Free Speech thread

[Job_38]

Let's give a shout for free speech!!!

Western culture is more superior because it focuses on the rights of the individual.

 

[Dewjunkie]

I wouldn't say any culture is superior. We're all human, we just go about things differently. There are good points and bad points in every culture.

Freedom of speech is a wonderful thing, unfortunately most people don't want to accept "free" speech. They want everyone's speech to agree with their own and they don't want anyone's speech to offend them. People are quick to support freedom of speech until someone's speech upsets them.

 

[David Gould]

That is true. I personally think freedom of speech is very dangerous - for example, Hitler had the freedom to say whatever he wanted to. With the power to do that, he was able to shape the minds of others.

With a gun, you can kill a person. With words, you can get other people to kill for you.

Given the choice, I would stop people saying certain things - for example, holocaust deniers.

So I do not believe in absolute freedom of speech.

 

[stray bullet]

Originally posted by David Gould
That is true. I personally think freedom of speech is very dangerous - for example, Hitler had the freedom to say whatever he wanted to. With the power to do that, he was able to shape the minds of others.

With a gun, you can kill a person. With words, you can get other people to kill for you.

Given the choice, I would stop people saying certain things - for example, holocaust deniers.

So I do not believe in absolute freedom of speech.

I do. I don't want to have to be silenced because someone finds what I have to say offensive. In many places, Christians aren't allowed to be open, even in France, they can't wear crosses to school, simply because it's 'offensive'.

Freedom of speech is good for the minority.

 

[David Gould]

Originally posted by stray bullet
I do. I don't want to have to be silenced because someone finds what I have to say offensive. In many places, Christians aren't allowed to be open, even in France, they can't wear crosses to school, simply because it's 'offensive'.

Freedom of speech is good for the minority.

As the example of Hitler shows, not always.

I think that in general freedom of speech is positive. However, the instances where it is negative are so negative (mass murder, stirring up of racial hatred and so on) that absolute freedom of speech is not a good thing.

I think that there have to be things that should not be allowed to be thought, let alone said.

But then again, I am all in favour of dictatorships, provided the dictator is me.

 

[jon1101]

Originally posted by David Gould
That is true. I personally think freedom of speech is very dangerous - for example, Hitler had the freedom to say whatever he wanted to. With the power to do that, he was able to shape the minds of others.

With a gun, you can kill a person. With words, you can get other people to kill for you.

Given the choice, I would stop people saying certain things - for example, holocaust deniers.

So I do not believe in absolute freedom of speech.

I do not believe in absolute freedom of speech either, but I have to disagree with your examples of holocaust deniers and Adolph Hitler. What makes you or any other human being the judge of what positions, whether they be political, historical, philisophical, or whatever, are to be allowed to be argued? What gives any individual or group of individuals the right to deny argument for a position based on naught but intense dislike for said position or the a priori decision that it is so very wrong?

-jon

 

[arab4christ]

Freedom in general is nice, until it makes everyone want to be free and even free of God and his law...So it has a negative side as well.

God bless

a4c

 

[David Gould]

Originally posted by Cancer To Iniquity
I do not believe in absolute freedom of speech either, but I have to disagree with your examples of holocaust deniers and Adolph Hitler. What makes you or any other human being the judge of what positions, whether they be political, historical, philisophical, or whatever, are to be allowed to be argued? What gives any individual or group of individuals the right to deny argument for a position based on naught but intense dislike for said position or the a priori decision that it is so very wrong?

-jon

Historical consequencs of similar positions in the past. If the consequences were much suffering, then they should not be permitted.

And I think it is clear that certain views automatically lead to suffering, racism being one.

Nothing in particular makes me or anyone else the judge, except for power.

Absolute freedom of speech has never been permitted by any government, anyhow. Libel and slander are two examples which clearly apply to individuals. Extend that a little and why is libel and slander against groups permitted?

