37

Two Catastrophic Problems With The Term 'Hate Speech'

5 comments, 178 views, posted 9:13 pm 14/07/2020 in Useful by REALITY
REALITY has 24772 posts, 9574 threads, 495 points, location: Don’t believe what I post - Research what I post.
I want to be the reason you get out of bed in the morning...Even if it is to make sure the door is locked.

   

   

Outspoken British comedian Ricky Gervais has once again exposed, in his usual direct manner, the escalating use of the term "hate speech" to crush any dissenting view from the mainstream narratives has unleashed "a new weird sort of fascism."

In an interview with talkRADIO host Kevin O’Sullivan, Gervais dismissed the new 'trendy myth' that the only people who want free speech want to use it to say terrible things:

Quote:

“There’s this new weird sort of fascism of people thinking they know what you can say and what you can’t say and it’s a really weird thing that there’s this new trendy myth that people who want free speech want it to say awful things all the time, which just isn’t true. It protects everyone.”


Critically, Gervais sees two catastrophic problems with the term ‘hate speech’:

Quote:

"One, what constitutes hate speech? Everyone disagrees. There’s no consensus on what hate speech is.”

Two, who decides? And there’s the real rub because obviously the people who think they want to close down free speech because it’s bad are the fascists. It’s a really weird, mixed-up idea that these people hide behind a shield of goodness."


Additionally, 'The Office' star points out that “social media amplifies everything."

Quote:

"If you’re mildly left-wing on Twitter you’re suddenly Trotsky. If you’re mildly conservative you’re Hitler and if you’re centrist and you look at both arguments, you’re a coward and they both hate you,”


Listen to the full interview here:


Extra Points Given by:

tricpe (5), Quaektem (10), z0phi3l (5), tamsnod27 (5), Eavesy (5), elsels (5)

Comments

3
10:32 pm 14/07/2020

Quaektem

Quote by REALITY:
the only people who want free speech want to use it to say terrible things:



I believe the First Amendment protects your right to be a Nazi, a racist, a communist, a pinko-fachist, or anything else. You can even tell people you are these things.

What you cannot do is threaten, harass, or harm someone through speech (and I'm not talking about hurt feelings or being 'triggered').

The Religious Right of the 80's lost the argument that feeling offended by porn justified obscenity laws, rightfully so. Now the sons and daughters of liberals who celebrated that ruling are demanding that anything they find offensive be banned.

The arms-race of what's deemed offensive has risen to ludicrous levels due to the Twitter illusion. There are automated bots that make comments over millions of fake accounts (Google it) and they are what's shaping reality, doxing people, and getting people fired... but they are not representative of America. Even let's say they are all real... how many people use it and do they represent the country's demographic being as generous as I can? Not at all.

Hate speech (in Canada at least) has gotten to the point where mis-gendering a trans-person is legally hate speech now.

There is a quiet back-lash coming. Trump may not be the candidate we want, but he is going to win in a landslide in November because Clinton Democrats are being told they are racist, homophobic and trans-phobic and the minorities are starting to realize that every famous black man killed by police are from Democrat controlled cities usually in Democrat controlled states by cops protected by Democrat controlled unions. Their kids are being failed by Democrat school departments controlled by Democrat teacher's unions who suck up as much money as they can. They also saw historic black unemployment under an orange president... and this COVID and race-riot shit isn't going to make them forget.

But I guess that's all hate speech

1
6:28 am 15/07/2020

tricpe

Quote by Quaektem:
I believe the First Amendment protects your right to be a Nazi, a racist, a communist, a pinko-fachist, or anything else. You can even tell people you are these things.

What you cannot do is threaten, harass, or harm someone through speech (and I'm not talking about hurt feelings or being 'triggered').

So, in other words, just like hate speech, there is no clear definition of free speech, either.

2
11:11 am 15/07/2020

Quaektem

There certainly is. The legal definitions and boundaries have been in place for centuries. I was pointing out that there have been attacks from the right and the left, but the basic understanding hasn't changed.

1
8:14 pm 15/07/2020

elsels

He is right.

0
12:20 pm 03/08/2020

cekubymuma

But I guess that's all hate speech

Add Comment

via teoti, or register to add a comment!