Free Speech: Yay or Nay

I can't seem to make up my mind about being for or against free speech. Without it, people like us wouldn't have had right winged discussions openly or question things like the holocaust. But at that expense of course, gives left wingers a platform to speak. Not only that, but faggots like Milo or Richard Spencer can subvert the movement with faggotry (or other forms of degeneracy). If the right was to rise and stay in power with free speech, whats to say that leftism will rise again in 50 years? So why should we let them speak? Why should we let them lie to people and mislead them?

The reason you are fed up with the leftist free speech is because they are trying to censor the right simultaneously. If we were to take away free speech while the right was in power then it would only make it more difficult for us 50 or so years if the left were to take back control.What you are suggesting is exactly what the left is trying to pull right now, and as we can see it is failing.

Censoring the speech of one side is too difficult to be used effectively anyway (at least with the internet). Start censoring half of all opinions and you are bound to attack your own people sooner or later, causing chaos from within while at the same time shedding light on the things you are censoring. You might as well set up a dictatorship if you are planning on censoring speech, which Is not always a bad thing (depends on the dictator really).

Trump for Dictator 2016

I'm pro-free speech but Milo needs to fuck off and die. He's an attention-whoring fag. The most uptooted comment on the Trump AMA on Reddit was about making Milo press secretary of the White House. I hate that fag and his Plebbit followers.

Free speech yay
Unimpeded false slander nay

Have a clear set of laws for 'intended truth' and just nearly limitless freedom for 'intended fiction'. That way newspapers have to play nice or be known as tabloids. Make journalistic integrity a god damn requirement rather than guideline.

yay. we always have the truth behind what we say. we are still at an infant stage of humanity and are still learning about what instant communication with the entire world means. when we purge the zog, leftwing opinions will be ridiculed for eternity and banning them makes it seem as though we have something to fear.

free speech doesnt give you the right to walk around town in a thong with pierced nipples like a faggot, you will be executed on sight.

agreed

when you put it that way makes sense. But would you just suggest discouraging via propaganda? (not shoved down our throats obviously)

You mean propaganda?

Free speech Yay.

I do believe that the problems that we are seeing today with speech are due to the fact that we live in the age of pseudoscience with political correctness stifling actual free speech.
Where we actually guided by scientific principles, logic and reason then we could have debates and discuss ideas on their own merit.

The answer as we all now is simple:
Gas the kikes, Race War Now!
Hang the traitors!
Cull those infected by marxism!
Sterilize the weak!

no, i mean promotingthings like traditional family values and hard work while discouraging marxism in general.

Free speech is fine in a pro-white, Christian dominated society. When pro-white, Christian ideals are dominant, someone like Milo, Lena Dunham, John Oliver, etc, would be laughed out of the mainstream and wojld not have a platform eith which to speak.

Left vs. right is not the dichotomy that needs to be analyzed when talking about free speech. Hitler was very left wing, by all accounts. The dichotomy that we must focus on when talking abput free speech is anti-white vs. pro-white, and Christian vs. degenerate. The values inherent to white Christians, regardless of left vs. right, are typically worthy of a system thst holds free speech as a noble ideal. The values inherent in anti-white poc atheists and faggots are never worth being spoken in public.

Fuck off you anti-free speech Christcuck.

Every letter of the spoken/written/typed language composed in any, ANY way is to be protected no matter who or what conveys it.

This throws the whole "HATESPEECH =/= FREE SPEECH" in a ditch and eternally secures the liberty of the citizenry.

Don't like protected Free Speech for EVERY citizen?
Get out of America you treasonous Communist.

Free speech: Yay
Universal suffrage: Nay

There seems to be a misunderstanding of what "freedom" is in most of society. (I blame (((socialism))), and the consequential degradation of our language, personally.) Colloquially, freedom is the ability to do what you want, but when you're talking about the American Constitution (where most of this debate comes from,) it means something different. Freedom always comes with an attached responsibility. Freedom of speech, for example, while largely referring to the ability to say what you want without government reprisal, generally has limitations when it comes to deceit, slander/libel, and incitement to violence.

There's nothing to think about you fucking coward.

Calling it a pseudoscience is spot-on. Libtards truly think the are on the side of science; you heard Hilary stating that she was on the science side with 'muh global warming'.


There will always be people to fight against the norm including propaganda, left or right. That being said, I do think promoting traditional family values again would cause a 'reverse'-revolution to undo some of the damage from the last few decades. So many people are fed up with this 'go your own way' and 'do what you want' bullshit that I'm sure such things could catch on like in the 50's.

