Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Sniffy4 t1_iy9gx7p wrote

Reply to comment by anonymousviewer112 in UK waters down internet rules plan after free speech outcry by Sorin61

>History has taught us over and over that free speech is a cornerstone of a legitimate democracy.

History has also taught us that hate speech gets lots of people killed and can turn elections and put itself into power.

1

anonymousviewer112 t1_iy9hcgh wrote

You miss the point clearly.

There are pros & cons easy way here. However it's clear that free speech is the better of the 2 (vs censoring speech)

3

Sniffy4 t1_iy9hw3q wrote

> You miss the point clearly

No I completely got your point, it just happens to be wrong.

There have *always* been boundaries on public discourse for good reason (people die) and pretending like there never have been is not helpful.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

1

anonymousviewer112 t1_iy9yfrr wrote

Never said there weren't boundaries in the past, not sure where you got that from...

What I am saying is that outside of basic boundaries which generally involve the matter being settled in the courts, there hasn't been been effective more wholesale censorship implemented in a way that doesn't severely undermine democracy.

You are just throwing your opinion out there "more censorship will equal less hate speech" without any specific details on how such a complicated and vast system would operate.

Try this...explain in detail what would and would not constitute hate speech as well as inaccurate information.

1