Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Eric M <[email protected]> wrote:

Adam H. Kerman Wed, 28 Feb 2024 01:05:17:

You have an american point of view, with the first amendement. We have >>>>an european point of view, here you cannot say something antisemitic in >>>>public, we had a sort of war a while ago so maybe we are more vigilant >>>>on this kind of things.

I am an American and a Jew. Bad speech may be countered by good speech, >>>lies by truth, dangerous speech by counterspeech. Censorship wouldn't >>>have kept my family alive.

I don't think that works, look what happened with Cambridge Analytica or >>Twitter, the lies always win if you do it this way. Maybe if Hitler had >>said "I'm going to kill 6 millions people in concentrations camps and my >>country will be in ruins in 12 years" people wouldn't have vote for him, >>but he said everything would be fine, and people believed him.

Uh, his book was published long before he was first elected. It was
known whom he was.

If France wants to promote peace, I'd have been a lot more impressed if
the anti-English hatred hadn't re-asserted itself with the UK's
withdrawal from the European Union and new impositions of trade
restrictions. Gee. How can that possibly go wrong?

Please don't promote speech restrictions in the cause of peace.

Your last sentence is very clear. This cause is used often by those in
power restrict speech.

Those who support restricting speech tend to be on the side of those
currently in power, maybe not realizing that the tables can turn, and
suddenly the side you oppose controls speech.

It's difficult to discuss free speech with non Americans. There is often
the comment such as, "Yes, I support free speech. Except of course for
<insert issue here>.

I'm married to an Australian, I have these conversations now and then with
her family.

--
Retro Guy

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

llp wrote:

Retro Guy vient de nous annoncer :

Adam H. Kerman wrote:

Eric M <[email protected]> wrote:

Adam H. Kerman Wed, 28 Feb 2024 01:05:17:

You have an american point of view, with the first amendement. We have an >>>>>> european point of view, here you cannot say something antisemitic in >>>>>> public, we had a sort of war a while ago so maybe we are more vigilant >>>>>> on this kind of things.

I am an American and a Jew. Bad speech may be countered by good speech, >>>>>lies by truth, dangerous speech by counterspeech. Censorship wouldn't >>>>>have kept my family alive.

I don't think that works, look what happened with Cambridge Analytica or >>>> Twitter, the lies always win if you do it this way. Maybe if Hitler had >>>> said "I'm going to kill 6 millions people in concentrations camps and my >>>> country will be in ruins in 12 years" people wouldn't have vote for him, >>>> but he said everything would be fine, and people believed him.

Uh, his book was published long before he was first elected. It was
known whom he was.

If France wants to promote peace, I'd have been a lot more impressed if
the anti-English hatred hadn't re-asserted itself with the UK's
withdrawal from the European Union and new impositions of trade
restrictions. Gee. How can that possibly go wrong?

Please don't promote speech restrictions in the cause of peace.

Your last sentence is very clear. This cause is used often by those in
power restrict speech.

Those who support restricting speech tend to be on the side of those
currently in power, maybe not realizing that the tables can turn, and
suddenly the side you oppose controls speech.

They don't even think about it. They think it will keep them
in power or influence.

It's difficult to discuss free speech with non Americans. There is often
the comment such as, "Yes, I support free speech. Except of course for
<insert issue here>.

I agree with you.

But you also have this kind of person in the USA, don't you?
I think of the "woke" or the cancel culture followers.

Yes, absolutely. More and more we have people advocating to stifle speech in the U.S. It's sad to see people pushing for their own rights to be limited.

Fortunately, so far anyway, it's more difficult to ignore a constitutional amendment than if such did not exist.

--
Retro Guy

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Eric M wrote:

Le 28/02/2024 à 16:02, Retro Guy a écrit :

It's difficult to discuss free speech with non Americans. There is often
the comment such as, "Yes, I support free speech. Except of course for
<insert issue here>.

It's difficult because your country is doing this :

<https://observer.com/2022/02/book-banning-is-increasing-across-the-united-states-a-book-burning-in-tennessee/>

So free speech for who ? :)

I agree that this is an issue. Most of what is reported as book "banning" in the
U.S. currently is removing books from schools. The books are still available to purchase or read.

Seeing what you link to supports the idea of, "What happens when the other side controls speech?"

The U.S. is by no means going the right direction, but fortunately it's more difficult
to legislate against free speech than it is in many countries.

I don't want people I agree with to be censored, and I don't want people I disagree
with to be censored.

--
Retro Guy

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Eric M wrote:

Le 28/02/2024 à 18:54, Retro Guy a écrit :

The U.S. is by no means going the right direction, but fortunately it's more >> difficult
to legislate against free speech than it is in many countries.

And you're about to reelect Trump, the world is looking at you.

Let's hope so.

I don't want people I agree with to be censored, and I don't want people I >> disagree
with to be censored.

This is not what it's about, it's about banning hate speech that can get people killed. But in the US everybody's in danger anyway.

Words don't kill. If I told you to kill someone, somehow I think you
wouldn't do it.

Our brief discussion here is a great example of my statement that it is hard for an American to have a discussion about free speech with someone who is
not American. We have a different view of whether the government should have the power to control speech.

But in the US everybody's in danger anyway.

Really? I wasn't aware that I should feel unsafe, which I don't.

--
Retro Guy

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)