Discussion Freedom of Speech or Political Correctness? Poll

[Forever Sleep]

I personally think freedom of speech is important. We ought to be able to express how we truly feel- even if the view isn't popular. Still- I can see how some views can be very offensive to people- and ought to be at least tempered.

I don't know. Sometimes I feel like we've gone PC crazy. I'm not sure it's always good to repress everything- as it doesn't always eliminate the feelings underneath- on the contrary- they just grow and fester...

I realise it's a very broad subject! Probably not one you can vote on without more context. I think probably both freedom of speech but with a sensitivity to not utterly offend others is probably best. So- providing a reasoned argument maybe if a view seems to be especially harsh or problematic. What do you think?

 

[Jarni]

The problem with PC (among others...) is that it tends to (very strongly) minimise all problems so they are not solved / and people don't have needed help.
It really depends on situation....

 

[chloramine]

I think sometimes political correctness is mislabeled as what's actually the consequences of how people use their free speech. There are areas where it feels overdone (and in some cases outright hurts the group it's supposedly for), but in terms of say not respecting someone's pronouns- you can do that. It's not illegal. But if people call you a jerk for it and don't want to associate with you afterwards, that's not political correctness so much as the consequences of dismissing the people around you.

Personally I'd rather err on the side of respecting someone's wishes and doing my best to make people feel recognized.

 

[evanescent]

I think sometimes political correctness is mislabeled as what's actually the consequences of how people use their free speech. There are areas where it feels overdone (and in some cases outright hurts the group it's supposedly for), but in terms of say not respecting someone's pronouns- you can do that. It's not illegal. But if people call you a jerk for it and don't want to associate with you afterwards, that's not political correctness so much as the consequences of dismissing the people around you.

Personally I'd rather err on the side of respecting someone's wishes and doing my best to make people feel recognized.

well put

 

[WellDefinedChin]

The one thing I am passionate about in this life is freedom. My depression is overpowered by my rage when I see freedom of expression is threatened. It would be a virtue to die fight for. No matter how insane, I want to be able to hear from everybody, and from everything. If I went to China, I would not be able to leave.

 

[Disappointered]

It's ridiculous that political correctness has been imposed - and with the same racist hierarchy of suffering as always - on a pro-choice suicide forum that was originally about free speech. As though it's going to make any f-ing difference at this point. I grew up being called politically incorrect names and was stupefied to discover that the priest class of political correctness is just as bad if not worse. The harsh realities that aren't solved by political correctness are the reasons some people are here and I would be surprised if those who've suffered under the abusive boot of the busiest of self-righteous hypocrites find any solace in having people pretend the world is other than it is during their most real moments of despair. But don't worry: that boot has been blessed (for a small fee of course), so all in the cosmos is as it should be. Because hindu brahminism is wrong even though its more sinister global version is law. Thanks for the "help".

 

[bijou]

i feel like the way people view political-correctness as a concept nowadays is dumb, because it is a constantly changing thing. depending on the point in history, geographic location etc. being politically correct can mean something very different.

the definition is:
"conforming to a belief that language and practices which could offend political sensibilities[…]should be eliminated"

the definition alone can be very flexible, especially when u consider political climates at different points in human history, and the use of the word throughout. at a certain point, in the states, it'd be quite politically-incorrect to say u think the ussr has done good things. whereas in the ussr it was quite politically-correct to do anything for the party. at another point in time it was politically-incorrect to say you don't like the war in iraq, your career tanked and you were also effectively "canceled" (see, the chicks criticize george bush). now it is politically correct to do xyz thing in xyz place, in another however many years something else will come along.

although, people may call me a "pc nut libtard blah blah" for the things i personally believe in, i can acknowledge the concept is evolving always. what one person is offended by another, somewhere else, is not.

honestly, you say what you want, but don't be mad when i say you're dumb and don't want to associate with you.

 

[Nolan96]

"Both in moderation" is possible as a personal norm but impossible as a broad societal norm. You either have freedom of speech or you don't. And we don't, tragically.

 

[epic]

"Political correctness is fascism pretending to be manners." - George Carlin

 

[ClownW0rld]

Freedom of speech is the type of thing that must be absolute in practice. The minute you start restricting what can and can't be said, you are starting to fall down a very slippery slope. Censorship is a tool for evil.