Free speech, voting, etc. it's all fine to me on the condition that we remove kikes, niggers, spics, and other subhuman animals from our society. Until that is achieved we can't be bothered with idealism like this, we simply need to be in war mode finding ways to beat the system in any way we can. If that means shutting down the free speech of the left, then so be it. We're under attack fighting for our survival right now.

When the smoke clears, sure, I'm happy to go back to all those ideals people like Andrew Jackson and Thomas Jefferson believed in.

I'm against free speech because I'm against democracy, and freedom of speech is part of the common man taking action in the political system. Those who disturb the peace need to be stopped.

L.O.L…. Looked at this cucked weirdo… You got really triggered, didn't you?

America is based on the whole liberty thing, so I don't think it could exist without free speech.
Regarding how far free speech stretches is more of a cultural thing, which can easily be broken.

What we have going on in the Netherlands is a law where you cannot insult the king.
The king can have no opinion because he is simply the head of state, and the state is not a monarchy because it is constitutional.
However, if you put in place a figurehead that doesn't do a whole lot except publicly sign new laws and make a big ceremony for that…
Then it would appear to the public as if he's the one making choices, despite him just being a normal person.
So if you make a law saying you cannot insult the lawsigner, you would basically have a law saying you cannot insult the law.
And that's how you can secure free speech with laws on sodomy and the like.
It might be a bit of a stupid idea, but I'd like to see it put to the test.

I bet you kiss prostitutes.

government =/= freedom

Man was never more free than before government, not to sound like some anarchist cuck. But we don't have a society because it is more 'free' but because it is comfortable and safer than doing what you want. You can't have a society based around everyone's freedoms, it would fall apart.

...

...

...

A beautiful country. It's of course a shame the way that the state has begun to degrade and so has begun to hurt the people with anti-white policies. However, much of the important process is identifying the problems, something a lot of people at Holla Forums are busy doing.

I think that the Netherlands in its more flourishing periods, that is to say, until recently, is a good model for others as well.

If that's the case then I'm with it. I would love to have a Starship Troopers type citizenship.

Censoring free speech doesn't make people think your way. If anything, it forces people that are easly flustered to side with the taboo way of thinking because they think there's something their higher ups don't want them to know about it. Yes, the left is wrong, but you wont learn from your mistakes unless you make them.

That sounds eerily like the united states system

Sadly it's easily degradable because the culture is so simple and primitive. If anyone dares defend Dutch culture, the leftist parties simply scoff at how "wooden boots and windmills aren't culture".
Aside from that, we're still a very lively country in the lesser known regions. Rotterdam is fucked though.

In what way?

If you think it's O.K. or good to get people flustered then you won't have a functioning society because people will be too busy playing defense to do anything, user.


No, I disagree that it's similar.

that's what I said satan

in this way
However, if you put in place a figurehead that doesn't do a whole lot except publicly sign new laws and make a big ceremony for that…
Then it would appear to the public as if he's the one making choices, despite him just being a normal person.
So if you make a law saying you cannot insult the lawsigner, you would basically have a law saying you cannot insult the law.
And that's how you can secure free speech with laws on sodomy and the like.
It might be a bit of a stupid idea, but I'd like to see it put to the test.

The anti-whites have politicised it at the racial level, user. Culture is only really along for the ride in the political world.

There are some people who think "assimilation" to the native culture is good, user. But that can't be allowed since it is bad at a racial level, for the genotype. However, I don't want to get too far away from the discussion about speech here…

Milo is a faggot, but I'm pretty sure spencer is straight. You're thinking of everyone else: greg, jack, james, etc

L.O.L., those bestial trips…

But, I mean that I disagree. Perhaps it's better to say "No, I disagree that it's dissimilar".

...

If I cannot express myself freely in a society, what incentive do I have to contribute to it?

If I am to endure the lack of certain rights, the society taking them needs to compensate me to my satisfaction, otherwise I will work against it or leave for another one.

This is highly difficult to sustain, because I will feel the sting of not having this freedom often, and your compensations' value will drop over timer as I get used to them.

But who in America is the unopinionated unjudgeable lawsigner?


You're right. But free speech should only be a right for citizens. Not refugees.
The only way to get rid of all this anti-white propaganda is to put up pro-white propaganda.
But we should go about it in the same way they do, use pictures, not words.

Go fuck yourself. Yeah it's a drive-by comment. Deal with it.

This is really too permissive a mindset, user. The truth is that most people don't want to spend time fixing the political system, they want to spend time using the political system in order to make money. Yes, status is a motivating factor, but those who write controversial things outside of sanctioned institutions (the church, the military academies, etc.) are not after the right kind of status and this ends up degrading society quickly.


That's a good point, that refugees should have fewer rights. I think a better point would be that they don't come in at all.

At a certain point, the State should put out pro-white propaganda. But most people think in a safer civic way that lends itself to discussions about culture as you mentioned. It's going to be tricky.


