Israel-Hamas War 2023

[DGuller]

My view is the same as it was before:  I find the saying "freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences of speech" to be monumentally Orwellian.  IMO, someone saying that and meaning it either has authoritarian mindset, or hasn't thought through the meaning of what that says to the end.

Lack of prohibitive consequences is exactly what freedom is.  It is true that First Amendment only protects you from prohibitive consequences dished out by the government, but that doesn't mean that prohibitive consequences dished out by other entities holding power over you are something we should want more of.  When people aren't free to say what they think, regardless of how that is accomplished, society suffers.

[Admiral Yi]

My view is the same as it was before:  I find the saying "freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences of speech" to be monumentally Orwellian.  IMO, someone saying that and meaning it either has authoritarian mindset, or hasn't thought through the meaning of what that says to the end.

Lack of prohibitive consequences is exactly what freedom is.  It is true that First Amendment only protects you from prohibitive consequences dished out by the government, but that doesn't mean that prohibitive consequences dished out by other entities holding power over you are something we should want more of.  When people aren't free to say what they think, regardless of how that is accomplished, society suffers.

And I think the other side of the coin is the freedom to contract.  Like all thoughts it's possible I haven't thought it through, but I don't think supporting the freedom to contract is authoritarian.  Compelling me to continue to buy from a company who's employee I object to is authoritarian.

[OttoVonBismarck]

My view is the same as it was before:  I find the saying "freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences of speech" to be monumentally Orwellian.  IMO, someone saying that and meaning it either has authoritarian mindset, or hasn't thought through the meaning of what that says to the end.

Lack of prohibitive consequences is exactly what freedom is.  It is true that First Amendment only protects you from prohibitive consequences dished out by the government, but that doesn't mean that prohibitive consequences dished out by other entities holding power over you are something we should want more of.  When people aren't free to say what they think, regardless of how that is accomplished, society suffers.

What about the freedom to run your business as you see fit? Why should a therapy company be forced to employ a hateful antisemite? One with views that suggest she could even be a danger to any Jewish patients?

[DGuller]

What about the freedom to run your business as you see fit? Why should a therapy company be forced to employ a hateful antisemite? One with views that suggest she could even be a danger to any Jewish patients?

You can't respect all the freedoms at the same time.  We chose to value the freedom to run your business as you see fit more than to value the freedom of speech, for whatever reason, but that doesn't make it a good thing when freedom of speech gets trampled by the freedom to run the business as you see fit. 

The freedom to run your business as you see fit is not universal either, it gets trumped in some circumstances as well.  At some point we decided that "No Irish Need Apply" was no longer legal, maybe sometime in the future we'll decide that employers enforcing censorship on their employees isn't compatible with society we want to have as well.

[OttoVonBismarck]

We have never decided the freedom to say offensive things trumps property / contract rights, we have decided protecting people in Federally protected classes (which don't include "people who spread antisemitic conspiracy theories") does, and I would not want to see that protection expanded further.

[Barrister]

If your racist uncle goes online and says how much he hates blacks, is he not "trying to influence the wider public debate?"

Which gets us back to my video of the racist lawyer.  He did not post his rant online himself; he was filmed by a third party.  Am I required to continue to do business with his firm under your code?

I am very much trying to not get into rules and what is "required" about social media.

I just think as a society we should act with more grace and humility when stupid people say stupid things.

Racism is still a problem. Why should I be tolerant of people who say racist things?

Because they are a person.  They are one of God's creations.  Because they deserve a certain level of respect.

I mean I've been prosecuting this dude for child sex abuse.  I think he's slime and needs to go to jail.  But he deserves a certain level of respect just as a human being.

And on some level out understand that.  If you heard someone say something racist you wouldn't go beat the shit out of them (even if you could get away with it).  You probably would say something to them.

I just think trying to get some nobody fired from their job if more like beating them up, and less like just saying something.

This racist uncle character - maybe he's supporting his wife, and maybe kids.  He's got bills to pay.  Who is it really helping to try and get him fired?  And do you really think it'll make him less racist?  Or maybe even more racist, but just less willing to say something in public.

Finally "tolerate" doesn't mean "ignore" or "agree with".  It's just you temper your response.

[Barrister]

My view is the same as it was before:  I find the saying "freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences of speech" to be monumentally Orwellian.  IMO, someone saying that and meaning it either has authoritarian mindset, or hasn't thought through the meaning of what that says to the end.

Lack of prohibitive consequences is exactly what freedom is.  It is true that First Amendment only protects you from prohibitive consequences dished out by the government, but that doesn't mean that prohibitive consequences dished out by other entities holding power over you are something we should want more of.  When people aren't free to say what they think, regardless of how that is accomplished, society suffers.

And I think the other side of the coin is the freedom to contract.  Like all thoughts it's possible I haven't thought it through, but I don't think supporting the freedom to contract is authoritarian.  Compelling me to continue to buy from a company who's employee I object to is authoritarian.

So again - some low-level accountant says something anti-semitic.

I'm not arguing for some law that says you must continue to use that accounting company, even though you have no contact with this person.

I'm just saying that as a culture we should treat people with respect, and consider that trying to force the company to have this guy fired by withholding your patronage probably makes you the bigger jerk than some anti-semitic accountant who said something stupid on Tic Toc.

[Admiral Yi]

So again - some low-level accountant says something anti-semitic.

I'm not arguing for some law that says you must continue to use that accounting company, even though you have no contact with this person.

I'm just saying that as a culture we should treat people with respect, and consider that trying to force the company to have this guy fired by withholding your patronage probably makes you the bigger jerk than some anti-semitic accountant who said something stupid on Tic Toc.