 

[cenimo]

Dewjunkie

talk to any of the Cubans or Haitians or anyone else who risk everything to get here and see if they think any cultutres are superior to others or not...the people in North Korea eating tree bark might give you good insight too

 

[strathyboy]

Originally posted by cenimo
Dewjunkie

talk to any of the Cubans or Haitians or anyone else who risk everything to get here and see if they think any cultutres are superior to others or not...the people in North Korea eating tree bark might give you good insight too

I think you need to separate culture from politics, even though the two are connected. Cuban culture isn't inferior simply because they are ruled by a restrictive regime.

 

[cenimo]

strathboy

it all goes together
politics affect the culture and culture affects the politics

 

[strathyboy]

Originally posted by cenimo
strathboy

it all goes together
politics affect the culture and culture affects the politics

So you agree with the statement "Our culture is superior because the other guy's culture doesn't have free speech"? There has to be more to culture to make it inferior or superior to another than simple freedom of speech.

 

[Evee]

Free speech is good as long as you don't use it to promote crime. When it comes to brainwashing or anything vulgar and disgusting that could cause a crime then I believe in limited free speech. Evee

 

[cenimo]

strathboy

Let's see when people from hundreds of cultures are all attempting to get to one country, just perhaps that country has a superior culture

 

[Dewjunkie]

culture n., v., 1. the quality in a person or society that arises from an interest and acquaintance with what generally is regarded as excellence in arts, letters, manners, scholarly pursuits, etc. (The Random House College Dictionary Revised Edition)

Culture is NOT a product of politics. Culture is a result of generations of people handing down beliefs, art, music, stories, clothing, religion, and various other lifestyle particulars. I have been to several "third world" countries where the people were desolately poor and oppressed by governments, but still maintained wonderful culture. Our political situation and GNP may be better than many countries, but our culture is mainly borrowed from the immigrants who have populated this country over it's history. Very few of the US' cultural standards are truly original to the US. And if you think that the people who come here don't bring their culture with them, go to Chinatown or the Italian Quarter or the Latino Districts in any major city and you'll find they may have pursued our wealth and profitiability, but they brought their own culture with them.

Therefore, the statement that any one culture is superior to another is wrong.

 

[cenimo]

Dewjunkie

I'm American born half-Irish half-Italian, no need to tell me about Italian neighborhoods....I'm also a viet Nam vet and lived in Japan, Germany, and Korea....

here's a deal- I give you a dollar for every American that wants to move to some third world culture if you are willing to give me one for every person from a third world culture that wants to come or comes here....

When Russia was the USSR, writing a letter to the editor could land one in jail or in a gulag, and that is political, and that was part of the culture.

In parts of India, the Hindu culture called for widows to throw themselves on their deceased husbands funeral pyre, so realize that you're opinion about no culture being superior to another is just that, opinion.

This may also be news to you- while in places like Aririang Town (Koreatown, LA) they indeed have their own culture, that culture is not that of the home country, it becomes an Americanized version of it....one example being that many of the Koreans in LA have cars which is something many of their counterparts back in Korea do not...and oh yeah, the LA winters are a bit milder than those in Korea

 

[Brimshack]

As long as we are checking in on the immigrants coming to America I think it would be worth inquering as to whether or not they viewed their immigration as a rejection of their own culture. I am betting most do not. As to the poverty of various third world countries it is worth noting that in many instances it is directly due to the exploitation of said countries by global powers such as the United States or Russia. To suggest that this poverty somehow speaks to the superiority of our own culture is highly disingenuous.

It is irrelevant anyway, the value of free speech is itsef partially determined by the nature of the culture in question. In small scale societies one doesn't find civil rights of any kind, but such people don't complain about the lack of it (largely because they lack leaders with coercive power anyway). In large scale societies absence of free speech leads to all sorts of abuses. But the argument for free speech is based on the value that such a provision has in keeping check on government power. It doesn't speak to the inherent superiority of any particular culture, western or otherwise.

The presence of horrible practices in any given culture doesn't prove the culture as a whole is inferior; it proves that cultures embrace both positive and negative practices. And if Dew's opinion is just that opinion, then so is that of anyone asserting the superiority of western culture (really vague term there anyway). Such leveling of opinions could hardly be used to advance the superiority of any culture over another.