Says the user. who spends a lot of time getting familiar with the sodomite tendencies of others. I am glad that my response to your nonsense bothered you, that's my dealing with it.

Another distinction about freedom and rights that people seem to conflate is positive vs. negative freedom. The left's idea of freedom is the former: they talk about the "right to healthcare", "right to education" and "right to a living wage" expecting other people to provide products and services for them to utilize, even though rights and freedoms actually concern the ability of individuals and groups to provide their products and services without other forces constraining them.

This applies all the same to free speech. Free speech does not entail that everyone listen to and go along with what you say, but simply that the government not impede your private thoughts and words. Free speech does not provide you with a medium for you to speak your mind away or allow you to make the country your safe space, but simply does not interfere with your attempts to form or contribute to such a medium. You have to realize such a medium by way of freedom of association, another concept they are quite baffled by. They can't have you living in a homogeneous community, they have to make it (((diverse))) and (((multicultural))). Because in their understanding, you do not have the freedom to live among your own, other people have the freedom to live next to you.

whoa there satan
checked

And that last point is why they deem anything pro-White as racist, bigoted and hateful. Wanting to live among and cherish your own people is in their eyes a denial of the positive freedom of others to infest your lands. Of course, they only apply this to White people.

Consider this: Ideas, or memes, are like a virus. They move and reproduce in hosts while undergoing natural selection. Ideas grow and evolve like this throughout human history. The most useful ideas are passed on, and the cancerous are not. In this process of selection true ideas are always at an advantage. If an idea is based on reality and truth, it is useful, it has a higher chance of being believed, and will flourish.

In this environment, if an idea only benefits the (((leaders of society))), it will not flourish. It is not useful to the majority of people, and would only be able to pass on to other (((like minded individuals.))) But if these individuals can create an artificial selection process to make an environment where there ideas can grow. An environment where you can ban hate speech, cyberbullying, racism, and sexism.

Truth does not fear investigation. Truth does not fear lies. Truth does not fear shills. If allowed to evolve unhindered by jews, truth will prevail.

Always freedom of speech, freedom of information.

The Jews operate most difficultly when their competitors have 'perfect information' of a system. It changes the game entirely. This is not a true example of 'perfect information' like a chess board, but it tends to perfect because info spreads (meme magic, anyone?)

What that is isn't so much magic, it's just a manifestation of how 'magical' these chaotic systems can be. Chaos, power laws and fractals - this is where systems develop in a way that is really impossible to predict in entirety, but there are still trends and patterns observed because of the underlying logical relationships.

I'm drunk, and this is Autism: the post, but read two books to understand it:

They may seem unrelated, but they both give great insight to chaos as a dimension, or a channel of new information.

No free speech = no memetic magic (and it will become 'memetic science' when we understand it better and analyze it).

Besides, history is beyond the agency of a singular man. A trend may begin with a single person, but Trump nor Hitler nor Napoleon gained influence without the energy of the people. We have been asleep for a long time. The more our ideas trickle down to the masses, the more momentum will favor us.

Sorry for the rant. I know I've read books and screenshots here that gave me this full understanding, but I'm not finding and I'm drunk. Good luck user, use your free speech while we still have it as ammo.

To give a quote from this book:

There are a lot of "survival of the fittest" types here, but that leads to a degraded sort of bestial lifestyle. The society that exists in relation to that State is going to be poisonous as the State itself is inherently unstable, without legal means to protect itself.

It's a very erudite quote that gets it right, user.

Hardly. Degeneracy is not productive, and does not pass on. It provides temporary short-term benefits (pleasure, popularity) for a long-term social harm.

Look back to the early 1900s. Divorce and infidelity were publicly shamed. This is not because the government had any laws against the promotion of cuckoldry, but the opposite; nobody had any laws or forces in place to make such degeneracy popular. Everyone had the freedom to discuss things in any way they wanted, and they chose to disregard such immorality.

So what changed from then to now? The jews made environments that convinced young men and women that having multiple sexual partners was perfectly fine, and you shouldn't "judge" or "shame" degenerates. These environments were universities, funded and designed to undermine society by the kikes in government.

It wasn't freedom that brought down the west, it was the destruction of free speech by an environment created by the jews.

Yay to free speech overall. It's a necessary part of a well functioning society. However, there must be requirements on major media outlets to be truthful.

Additionally I believe that since porn is already regulated, we should add rules banning interracial and cuckold porn, just as bestiality and CP are already disallowed.

