censorship

[AbnormallyNormal]

what do you guys think about it? is it ever ok? dont you think its pretty obvious that as a society advances it censors less and less, hence the ideal society would not censor at all? isnt creative expression and freedom more important in the longer term than possibly offending people here and there temporarily?

 

[Deleted member 84471]

Pardon my laziness in not giving an 'encompassing' answer, but I'd just evaluate each case and I'm sure I'd find instances where censorship is the better option to freedom of expression. Western society has done that in say, denial of the Jewish holocaust where you can face prison time for being found out to have denied it in the past or in the present. If the expression causes more harm than it's worth, I'm not averse to censorship.

 

[Shinobi Mugen]

In an ideal society with ideal people there would indeed be no need for cencorship. But we don't live in an ideal society and we have a lot of people who's only goal is to spread a message of hate and violence. So our society should be protected against the spread of such hatefull doctorines. If this is not done then the dangers of a new hitler rising and the pursecution of minorities will always loom over that society.

As for censoring out violence, sex or swear words, that's just bullshit. Beeing overprotective with censorship is even more harmfull than not censoring at all.

 

[Lezard Valeth]

Censorship is not pure evil. It certainly is misused in most countries, especially dicatorship. But what would prevent someone to call for racial massacre, for example, if there was no censorship?

 

[Pilaf]

Censorship is not pure evil. It certainly is misused in most countries, especially dicatorship. But what would prevent someone to call for racial massacre, for example, if there was no censorship?

Conflicting social attitudes?

 

[Shinobi Mugen]

Conflicting social attitudes?

So you are allright with some violent racist psychopath actively recruiting young influencable minds in preparation for a new holocaust?

 

[Darklyre]

Pardon my laziness in not giving an 'encompassing' answer, but I'd just evaluate each case and I'm sure I'd find instances where censorship is the better option to freedom of expression. Western society has done that in say, denial of the Jewish holocaust where you can face prison time for being found out to have denied it in the past or in the present. If the expression causes more harm than it's worth, I'm not averse to censorship.

Correction: European society has censored Holocaust denial. American society has not.

In America, generally speaking, you can say whatever you want. However, you CAN run into the risk of violating other laws, such as public safety or ones against inciting violence. I'm not sure if this counts as censorship, considering the law concerning free speech doesn't actually mention those other categories.

 

[Pilaf]

So you are allright with some violent racist psychopath actively recruiting young influencable minds in preparation for a new holocaust?

No. That's almost completely different from what I was talking about. That's the difference between freedom of speech and indoctrination. If you honestly don't understand the difference, I'm certainly not going to explain it to you - but I think you do, and you're simply using a dishonest debate tactic to twist my words, and I disrespect you for it.

 

[Shinobi Mugen]

If freedom of speech gives you the right to say whatever you want, it also gives you the right to say it as much as you want, to anyone you want, and not to tell them any other side of the subject. So what exactly prevents people from abusing free speech to indoctrinate peoople with a hatefull message?

 

[Pilaf]

It just seems like you're out to get me and misrepresent my point of view a lot, Mugen, and I don't know why. We're having a discussion on the internet, not running for president. You don't have to run "Pilaf is a Muslim" attack ads against me.

 

[SENTINEL]

I have to agree with Shinobi Mugen. If we have few people that are silenced..Then we all lose our voice.

You also have to look at countries like China in the Mao periods, They did so all well and grow amazingly all because of censorship. Spain in 17th century and so on..

 

[MF NaruSimpson]

what do you guys think about it? is it ever ok? dont you think its pretty obvious that as a society advances it censors less and less, hence the ideal society would not censor at all? isnt creative expression and freedom more important in the longer term than possibly offending people here and there temporarily?

In an ideal society with ideal people there would indeed be no need for cencorship. But we don't live in an ideal society and we have a lot of people who's only goal is to spread a message of hate and violence. So our society should be protected against the spread of such hatefull doctorines. If this is not done then the dangers of a new hitler rising and the pursecution of minorities will always loom over that society.

As for censoring out violence, sex or swear words, that's just bullshit. Beeing overprotective with censorship is even more harmfull than not censoring at all.

good question and good answer. Since your question is framed in an "ideal society" then that means there's no need for censorship because everybody says what's right, does what's right, and doesn't think or do or say "bad " things. Nobody is oppressed or abused or bullied. The government actually does things that help the people and there's no need to fight the govt at any time.

But we are far and away from that.

 

[Shinobi Mugen]

It just seems like you're out to get me and misrepresent my point of view a lot, Mugen, and I don't know why. We're having a discussion on the internet, not running for president. You don't have to run "Pilaf is a Muslim" attack ads against me.

