You are here

Free-Speech

Summary:


The concept is nicely summed up here:

Free speech-even speech you don't like; especially speech you don't like-is one of the things that literally makes America great https://t.co/G6M3PZTdjk

— Richard Dreyfuss (@RichardDreyfuss) April 29, 2017 

Brendan O’Neill - editor of spiked

It’s time to get serious about freedom of speech. It is unacceptable to repress the expression of ideas. It is unacceptable to repress the expression of hatred. ‘Hate speech is not free speech!’, people say. But it is. By its very definition, free speech must include hate speech. Speech must always be free, for two reasons: everyone must be free to express what they feel, and everyone else must have the right to decide for themselves whether those expressions are good or bad. When the EU, social-media corporations and others seek to make that decision for us, and squash ideas they think we will find shocking, they reduce us to the level of children. That is censorship’s greatest crime: it infantilises us. Let us now reassert our adulthood, our autonomy, and tell them: ‘Do not presume to censor anything on our behalf. We can think for ourselves.'

http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/we-must-have-the-freedom-to-hate1/18445#.Wu7ObIgvzIV

This point on tolerance is also very apposite:

Tolerance demands conditions, something that the great Catholic preacher Fulton Sheen knew a century ago. The following piece is an excerpt from his 1931 book, Old Errors and New Labels, and is provocatively titled “A Plea for Intolerance.”

I’m sure his words were timely then, but perhaps moreso today. This line sums up his argument:

“Tolerance applies only to persons, but never to truth. Intolerance applies only to truth, but never to persons. Tolerance applies to the erring; intolerance to the error.”

What a crucial point! The greatest barrier to dialogue is our failure to separate people from their ideas. When that happens, people become afraid to challenge bad ideas because they feel like they’re demeaning the person who holds them. But people are not their beliefs—they have beliefs, but they are not identical with their beliefs. That’s a vital distinction, which Sheen helps us see.

https://brandonvogt.com/fulton-sheen-need-intolerance/?doing_wp_cron=1507130927.9002470970153808593750

This professor also makes the valid point: ‘Hurling labels doesn’t enlighten, inform, edify or educate.’

What those of us in academia should certainly not do is engage in unreasoned speech: hurling slurs and epithets, name-calling, vilification and mindless labeling. Likewise, we should not reject the views of others without providing reasoned arguments. Yet these once common standards of practice have been violated repeatedly at my own and at other academic institutions in recent years, and we increasingly see this trend in society as well.

One might respond that unreasoned slurs and outright condemnations are also speech and must be defended. My recent experience has caused me to rethink this position. In debating others, we should have higher standards. Of course one has the right to hurl labels like “racist,” “sexist” and “xenophobic”—but that doesn’t make it the right thing to do. Hurling such labels doesn’t enlighten, inform, edify or educate. Indeed, it undermines these goals by discouraging or stifling dissent.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/what-cant-be-debated-on-campus-1518792717#click=https://t.co/rEmRMjIwWK

This article on how language manipulation can be used to manipulation beliefs:

How language manipulation distorted national identities

Not all indoctrination is bad. Helping someone understand their own thought processes to help quit smoking or other addiction, for example, is arguably also a form of brainwashing. But in this instance, the intention is to help the individual. Crucially, the individual is aware of what is about to take place.

What should be of concern is when this takes place without our conscious awareness. Because, and you don’t need me to spell this out, that if it’s being done deceitfully we can pretty much guarantee that it isn’t in our interests. So how do we know? It can be difficult, but here are some pointers:

  1. When you see or hear a headline, first ask yourself why this story is being aired? Or how much air-time it is getting? Who benefits from you buying into the narrative? There are endless stories all over the world the media can choose from, so why did they choose this one?
  2. What and how is language being used? Are there any words or phrases that are being repeated often? This is important because if this is the case, you will notice people around you repeating the same phrases as their own
  3. Spend time on numbers 1 and 2 before you get involved in the story. The moment you delve in and get involved in the arguments, you are psychologically much less able to step back and evaluate with the same effectiveness. It is, literally, the perfect example of: ‘Can’t see the wood for the trees’.

https://shysociety.co.uk/2018/03/17/language-manipulation-distorted-national-identities/

Finally, this legal blog makes some very interesting points on the laws currently used to monitor 'hate' speech in the UK.

http://barristerblogger.com/2018/03/24/its-time-to-change-the-bad-law-used-to-prosecute-count-dankula/

Summary: 

This smearing nonsense has to stop.  I don’t like Islam and I have every right to feel that way.  As a woman who believes in free speech, it is entirely justified.  In order to preserve the rights and safety of women, and our right to speak our minds, I believe we must end immigration from Muslim countries.  Its not a conclusion I want to reach, but common sense tells me it’s unfortunately necessary.

I want to halt immigration from theocratic or tyrannical societies because I believe in freedom.  Freedom and totalitarianism, especially religious totalitarianism which gives itself the authority of the creator of the universe, cannot live side by side.  You must pick one.  I pick freedom, and I will fight to preserve it from all that threatens it.

