Posts by DCBCauchi
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: How much speech does it take?, in reply to Paul Williams,
I like this but it surely doesn’t apply to speech? Your right to not be offended by me can be respected by choosing to not listen; it doesn’t require my silence.
It seems to me that one reason this whole area is so murky is because the lines between thought and action – and between speech and action – are so murky.
It's why precision is necessary.
-
Hard News: How much speech does it take?, in reply to Islander,
And, personally speaking, I also think that I have a clear moral right to use whatever I need to make my work. I will fight tooth and nail against any infringement of that right.
Just where does that leave plaigerism – and copyright?
In a whole other discussion. One that is also very worthwhile having.
-
Hard News: How much speech does it take?, in reply to Islander,
thought it would be in the interest of artists that their freedom of expression not be subject to there not being any form of censorship whatsoever. And I stand by that.
Mmmm.
Which does rather bring up the rather loaded query – who is an artist?
Not just askin’ – I am sure we all know of people who trade on the -urm? prestige?- I am no longer sure of that- of being ’an artist- who have never put in the hard yards of practise/practice and production, whether it be in paint or print or photograph. Or whatever-Let me be clear. I don't think the question of 'who is an artist' is relevant. The principles underpinning artistic freedom apply more generally to free speech – that is, to all thought (and therefore action). The best society is the one in which information is exchanged freely, openly, and transparently.
And, personally speaking, I also think that I have a clear moral right to use whatever I need to make my work. I will fight tooth and nail against any infringement of that right.
I accept that I live in a society, which as presently structured does infringe on those rights. Therefore, what I want to know is what are the legitimate limits of those constraints? (To put it, as someone pointed out, the right way round!)
-
Hard News: How much speech does it take?, in reply to Paul Williams,
You think there should be a simple and universal answer rather than broad principles and common law? I’d worry that the bar would be set very low.
No, I think we should specify those broad principles as much as possible.
-
Hard News: How much speech does it take?, in reply to Russell Brown,
the actual potential for harm to a group is another.
No-one has in any way tried to specify how to determine that. That's all I'm asking.
-
Hard News: How much speech does it take?, in reply to giovanni tiso,
I also think your question has been answered half a dozen times but if that’s now how it feels to you I’m not sure where to go from here.
Well, I've totally missed that. The question seems to me to have been systematically dodged.
And, yes, I have read the relevant legislation. To be perfectly frank, I used to work on the stuff. But that's not relevant to this discussion.
And, yes, I too see no point in commenting on a blog purportedly about limits on free speech if no-one is willing to discuss the subject. I no longer have any idea what you (the general not specific) think you're doing here.
-
Hard News: How much speech does it take?, in reply to Danielle,
I think he meant the general ‘you’ rather than the specific ‘you’.
No, I think he meant the specific 'you'.
-
Hard News: How much speech does it take?, in reply to giovanni tiso,
Why be hypotehtical? Have you got any specific problem with the statutes that we do have?
Yet again: I want to determine the basis on which those statutes are made, because it directly affects me, as it does everyone.
Really, how hard is it?
-
Hard News: How much speech does it take?, in reply to giovanni tiso,
You want people to be shocked at Pakeha Have Rights Too, you want some of them to demand that it be removed from public view, or destroyed.
Where on earth did I say that? I want none of those things and honestly have no idea why you think I would. I want a free, open, and tolerant society in which artists – and everyone else – can make the best work they can through the free, open, and tolerant exchange of information.
And still no-one has addressed my question, whichever way I put it.
-
Hard News: How much speech does it take?, in reply to giovanni tiso,
No, no, it's not about the picture at all. Bad example!
Let's reframe the question:
Hypothetically, what specific criteria should we use to determine whether something is legitimate free speech?