I just have a lot of fun debating you. You seem to have the exact opposite opinion on a lot of subjects than i do. Which makes debating a lot more interesting than debating with people who mosty agree with you. So you shouldn't take it personally, it's actually more of a compliment that i go into debate with you so often. But if you think i'm misrepresenting your views i will try to prevent doing so from now on.

Ow, and i actually like Muslims by the way, so that would be a compliment aswell.

 

[Pilaf]

Okay..here's why the racists should be allowed to publicly display their opinion:

It brings them out into the spotlight. The alternative would be they spread their hatred behind closed doors, and it somehow slips through the cracks and the people with the hatred come into power and use their hate subtly.

The alternative is Fred Phelps, who is very loud and vocal about his homophobia and general hatred of all humanity. I prefer having that mother fucker right out in the open so all can see his opinions. Imagining him working behind the scenes instead is just scary.

 

[Shinobi Mugen]

Okay..here's why the racists should be allowed to publicly display their opinion:

It brings them out into the spotlight. The alternative would be they spread their hatred behind closed doors, and it somehow slips through the cracks and the people with the hatred come into power and use their hate subtly.

The alternative is Fred Phelps, who is very loud and vocal about his homophobia and general hatred of all humanity. I prefer having that mother fucker right out in the open so all can see his opinions. Imagining him working behind the scenes instead is just scary.

You have a point there. But even so, people like that will also reach a much larger audience than they would otherwise, and can infact seriously hurt society on a much larger scale than they otherwise could.

People like Geert Wilders have been spreading ani-Islam crap, most of it flatout lies, into the media for years now and the result has been a huge amount of anit-Muslim sentiment thoughout dutch society and increased tensions between the 'original population' and immigrants. We used to be known worldwide as a country that treated it's immigrants fairly and was tolerant of all religions and ways of life. Now our flags are beeing burned on the evening news...

 

[Pilaf]

People like Geert Wilders have been spreading ani-Islam crap, most of it flatout lies, into the media for years now and the result has been a huge amount of anit-Muslim sentiment thoughout dutch society and increased tensions between the 'original population' and immigrants. We used to be known worldwide as a country that treated it's immigrants fairly and was tolerant of all religions and ways of life. Now our flags are beeing burned on the evening news...

Wait...what's wrong with being anti-Islam? Those people have no respect for polite society or the law anyway. It's because of their fascist nature that they burn flags. Any other group would react in a rational manner.

 

[Fuzzly]

Lol what? America has a huge history of discrimination against immigrants. Irish, Dutch, Chinese, Japanese, Puerto Rican, Mexican, and more have all faced huge discrimination from the first time they entered the country.

I don't think censorship is necessary. I'm not willing to go around deciding what is worth censoring and what isn't.

 

[Sarutobi sasuke]

what do you guys think about it? is it ever ok? dont you think its pretty obvious that as a society advances it censors less and less, hence the ideal society would not censor at all? isnt creative expression and freedom more important in the longer term than possibly offending people here and there temporarily?

I believe in free speech with no censorship at all, ever. New ideas cannot blossom without it, government, business, science and religion cannot be held accountable without it, and society cannot grow without it. Yes this will allow idiots and con men to spout their bigotry and lies but the way to combat this is with education not censorship. A population who can think freely and critically will dismiss these bigots and liars when they can't back up what they say with evidence. Free speech allows for people to say what they like but it does not guarantee they will be taken seriously.

 

[Kojiro Ganryu Sasaki]

I am against censorship in general.

Sweden feels like it is slowly regressing into some kind of neo-conservative (socially, sexually) censorship state. Now that prostitution is illegal and lolicon is illegal (prison sentence LOL) they're aiming for making bondage illegal (prison sentence again) and the next goal is probably porn. Many of those backing most of our idiotic legislation are also porn opponents in general.

 

[Shinobi Mugen]

Wait...what's wrong with being anti-Islam? Those people have no respect for polite society or the law anyway. It's because of their fascist nature that they burn flags. Any other group would react in a rational manner.

This is all offtopic, but.... Been reading propaganda much??? Most Muslims are good, friendly, social, law abiding, intelligent, helpfull people. They don't run around with burning flags and belts full of TNT.

All Fox news shows you are a bunch of protesters burning a flag and from that you you deduce all 2 billion Muslims are fascist barbarians? Besides, what do you think motivates those protesters? Do you really think they have unlimited internet access and television from which to recieve all the information on the subject and then make a well informed decision? They probably heard from some goverment official that some country in the west hates them all and wants them dead, that they mocks their deepest beliefs and despise everything they are. I'd probably burn a flag too if that was the case... (By the way, isn't protesting and burning a flag just another form of free speech???)