This isn’t fascism.  This is commitment to liberty and democracy.  I will hold fast to this commitment and I will not cower down.  I will fight for our age-old liberties, and if I become leader, UKIP will be a party that fights for our age-old liberties.

Country: 
Malaysia
News Date: 
17/05/2018
Summary: 

The police have nabbed a man suspected of insulting Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Islam on Facebook. In a statement posted on the official Langkawi IPD Facebook page on Thursday, police said that the suspect was arrested on Wednesday after several NGOs (non-governmental organisations) filed a police report against him the day before. They had voiced dissatisfaction with his “excessively insulting statements on Facebook against Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Islam”

Country: 
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (the)
News Date: 
15/05/2018
Summary: 

Shocking levels of hatred, violence, bigotry and religious intolerance has been unearthed among the readership of a UK-based media platform which reports on national and international Muslim news, an investigation by AltNewsMedia reveals today.
 

Summary: 

Legitimate criticism of Muslim teaching can’t be compared to antisemitic demonisation and lies.

Unlike the claim of Islamophobia, which was used to silence legitimate criticism of the Muslim world, antisemitism was based entirely on lies and demonisation. On social media, I was accused of seeking to silence legitimate criticism of Israel and the Jewish world. Not at all. Criticism is legitimate because it is rational and grounded in evidence. Antisemitism is not criticism. It is instead a unique form of bigotry.

Irrationally, it holds that both Israel and the Jewish people possess a demonic power to control the world. It accuses both of crimes of which they are not only innocent but are themselves the victims. It treats them in ways which it applies to no other people, nation or cause.

Now consider Islamophobia. Anyone who calls out Islamist extremism as a fanatical or primitive interpretation of Islam currently dominant in the Muslim world is called an Islamophobe. Anyone who says the Muslim Brotherhood is a conspiracy to Islamise the world is called an Islamophobe. Yet evidence abounds to support such observations. Numerous Islamic religious authorities have upheld the uncompromising precepts behind Islamic fundamentalism and holy war.

Country: 
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (the)
News Date: 
03/05/2018
Summary: 

The British government acted more like an Islamic State when it barred foreign journalists Lauren Southern and Brittany Pettibone from its shores, a Christian lobby group has claimed. In a frank assessment on the recent decision to prevent Southern and Pettibone from entering the UK and detaining the Canadian journalist for six hours under the 2000 Terrorism Act, Christian Concern said there was growing evidence that as Islam increases its influence in society authorities were clamping down on any criticism of the faith. Tim Dieppe, director of Islamic Affairs at Christian Concern, slammed

Country: 
Canada
News Date: 
01/05/2018
Summary: 

Muslim children in a mosque in Canada practicing beheading of infidels In a shocking video which went viral on social media. Canada may be the first Western country to adopt blasphemy law and to criminalize criticism of Islam. Justin Trudeau is most vocal Western leaders against Islamophobia which means fear of Islam. The Canadian prime minister wants to ban not only criticism of Islam but to persecute people who are afraid of Islam. Freedom of expression is a fundamental right in a democratic state and should be protected in Canada. Freedom of speech should not be limited by people's feeli

Country: 
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (the)
News Date: 
24/04/2018
Summary: 

MPs are to write a report on identifying a “working definition of Islamophobia”, appealing to hard-line Islamist and far left, Soros-funded groups to contribute. The All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on British Muslims launched their “appeal for evidence” Monday, describing “Islamophobia” as a form of “group based hatred or hostility” comparable to racism.

Country: 
European Union
News Date: 
10/04/2018
Summary: 

Europe must do more to assimilate Muslim immigrant populations and criminalise religious hate speech, said the head of a global Muslim missionary society trying to help Saudi Arabia mend its reputation as a promoter of intolerant ideology.

Admin: This will lead to Islamification and the end of free speech.

Summary: 
  • One of the most troubling aspects of this rapidly spreading dhimmitude, is the de-facto enforcement of Islamic blasphemy laws. Local European authorities have been utilizing "hate speech" laws to prohibit criticism of Islam, even though Islam represents an idea, not a nationality or an ethnicity. The conventional purpose of most hate-speech laws is to protect people from hatred, not ideas.

  • The British Foreign Office, which has ignored Iranian women's desperate fight for freedom and stayed shamefully silent during the Iranian people's recent protests against Iran's regime, unbelievably handed out free headscarves to its staff. Meanwhile, at least 29 Iranian women were arrested for shedding the hijab, and were likely subjected to rape and other torture, as is common in Iranian prisons. Yet British MPs and Foreign Office employees were perversely celebrating the hijab as some sort of twisted tool of "female empowerment".

  • Counter-jihad measures have been obstructed by Western leaders everywhere since immediately after 9/11. President George W. Bush declared that "Islam is peace". President Obama removed all references to Islam in FBI terror training manuals that Muslims deemed offensive. New York City's current leadership threatened New Yorkers, immediately after the October terror attack in Manhattan, not to link the terror attack to Islam. UK Prime Minister Theresa May claimed that Islam is a "religion of peace".

This extract from the manual of sharia (Reliance of the Traveller) tells its own story:

Manual of Sharia law on non-Muslims

Pages

Subscribe to Free-Speech