Since Jun 2007 • 7473 posts Report Reply

  • nzlemming,

    The good thing about trolled threads is that your scrolling finger gets well exercised.

    Waikanae • Since Nov 2006 • 2930 posts Report Reply

  • son of little p, in reply to nzlemming,

    oh wicked, most cowardly fellow! Such scrolling exercise might be most luminously compared to the scrambling paws of an nzlemming, may it not?

    Since Apr 2011 • 38 posts Report Reply

  • DCBCauchi, in reply to giovanni tiso,

    The freedom to paint Guernica and the freedom to shout “kill all Jews” are two fundamentally different freedoms, it seems to me. I still don’t get the connection.

    I am not equating the two. I am merely asking, once again, where and on what basis do we, as a society, draw the line?

    (It's always all about drawing the lines.)

    Since Feb 2011 • 320 posts Report Reply

  • giovanni tiso, in reply to DCBCauchi,

    I am merely asking, once again, where and on what basis do we, as a society, draw the line?

    We draw the line on the basis of whether a statement incites hatred, or not. Which is not always an easy determination to make, but it often is.

    Wellington • Since Jun 2007 • 7473 posts Report Reply

  • DCBCauchi, in reply to giovanni tiso,

    We draw the line on the basis of whether a statement incites hatred, or not. Which is not always an easy determination to make, but it often is.

    So how do we go about determining it?

    A better comparison than Guernica might be Robinson's picture vs shouting 'kill all Jews'.

    Or maybe patently silly stand-ins instead of real world examples.

    Since Feb 2011 • 320 posts Report Reply

  • son of little p, in reply to giovanni tiso,

    may i ask you if you honestly believe that real hatred is something that, in our own present time, can simply be incited? (i take this to mean that before the statement, this 'hatred' could not be said to have, you know, 'existed')

    Since Apr 2011 • 38 posts Report Reply

  • Che Tibby, in reply to DCBCauchi,

    could you link to robinson's picture? i can't find it online.

    whether a statement is hate speech will always be subjective. but like all social interaction there has to be limits. without limits you have no society.

    the back of an envelope • Since Nov 2006 • 2042 posts Report Reply

  • Paul Williams,

    It's more of a dissection of a specific example than a universal definition, but feel free to copy and disseminate in whole or part as you please.

    I understand, it's just that largely corelates with my general experience dealing with trolls; it's a great diagnostic, a simple troll pathology.

    may i ask you if you honestly believe that real hatred is something that, in our own present time, can simply be incited?

    Yes, people marginal or disenfranchised can readily be encouraged to blame someone else for their predicament. Fear and hatred of migrants in Australia is whipped up by shock jocks who claim "they'll take your jobs" etc. The Cronulla Riots were fueled by exactly this.

    I'm going to regret engaging...

    Sydney • Since Nov 2006 • 2273 posts Report Reply

  • giovanni tiso, in reply to DCBCauchi,

    So how do we go about determining it?

    We have laws that define such things and courts that interpret such laws.

    Wellington • Since Jun 2007 • 7473 posts Report Reply

  • son of little p,

    first - just WHAT is the point of this?

    "I’m going to regret engaging…"

    Since Apr 2011 • 38 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha, in reply to Paul Williams,

    people marginal or disenfranchised can readily be encouraged to blame someone else for their predicament

    and beneficiary bashing by NZ politicians feeds off the same dynamic

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19699 posts Report Reply

  • Paul Williams,

    and beneficiary bashing by NZ politicians feeds off the same dynamic

    Indeed. At the risk of repeating something already said, or simply known, I think fear is a precusor of anger.

    Sydney • Since Nov 2006 • 2273 posts Report Reply

  • Che Tibby, in reply to Sacha,

    i'd disagree, in my experience beneficiary-bashing is most usually done by non-marginalised and highly enfranchised people.

    otherwise, yup.

    the back of an envelope • Since Nov 2006 • 2042 posts Report Reply

  • DCBCauchi, in reply to Che Tibby,

    Since Feb 2011 • 320 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 12 13 14 15 16 23 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.