Fair enough.

[Tamas]

How does ignoring antisemitic or racist remarks figure into the giving people basic respect idea? You want society to make the effort to not be influenced in dealings with a racist individual due to their racism but you do not expect the racist individual to show basic respect toward the race they openly agitate against.

[The Brain]

I think cancel culture is destructive. It may seem benign to some people, but my impression is that it's often because the mob acts on views the person happens to share. That is not the general case though.

[Barrister]

How does ignoring antisemitic or racist remarks figure into the giving people basic respect idea? You want society to make the effort to not be influenced in dealings with a racist individual due to their racism but you do not expect the racist individual to show basic respect toward the race they openly agitate against.

Well first of all:

Finally "tolerate" doesn't mean "ignore" or "agree with".  It's just you temper your response.

You teach the racist, the anti-semite, the misogynist, whomever respect - by showing respect to them.

I mean this isn't some brand new idea - it's the Golden Rule.

[Jacob]

I tend to agree with the Brain and BB on this, even if I do get some visceral satisfaction from seeing people I dislike getting metaphorically whacked upside the head.

[Josquius]

It was a theoretical of one extreme.
In this case it's a nobody who mentioned a silly conspiracy theory. Maybe once.?. No sign of her being utterly devoted to it. She even claims she misspoke.

Which one is it, a theoretical or an actual case?

Someone making a joke was a theoretical.
Some nobody mentioning an anti semitic conspiracy theory is in the actual article.

I don't know what you mean by "silly" conspiracy theory.  I think they're all silly in that they ignore evidence.  Do you mean harmless?  As in, no possible harm could come from people thinking the Hamas kidnapping was a false flag operation?

If a large number of people start to believe this and it becomes a mainstream view encouraged by politicians and we add in some elements about domestic Jews too then it becomes potentially harmful.
When it's some randomer spouting nonsense about events in a far away land that nobody of note believes.... It's really not reached the level of pizzagate.

If you treat this chick exactly as you would a Holocaust denier who says it maybe once? Showing no signs of being "utterly devoted" to it, then I've got no beef with you.  I suspect your response to that would be different.

Not really.
Say something dumb online then you deserve to have people shout at you online.
If this Holocaust denier then said sorry, they misspoke, and clarifies that they accept the Holocaust was obviously real and went down as it did... Then they are forgiven.
They're still on a "watch list" of course. Future incidents of "misspeaking" will be dealt with in the context of what they said in the past.
But they're in no way in the same league as someone who basically makes offensive conspiracy nonsense their life and is completely unapologetic.

I don't know what you're talking about with cancelled before getting doxed.  Theoretical or specific case?

It was in the article.
Who did these people getting doxed "cancel"?

]

This seems irrelevant. Try again?

I don't think it's irrelevant at all.
Not all racism is the same.
There's a huge difference between those who are used to different words, now considered racist, and accidentally use them meaning no malice; and somebody who knows fine well they're being racist and thats their goal in setting out to cause harm.

[garbon]

I don't think it's irrelevant at all.
Not all racism is the same.
There's a huge difference between those who are used to different words, now considered racist, and accidentally use them meaning no malice; and somebody who knows fine well they're being racist and thats their goal in setting out to cause harm.

Irrelevant as we weren't have a discussion about the most mild form of racism. Bringing up the most mild version feels like an attempt to shut down the conversation.

[garbon]

Because they are a person.  They are one of God's creations.  Because they deserve a certain level of respect.

Sure. I mean I don't believe in the Christian god but I generally politely let people prattle on about him without further comment. Despite, how as described in writings and basic logic of how he is stupposed to work, he sounds actively malevolent. Despite the fact that his followers previously used their Christianity to enslave people that look like me and in the current day, his adherents use their faith to legitimate their hatred for people who love like I do.

And on some level out understand that.  If you heard someone say something racist you wouldn't go beat the shit out of them (even if you could get away with it).  You probably would say something to them.

I just think trying to get some nobody fired from their job if more like beating them up, and less like just saying something.

Losing a job is like being beaten up?

This racist uncle character - maybe he's supporting his wife, and maybe kids.  He's got bills to pay.  Who is it really helping to try and get him fired?  And do you really think it'll make him less racist?  Or maybe even more racist, but just less willing to say something in public.

I don't care if he is racist. It isn't my job to teach people not to be racist. And that's what you appear to be saying with 'You teach the racist, the anti-semite, the misogynist, whomever respect - by showing respect to them.' I'm just trying to live my life and it was luck of the draw that I ended up with a skin color that some people choose to go off about.

It isn't like it is hard to know that racism is wrong. That's why many times people will say 'I'm not being racist' and then go on to say something incredibly racist. I would have thought one positive out of the BLM protests was the idea that minorities should not have to bear the burden of educating others but that people can educate themselves.

I'm less concerned about the well being of the person who wants to say hurtful things (the person who wants to say racist shit with impunity) than I am about the people who are harmed by their racist antics.

If I had to assign blame/responsibility, I'd assign it first to the person who was saying the racist things. Then I'd put it on their friends/family/close community. After all, had those others not simply given 'a bunch of dirty looks' or been 'respectful' and let it pass, the racist would have already learned to stop saying racist shit.

Finally "tolerate" doesn't mean "ignore" or "agree with".  It's just you temper your response.

Yeah and getting fired is tempered and not anything like getting beaten up.

The answer is not 'oh, someone is saying something hateful about your group, just be respectful and eat that shit sandwich. that's how change happens.'