There needs to be some type of distinction between online platforms that are moderated and tailored to a specific audience (like this board, or like a forum for a game), and larger sites like Twitter and Goybook. The huge normie-filled general social media sites need to be required to respect their users rights. The first amendment must be extended to those places so that they must stop with things like shadowbanning, unfair bans, etc. Meanwhile on the smaller or more topic-dedicated forums, administrators should be allowed to run it however they want.

Agreed.
If you mean "Political system" as in "a society run by a political system", then agreed, otherwise please clarify.
I am not sure what you are talking about when it comes to "status".

You seem to want to limit speech about change to an institution to those within that institution. Reasonable when it comes to self-sustaining institutions like the military and church, but hardly useful when it comes to providing a service.

I think man has the right to say what he wills. But I also believe in the will of a nuclear community to see for themselves which ideas are of merit, which ones are shit, and to teach onto successors their own way of telling the difference.

When the Weimar Republic collapsed, people burned en masse the scores of communist literature, progressive opinions, and pornography that corrupted a society. That is, it was printed by Jews, the community saw it, was eventually rebooted, and removed it. Revoking freedom of speech implies not letting them say it in the first place - that means such degenerates will merely create and spread their ideas through underground channels.


In a meritocracy, the influential people will be able to discern it for themselves. The reason Jews have controlled us for so long in modern history is because they always assumed an identity of authority (Albert Einstein, J Robert Oppenheimer, Richard Grumman, etc.) I won't say they weren't smart, but by subsuming the identity of authority, people listened to them. 'ok, let's develop an a-bomb and end the last unit of independence.'

When good men can see evil, they will be motivated to fight it.

And besides, would you be here if this was only pro-Holla Forums circlejerking? Some of our best discussions happen when (((someone))) prints an op-ed promoting degeneracy.

Read: not Grumman, but Feynman. Google Android is awful with their IMEs.

You fucked up because you do not notice anything past your consumption sphere.


How dare they to disrupt current year perfect yet evolving culture and society?

You are the degenerate instead.

according to libs Obomba

Yay. Better to have open discussion about ideas than attempting to suppress them, only makes people feel more adamant in their position and makes it easier to garner sympathy then just proving them wrong.

I know what you all are after, ideological competition, but I'm not interested in continuing the precipitous decline caused by the barbaric society of "freedom of speech" countries. If I see an easier way to do things, I'm going to go for it, Anons.

Leave motivations and ambitions behind, and go for the stability of it, that's right.

It goes back and forth every four or eight years, user. That's much more unstable than a king who spends almost all of his life in the position and whose status isn't changed by elections.

If you can't see that, user. Well, uh… I don't know…

Never trust anyone but yourself completely.

Milo et al. - I never give him much weight. If it will carry weight with others, let 'em talk.

I do know good Jews who appreciate nature and self determination - but they are at most 1/4 like, and I would say their European instincts are dominant unless they are born into globalist interests. Other Jews I know, they are the epitome of degeneracy and anti-occidentalism.

If Milo is serving some self-purpose, I have no idea what it is, other than faggots getting to live in a nationalistic, ethnocentric society. If he has some Ashkenazi/globalist pitch behind him, I'd like to see the evidence. I personally don't follow his ideas, but so long as he shills for Trump, I see no problem.

"Race is a social construct"
And the rise of the 'social'sciences is another nail in the coffin of the world.
Marxism and all it`s offshoots are comparable with theoretical astrophysics, it works within a certain framework. Astrophysics have dark matter/energie and strange X and marxism has a whole rang off bs to make it work.
When theories with regard to theoretical astrophysics are proven to be false the field is adjusted to fit the new reality. Marxism does not adjust, it claims that reality itself is wrong. Whole fields of social 'research' are created just to morph reality so it fits in with this absurd doctrine.
A woman want`s to be a homemaker? "Its internalized misogyny".

Controlling Content < Creating Context

A King makes a country very stable, yes. The problems arise at the king's death. The methods of succession are simply no good. The King's children are no guarantee of being a good ruler, and any other means of selection suffer from the same problems as democracy, except that a mistake will last an entire lifetime.

Beyond the first king's life, stability is up to chance.

The decline in western countries is not caused by free speech. It is caused by an outside jewish force.

Do you think that every major website censoring content is free speech? Do you think hate speech laws are free speech? Free speech is the only thing that lets you and I talk here.

Both of you are right on the money. Jews invented cuck porn, scat porn, blacked porn, anything you might see as disgusting.
But porn will always be a part of human society. It should model what a culture should expect of sex.

Wanna see some somalian nigga cherrypicked for a BBC screwing white girls? You fell for it hook, line and sinker. Other guys? They don't want the man to be black? They self-identity when they see it. And that builds motivation to procreate.

What difference does it make if justice is explicit?

I'm not saying that at all. Some people are just quick to anger and/or quick to blame their folly on someone else.