 

[cenimo]

Your posts don't make it evident whether you are talking from life experinces or book learning.

Try bouncing your stuff off of any American women who married someone from the Middle East and found herself living over there, or going back there trying to get her kids, there are plenty of cases like that.

Another good group would be those who flew Cuba to get away from Castro.

When I worked in Vegas, we had a Russian fellow who had worked on the island where that Korean airliner was shot down. He stated that a number of North Koreasn were stationed there with him. Every break, he would go to the coffee table and get a dozen packets of sugar and cream, have his coffee, and put the 10 or 11 unused ones back. When we asked him why he did this, he said, "You Americans don;t know, this stuff like gold in Russia, and on that island." He then told us that by virtue of not being in North Korea, the North Koreans thought that the Russian island was Paradise.

Romanians that worked with us all had the same stories....three hours of having hot water a day, but never knowing what three hours...having to work Saturdays, not to get paid, but so as not to get missed Saturday hours docked from their pay...

As for immigration, the lack of opportunities in their own countries is just as strong as the rejection of their own culture in some cases... if we go back pre WW II, those Europeans who it is now so trendy to crticize came here for the opportunities to work and go into business, not to bleed the system dry...and many wound up figthing against their former homelands...perhaps they had a far deeper appreciation of freedom than those born into it and wont to "bite the hand that feeds them" so badly...

often foreigners who come here penniless succedd because they are willing to work 20 hour days seven days a week in their own business as they could never have one in their own countries because of laws and restrictions, they basically freak out on the freedom.

if we're going to discuss horrible practices as you called them, the answer to the simple question of given a choice, where would you rather live tells you all about one culture being "better" than another

 

 

 

[Dewjunkie]

Brim, that is exactly my point. Every culture has wonderful aspects and loathable aspects, therefore saying anything along the lines of "we're culturally superior because we can express our opinion freely" is incorrect. Japanese could say they are culturally superior to us because their high school graduates can read and do math equations above a 4th grade level. Wouldn't make it correct.

Cenimo; Rachmaninov, Tchaikovsky, Borodin, Vodka, Icon painting; these are aspects of Russian culture. Communism was a political standard, not a cultural aspect. Lenin and Stalin did nothing to enhance the art, literature, music, cuisine, or folklore of the Russians. Those were in place thousands of years prior to their arrival on the scene. The fall of Communism has not changed their culture other than more western products are in the every day. Politics and culture are two different things(both by my opinion and dictionary definition), and to say that the US has a better culture than Russia because for a few decades we could openly speak against the government and they couldn't is completely incorrect.

 

[cenimo]

Dewjunkie

Let's go back to the example of Aririang town in LA (Little Korea) and lets' compare people living there with people living in Korea.

In L.A., owning and driving a car are part of there culture, not necessarily true in Korea. L.A. winters are mild, not even the case in Korea. We could go on and on with this but the point is that the L.A. version of the Koreans culture is defintiely Americanized...so which culture are they really displayng?

To make it even more interesting, let's look at Hawaii. If the mainland is a melting pot, Hawaii must be Mt McKinley of melting pots....Hawaiin, Japanese, "haole" (caucasian), Portugese, Filipino, and quite a few more ethnic groups thrown together. What label would you give that culture? American?  Japanese? The Japanese would say no. So would the other groups.

Want to talk about (Red) China? Many Chinese feel that even before Americans had a country the Chinese where "wearing the finest silk and enjoying the best prepared food and exposed to the wisest philosophers" there were. Sound like they think they might have a superior culture?

Some cultures are desirable, some not. To try and reduce every culture in existence down to the lowest common denominator and a level playing field is nothing better than one-worlder globalist hype.

Would you deny that religion plays a very big part in cultures? Then consider North Korea where the Premier is the deity - and the nation can't feed itself. Nice culture. There's not one starving North Korean that would tell you their culture is better than anyone's where they can feed themselves.