You also can't hold the oppressed people of countries like Saudi Arabia responsible for their crazy goverment and it's fucked up policies. They might act like they base their stuff on Islam but it's all just politics.

 

[mister_manji]

censorship is bad, but misinformation shouldn't be tolerated either.

Of course, your freedom of speech ends the moment I punch you in the face for insulting my disabled mother.

 

[Fuzzly]

censorship is bad, but misinformation shouldn't be tolerated either.

Of course, your freedom of speech ends the moment I punch you in the face for insulting my disabled mother.

And then you get jailed for x amount of time, unless you can make bail until your trial for assault. Then you look like the jerk.

 

[AbnormallyNormal]

i heard a quote once that the best way to combat bad speech is not by trying to restrict or ban it, but by producing MORE GOOD SPEECH.... you have to persuade people openly in the "marketplace of ideas" and if you cannot, you deserve to lose ...

i am not worried about racists or hate mongers saying whatever they like. as long as all they're doing is spreading messages and not doing any actual attacks, then they can be 'fought' verbally pretty easily, with facts. being afraid to let people who you disagree with express their opinion demonstrates a lack of confidence that your opinions will truly hold up!

 

[mister_manji]

And then you get jailed for x amount of time, unless you can make bail until your trial for assault. Then you look like the jerk.

my mom has MS. I don't take shit from anybody when it comes to her. Nobody in their right mind would take that to trial. I am fully able to pull of a insanity defense.

You don't diss disabled mothers dude. its just not done. I'd warn the guy first of course.

 

[neko-sennin]

In an ideal society with ideal people there would indeed be no need for cencorship. But we don't live in an ideal society and we have a lot of people who's only goal is to spread a message of hate and violence. So our society should be protected against the spread of such hatefull doctorines. If this is not done then the dangers of a new hitler rising and the pursecution of minorities will always loom over that society.

Unfortunately, silencing disagreeable opinions-- rather than countering them in debate or discussion-- only promotes them, insidiously and indirectly. It grants bullies the appearance of underdogs, allows bigotry to pass itself off as "secret knowledge" and turns fascism and racism into a more appealing alternative outlet for rebellion. In my experience, it has always served better to confront ignorance with critical thought than to silence it and give it unnecessary self-justification.

 

[Fuzzly]

my mom has MS. I don't take shit from anybody when it comes to her. Nobody in their right mind would take that to trial. I am fully able to pull of a insanity defense.

You don't diss disabled mothers dude. its just not done. I'd warn the guy first of course.

I'm not insulting your mother. But, if I did, and you attacked me, I'm fully within my right to defend myself. What happens if you're the one to get seriously hurt? If you're mom is never going to hear what I have to say, wouldn't it just be better to ignore the obvious attempt at trolling?

 

[wiggely]

a little bit of nazism is still nazism

 

[Ninjaguiden]

I have a very strong dislike of censorship, mostly when it is used to enforce moral values....

I became intrested in the subject when I read about anime censorship in the US, being from Sweden I'm very glad that our censorship laws nearly aren't affected by moral at all.

The worst case I have heard of in the anime genre is US television censorsing the lesbian relationship between wto characters in the series my blood boils just to think about it.....argghh! Being bi myself I have a good reason for this, but I would hate even if I wasn't.

Funny thing is, in Sweden, one villian in the series was censored from gay to straight to avoid making children think gays were bad . So......good censorship? Then again, the main problem in the US seems to be that the TV companies market these series to a younger audiance, thus the need for censoring, but why just not market them to an older crowd?

 

[Purgatory]

Censorship can go the fuck to hell. If you don't like it, turn the other cheek and don't bitch about it.

 

[Toby]

Correction: European society has censored Holocaust denial. American society has not.

In America, generally speaking, you can say whatever you want. However, you CAN run into the risk of violating other laws, such as public safety or ones against inciting violence. I'm not sure if this counts as censorship, considering the law concerning free speech doesn't actually mention those other categories.

That's where it can run into freedom of expression. Last year in Norway we agreed to let non-Norwegian and non-Sami flags fly on the constitutional day, which was under a hot debate amongst our politicians. People feared all sorts of things, amongst them instigating violence against immigrants who were supposed to be in an assimilation-process. But if laws prohibit you from expressing yourself, are you truly free, or are we caving in to fear?

I personally believe that denying racists the right to speak is part of denying the real world. These people exist, and if people are not informed about others' opinions, chances are that intolerance will simply run higher, against people with controversial opinions and amongst minority-groups, which frequently end up being targeted.

The thing is though, you should be liable for slanderous claims. As long as this rule remains the exception, the principle of respect for all opinions could be maintained in theory.