I agree with this user. We need an all White society first and then we can strive towards these higher goals for our nation.

Freedom of speech is the inherent right of all americans. Leftists are not americans because they are avowed traitors and jews are citizens of no nation and neither have or deserve rights.

I'm not sure I know what you mean.

I say complete free speech 100% but completely get rid of freedom of the press since news organizations have been made obsolete by imageboards.

One more thing about the way that people see a lot of intolerance for traditional things, is that Political Correctness, a very real force, is being enforced by legions and legions of women in the institutions who don't use any ideology, but only their feelings. They are supported by a few legitimately Politically Correct men, but also by tonnes of men who could care less, but have traded institutional positions to their wives in exchange for them actually caring about their own spouses.

If speech gets checks put on it, then the excuses that the Politically Correct give out are taken away. It's no longer "anyone can say anything", but "I have to stay within certain lines" which are of course going to be established in a way that makes sense, or else if they don't make sense then people eventually change the civil government so that speech rules are better.

You had better see that the change away from sanity towards feelings is about neglected women being paid off with jobs, and this sham continues to exist because of beliefs in a freedom, which means putting up with those who say things that degrade the environment.

But you realize how quickly that changes when the power shifts, yes?

Of course you do.

But that's contradictory user., and when you see that, then you're starting to see where the issue lies for the rest of us.

Honestly first of all if we ever gain power explicitly censoring the average citizens right to speak would horribly fuck our government due to our national character. Not even the Jews have been able to even come close to touching freedom of speech in American soceity(instead they use social shaming and threatening your job security).

It wouldn't give us much benefit and it would make the populace hate us.

Spencer is anything but, hell he has a gay club you have to PAY

i really hope you don't believe in that MEME MAGIC shit, i swear that shit was funny at first but then people started taking it seriously.

might give that book a read

fuck off, i don't like degenerates promoting their faggotry. If you support people only because you agree with them then you ARE the cancer

he has promoted pedophilia (specifically man/boy), loves black cock, and is a sodomite

agreed

People did indeed burn those books, prohibiting anyone else from seeing them. In other words, they didn't just let them sit on the shelf for others to pick up and judge for themselves, because most people are not able to properly judge the merit of those books by and for themselves. They essentially censored the Jew Communist propaganda so that it may not even be considered in the majority's thoughts.
This is just that. The propaganda was removed and not allowed.

Those who can properly weigh what is before them are those few "influential people". They are the ones who should be given free speech because they will know what should and should not be heard and what they should even speak on. Like Odysseus, in Simpson's example, rebuked Thersites and then beat him for speaking. If he hadn't done that, and simply let each soldier consider himself Thersites attack upon Agamemnon, there would most likely have been support for Thersites. Odysseus, the greater man and far more capable of knowing what was and was not proper for all the other soldiers, did not allow Thersites to speak, and stifled any thought similar to it.

Yes, this is the most valuble thing to be taught to anyone really. "Should this be heard" is always an appropriate question for learning.

But that makes it even funnier

true but people won't take you as serious when you literally worship a cartoon frog

I agree with this
Purely because I think the other main point of free speach laws is that honesty can be uphld

...

It keeps the normalfags out.

And a neo-nazi frog worshiping wizard cabal is to fucking funny to not roll with.

...

...

Fuck off because you failed in finding the root of the problem. I did not express any support for Milo in my post, but of course you'd better create a strawman because you cannot comprehend the sarcasm.

oh shit i'm sorry

Suffer not the heretic, the alien, the mutant, to live.

Free Speech Yay.

The problem isn't with free speech, and free speech only helps us. The problem is we have over-expanded the meaning of citizen. Other anons have already expanded upon this, I'm just putting forward my vote.


Praise Kek!
I firmly believe that if you take any of it seriously it stops working. If you don't believe it's just a joke, then the magic is gone and Kek turns his metaphysical back to you.

Where is this guy now?

Almost everyone in this thread.

You know Holla Forums is satire, right?

^^^
Greetings fellow Holla Forumsitician

...

Truly free speech would allow for a complete discrediting of all 'progressive' ideas so much so that they would never plague us again and those that try to push such evil lies (Jews) would be ostracized and hated as we, the truth tellers, currently are.

Don't you see the logical error here, user.?

You're saying that the mistake lasts a life-time when saying that the stability is up to chance. Now try thinking about a king who reigns for his adult life of 30 years. Then consider a system of election like the U.S. has to the head of state, with 8 years maximum.

Within those thirty years, the United States will have at least 4 presidents, with some good ones (not mistakes) and others bad (mistakes). Those changes from good to bad, and vice versa, are still less stable than the one long mistake. Perhaps the democracy system will have more good governance in that period, but you went with the quality of stability which is a different thing.

