Comment by kyboren
17 hours ago
I support free speech through any media, including all noncommercial speech not including:
- defamation (with extra lenience for speech about public figures)
- evidence of child sex abuse
- incitement to imminent lawless action likely to cause disorder
Even those few exceptions are dangerous to liberty. Certainly anything else is too easily twisted into political censorship.
For example, under the guise of fighting "hate speech", the EU has already used the DSA to censor disfavored political speech like, "I think that LGBTI ideology, gender ideology, transgender ideology are a big threat to Slovakia, just like corruption"[0].
And yes, people obviously have the right to insult their politicians. It's honestly perplexing to encounter someone defending an early morning house raid because the guy called a politician a "professional moron". Are you actually Robert Habeck??
[0]: https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/republicans-j... (p. 19)
Even here on HN insulting other posters gets you banned. Same in many US media. There's quite a discrepancy between what people claim and the reality on the field, why you think? Yes I'm aware I'm shifting focus from Europe to the US, but you know, who should cast the first stone...
Private companies should have the freedom to ban/censor whatever content on their platforms they want. I’d prefer if they don’t, but we shouldn’t force governments to prevent companies from creating their own rules about how people can use their own software
Governments however should not interfere with citizen’s freedom of speech - there should be no fines/arrests for insulting politicians. Otherwise those governments are actually authoritarian and repressive.