Therefore, I think your investment in democracy might be clouding the clearness of your analysis on this topic, user. That would imply that I have a better view this time…

How the fuck is this even a question?

Do you WANT this site shut down?

:^]

On that topic. How should one earn his citizenship?

Like in Starship Troopers, gaining citizenship after military/civic service?

After graduating from The Hitlerjugend? I remember Alfred Rosenberg talking about a ritual for becoming a citizen replacing confirmation.

How would women gain citizenship? A citizen shouldn't marry a noncitizen.

My dream system for freeze peach is something like this:


Problems with this includes people colluding to give false narratives, government becoming subverted and using a system like this as surveillance, and people getting paid to vote a certain way, a possibly solution would be to create something like the Supreme Court with a number of designated shitposters whose job is to monitor the entire thing and make sure nothing top down happens. A better alternative would be an AI with a likewise appointed court surrounding the AI to make sure it isn't tampered with.

This is the best thing I could come up with. The real problem with free speech isn't the idea itself but the operator, as usual. It's only a Republic if you keep it.

The solution is Free Speech Fridays. All other days you risk getting squashed by a tank.

...

Free Speech is retarded. Not for any of the reasons immediately come to mind, but for the simple reason that it is impossible for speech be truly 'free.' Speech will always have consequences, social or worse. 70 years ago being a commie was grounds to get fired. 300, desiring a Republic was grounds for hanging. Today, not liking blacks is the fastest way to get your 'friends' to abandon you. If the regime does not institute penalties for what it deems unacceptable speech, society will institute penalties for what society deems unacceptable speech - which might be entirely healthy beliefs such as hierarchy. Think of what will happen to you and your family today if you are outed as a Nazi - yet this is in a society with "free" speech.

Beaver wrote an excellent post on this that I recommend searching out. The gist is that three rights should be guaranteed instead of Free Speech:
The Right to Criticize.
The Right to Question.
The Right to Hate.

This protects us from going full Soviet in our anti-free-speech measures, and thus stoking resentment, whilst allowing one to institute punishments for (((subversives))) undermining society. You might hate Der Fuhrer, and be free to express your hatred openly without consequence, as it lets you vent. But advocate for his removal and you'll find yourself physically removed.

(Heil Hitler)
Why were these unchecked?

...

...

good shit

A codified rule of law, worshipped without an understanding of the purpose, context, or higher structures of justice, leads to an unhealthy secularism in society. Society betrays itself, insofar as the implicit means of justice (i.e.: socially reinforced values and stigmas) wither away. Case in point, the division of America and how it's falling into (or has already fallen into, if that's your style) petty consumerism etc.

When you find yourself in a position where there are no implicit avenues for justice to take hold, you leverage your opportunities, and do not deny yourself the power of legislation. More to the point, the sentiment that liberty begins and ends with the individual got us into this mess. Government is the natural evolution of a social group; should it not embody the values and stigmas that allowed that group to evolve and prosper in the first place?

Let me say one more thing: tyranny doesn't care for either method.

Free speech is the cause of most of our problems. It's not a righteous thing to allow the forces of evil pump out their cultural Marxist poison and sit back while they destroy our nations and people.

If we stopped the leftists from pumping out their poison over the past few decades we wouldn't be in nearly as big a mess as we are in now. We cannot stand by and let these people spread their poison and destroy our cultures.

Anyone promoting degeneracy, cultural Marxism etc needs to be stopped. Free speech is for cucks.

Free Speech is marxist nosense. I want nothing but hate speech. If you say something and don't say anything against Faggots, Kikes, Niggers, Mudsharks or Gooks, you need to be but up against a wall. Saying all Muslims are rapists and terrorists doesn't count, that's just common sense.

...

Shut your stupid face, moron.

Without free speech, Holla Forums wouldn't be a thing, so I'm for it.

If your opinion is truly superior, there is no reason to fear the opposition.

Free speech is absolute and binary.

Ideas don't always win on merit of their righteousness. Look how popular leftism and degenerate liberalism is today. Way more popular than our ideas. And still the cancer spreads, destroying our nations day by day.

Censorship doesn't work anymore, with the internet and this mass culture and media, under a Fascist country, I think it's in our best interest to allow them to speak. What people will be able to speak after traitors are executed.

Freedom of speech means no OFFICIAL retribution for speech. Return the media into the hands of the people, and disallow a repeat of the agglomeration that concentrated TV, radio, and print in the hands of a very few Jews and you will see society shaming these people into compliance.

Also, vigilantes will take care lefties, faggots, etc. A few beating by masked men and they will learn to moderate their behavior and opinions in public.

Of course, we must also get rid of the prohibitions on bullying in school. This is a major part of development of social consciousness, and without it, faggots will run wild and free, and SJWs will promote themselves to fill the vacant bully positions.

there's also a slippery slope for what counts as "intended truth." Pure free speech is something that needs to exist in America, but certain professions and careers should be required by law to present truth accurately.

Micro-managing other peoples lives and forcing your views and opinions onto other people against their will are left-wing values. You will be hard pressed to find a right winger who does not value freedom of speech very highly.


(((Raymond Finkelstein))) and the (((Finkelstein))) report.

Also,
mfw somewhere out there is a holocaust revisionist who just heard the story of Semmelweis Ignaz
t. Proud Magyar

There are literally no good arguments for freedom of speech. You are a degenerate shill if you support freedom of speech.

You clearly do not belong in Holla Forums leftards.

IntoTheTrashYouGo.jpg

Trump wants to enforce Libel laws more, and that sparked a bulb in my mind.

The Jews weapon to free speech is the media, if we implement laws that stop them from doing their Jewry, then right wing ideals will prosper.

Daily reminder guys: Free speech is not what caused this, it's the media, look at Germany before the establishment of the National Socialist party, degeneracy being pushed into the media and into the minds. THAT is their secret.

I am very much for free speech, and the freedom of information in general. This is one area where I very much agree with libertarians. Free speech and discourse of ideas is paramount to finding the best course for society and nation. Yes, we are right about a lot of things, but censoring free speech once we're in power feels like resting on our laurels too much. It's easy to get lazy when your viewpoint is the only legal one.

The freedom of knowledge and information is one of the reasons I moved so far right to begin with. There must be a system in place to depoliticize knowledge so that all ideas may be rigorously debated without the emotional and political attachments. It's why I'm against the idea of voting.

What a fucking surprise.

Throw people in jail for lying? There's a thought. Could such a society even exist?

You know it.

It already did in the Achaemenid Persian empire. Lying was considered a criminal offense, no matter the subject.

Free speech is non-negotiable. What we have today is not free speech, but a heavily regulated speech. Free speech always favors the truth, and The Cathedral will always fear the truth.

Even libcucks deserve the right to free speech.

As an American, this is non negotiable.

Things are unfortunate for us right now because "Political correctness" is the law of the land, and going against it can get you fired from your job, or ostracized from your community.

Were things balanced, we could easily BTFO the libcucks with facts and redpills, to where them having the right to free speech wouldn't be a problem.

What is needed is not censorship on their part, but prevention of punishment for exercising your first amendment rights.

what if you have a new idea that is true, but nobody believes it because it upsets them?

you realize the catholics threw galileo in prison for saying the earth span around the sun

people like you are a legitimate threat to humanity and must be physically removed from society

The trouble is that we're arguing for the principle when we should be discussing the fact.

We have precious few platforms, in the US it's mostly private interests and public institutions that choke off our ability to speak or even think freely.


Agreed, though the media parasites have got to go and internet platforms should be forced to abide by US law if available to the US.

Free speech is critical to a democracy, but so is restricted voting. They can say whatever they want, but ultimately only a few should be allowed the privilege of voting. For those people voting is not a freedom, but an obligation. Consecutive failures to vote leads to loss of voting rights.

Only people who care about the future of their nation need be invested in the future of their nation. All others will only bring ruin.

If its one or the other I'd rather be degenerate then a toe licker

...

The system of government doesn't even matter as long as there is bread and circus the plebs won't care about anything else. The only reason the American/French revelations happened was a increases in the price/a lack of food.

And what would happen to you for being a Nazi, you'd get a slap on the back and a raise?

There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt (see Romans 3:23)

Nah. You'd be fired, then exiled from your community, then you'd have yourself and all your friends discredited forever 20 years later.

You'd probably get your house burned down as well

You're a faggot and a leftist OP. You support free speech when it benefits us, but then oppose it for others. The only people who fear freedom of speech are the people who need to be purged.

this. they can't handle free speech.

As an example:

Germany is raiding homes for right wings posts on social media while foreign jihadist are waging a guerilla war on their streets.

And people wonder why Kristallnacht happened.
They're saying that like Jews are humans.

Yes for free speech, fuck false advertising. False advertising should be considered theft and fraud, I'd also include any falsified scientific paper (and referring to anything else than hard sciences as science or even hinting at it having the same level of validity) under that limitation. Also put a really harsh penalty for fraud, none of that fine and probation shit. That way you remove a good part of the cancer that is related to business.

Au contraire, mon ami, it actively entices the normalfags to visit and stay.

Dank memes, hot off the presses, are the only thing that motivate normalfags to leave their usual haunts for imageboards. If you have a board known for shitposting memes constantly, you're going to have a deluge of newfags who don't know how to post.

...

interesting, sounds like a decent alternative

ayyyy
i simply state it is a double edged sword, and rather or not it would be beneficial to keep or not. That is why i made this thread to discuss it.

It's my fault, I memed it first.

#MiloForPressSecretary

because it will even piss off Holla Forumsfags

...

It's a difficult question. My main issue is with certain forms of media, not with people expressing political beliefs. Hollywood garbage TV programming and movies, trashy music like rap, pornography…those kinds of things just shouldn't be legal. They're indecent and they pollute culture.

fascists believe in free speech and anyone who tells you different is a traitor. period.

tackle

Honestly, at this point free speech is a means to an end. I will use it to get the message across, but if Holla Forums the 4th Reich or whatever ever comes to power, fuck free speech, it just gets subverted and used to disseminate filth. I'm fine with being a hypocrite in this case.

Yeah we need a safe space goy!

One thing I have learnt from the Jews and their demise is that TRUTH conquers, deceit comes back to you eventually

What's wrong with this?

Political Correctness was initially established to stop this.
Look where it's brought us.

But user.

unlike them we know how the memes behave and which direction to go, our forefathers did not

I believe pruning the tree to make it grow stronger and healthier.

You missed the important part - they did this through RESTRICTION of free speech.

See what restriction does?
It degenerates society. You effectively cocoon the memes so they can't grow.

Free speech is pivotal to society.

It needs to be our number one rule.

AND Transparency in governmental institutions - possibly corporations too.

I agree with that to be honest. The ethnic division that stuff is creating is ridiculous.

But at the same time, it produced this massive right wing swing.

People don't like the idea of ethnic masochism.

This is the biggest issue.

This is exactly the problem the US is having. It's creating huge amounts of blowback against the people that didn't even attack them (the common folk)

Never will work.

There's a reason why we a have a nationalized educational system.

What we need to do is teach them constructive ways of thinking like how Holla Forums sees things. That memetic perception.

Teach that and you teach them a way for "seeing through the bullshit"

We need to teach religion as a memetic based subject.

We also need to focus on computer programming. The two seem to be subtly linked - with the way algorithms are processed and the way we process ideas.

I don't like those faggots. They seem to have ulterior agendas.

Plus degeneracy breeds evil.

a new merchant thanks

I see you fellow Law student.

Holla Forums has to start digging and summarizing relevant legal provisions for the Clinton scandals and the Shell Isis thing.

I'm out of that jurisdiction though.

why are you saging?

step it up senpai


dunno, just think there are better threads, this is more of a "let's talk shit" thread.

now it is, it was good for awhile
fug

This.

But I do think we should be modifying other races.

Infact I think we should be modifying all races - even whites are beginning to struggle with new technology

...

AINT SEEN NOTHING YET

B-B-B-BABY, YOU JUST AIN'T SEEN N-N-NOTHIN' YET

got a link to pictures?

Like a mega link?

What you've just suggest is the problem.

When you fragment duties like that, you inadvertently create echo boxes for the ideas for those sectors.

Then that sector starts implementing ideas adverse to the common folk.

You need a place which is accessible by all. A place which sorts out the shit naturally by putting dumbasses into place.

Holla Forums does that. Dumb comments are criticized here.

I disagree.

Strategic materials are censored because you are competing with an equal.

When you overpower them, there is no need for censorship.
Censorship just creates paranoia for those not in the know.

This I call "9/11 complex"

kys.

No seriously, kys.

The problem is censorship dumbass.

This.

We at Holla Forums are vastly outnumbered by liberals. Yet we have arguably a louder voice because the memes we produce WORK.

Lefty Holla Forums censors you subhuman.

This Holla Forums does not.

Only thing it filters is obvious spam. Lefty Holla Forums filters anything that does not fit it's narrative.

Dumb cunt.

We just need more white people in these sectors.

In the past there was no motivation. Now there might be motivation when you "do it to get rid of the lugenpresse"

Part of the problem the last few decades has been white people living contently while evil saturated the media.

This is the bump Holla Forums is hitting. Whereas in the past we simply exposed lies, now people seem to be actively closing their ears.
My mother and sister the other day when I discussed "do you want to know what Clinton is up to":

We are living in terrible times.

I don't understand how free speech creates the horseshoe effect.

In fact the horseshoe theory occurs when subversion happens. When those pushing an agenda are desperate to keep it going.

Every american here says Yay.
Yay.

Who sent you?

And DDR was a democracy. You believe everything people tell you? Fuck, there were several states that didn't want to be part of america and what happened? They launched a civil war that killed plenty of the people, all in the name of "freedom".

user….

You can say whatever you want so long as you don't assault my feelings.

Then it's verbal assault, which is virtually physical rape.