 

[wait.what]

Please let me provide some perspective here. I spent a short time in the Soviet Union as a teenager back in the '80's. It was meant to be a very, very carefully curated tour in the spirit of glasnost. However, our translator managed to arrange for the teen daughter of a dissident family she had befriended to "coincidentally" be on a public bus at the same time as us American brats. The girl could not have afforded to be seen with us otherwise. Her name was Masha (rhymes with "Sasha"), and she sat next to me for a while. Her family were very devout Eastern Orthodox Christians, and weren't interested in hiding that fact. Even under Gorbachev's glasnost policy, the Soviet government was not okay with people believing there was a higher authority than the Supreme Soviet. As a result, Masha's parents were blackballed from most employment, and their family was very poor. Her parents also printed an illegal religious newspaper in their home, and passed it around secretly in their apartment building. That was an actively, materially dangerous thing to do. The worst fear of Masha and her younger siblings was that there would be a knock on the door in the middle of the night, and the secret police would take their parents away. The younger children would most likely have been distributed among orphanages, which not only still existed in the USSR in the 1980's, they still exist in Russia today. I don't know what they would have done with the teenage kids like Masha. Nothing good. The family badly wanted to emigrate, but the government wouldn't give them permission.

Now, those were people who did not have freedom of speech. They were also literally, actually forbidden to go around saying "Merry Christmas," for that matter. Or any other religious message.

By contrast, people living in the decadent West who complain they have no freedom of speech are generally mad because somebody yelled at them on Twitter. No one actually goes to prison for doing "un-PC" things like being a white person using the n-word, or misgendering and deadnaming trans people, or spreading conspiracy theories about how the Chinese, or the Jews, or the Muslims, cooked up covid in their basements and are spreading it deliberately. Saying any of that shit is pretty rude, and in the case of accusing various minorities of being intentional plague carriers it's irresponsible, but none of it will result in being spirited away in the night by the secret police. It'll just be bitchy internet people telling you to shut up. After which you are welcome to tell them to shut up. Then you can all go "I know you are, but what am I?" until you all expire in a fit of pique, or until the Earth becomes uninhabitable. Whichever comes first.

And that is why I have largely abandoned social media. Where I'm from, we have robust protections for freedom of speech (yay!), but no one has anything remotely interesting to say (boo!).

 

[epic]

No one actually goes to prison for doing "un-PC"

It doesn't have to get as bad as going to prison before being called out.
Even if people are rude they should be allowed to express themselves . Not letting people speak their minds because the majority find it rude is tyrannical and violates an individuals freedom of speech which is worse than an individual being rude .

By contrast, people living in the decadent West who complain they have no freedom of speech are generally mad because somebody yelled at them on Twitter.

I bet there are people like that but there is also a serious undermining of peoples freedom of speech by big tech companies in USA .
Suppressing the Hunter Biden laptop story (story which later turned out to be true) and thus interfering in the election.
Censoring Lab leak theory for corona (turns out there is a chance for the story to be true.)
Removing POTUS from the platform and arbitrarily reinstating his account when their business started to tank (talking about fb, instagram) .

Censorship of people doubting election ballots.
Censorship of people doubting the vaccines .
Even if the above 2 stories were fake , in a free country you are allowed to express opinions which the majority doesn't agree. That's democracy 101. Moreover you are giving social media companies power over distribution of news . If you are a journalist and tomorrow uncover that there is something wrong with the elections or the vaccines , social media orgs due to their ideological bias will censor and worse would ban the journalist.

 

[bijou]

By contrast, people living in the decadent West who complain they have no freedom of speech are generally mad because somebody yelled at them on Twitter.

yep, pretty much!

the state politicians who want to criminalize drag shows and trans medical care in the u.s. are arguably doing more to suppress freedom of speech and expression. which is more than someone with an anime icon on twitter ever will.

 

[Disappointered]

I should remember to get around to reading Sohlzhenitsyn if I have time before I ctb. I gather he had some choice opinions.

It's not being spirited away by secret police but it's more than people telling you to shut up on the internet for "irresponsible" expressions of opinion (Kanye West found out the hard way). It's people being vilified and in some cases losing their jobs and being blacklisted due to pressure groups and/or being fined or sued.

People have also gone to prison in several European countries for providing rational defenses of "illegal" beliefs about historical events pertaining to Jews and/or theories of history attributing unflattering historical trends or events to co-ordinated planned behaviour by Jews. People have been imprisoned or pursued for hard time for making gestures that became ostensibly illegal due to being used to express resistance against perceived abuses from Jews. In Germany a lawyer isn't even allowed to defend their client on the substance of the "illegal" opinions or they themselves will and have been jailed. Application of the laws of canada and the US have been abused, presumably at the behest of certain Jews (and with little to zero opposition voiced among Jews in general), to place a thought criminal in solitary confinement for two years before being imprisoned in Germany. People communicating "irresponsibly" or communicating "illegal beliefs" about immigration or the influence of Jews have been penalized in canada in all of the above forms (not to mention the occasional physical assault or firebombing) including actual jail. In the past I would have defended the US as the last bastion of free speech but apparently some US states have enacted laws penalizing people or businesses who support the BDS movement, so even in the US it's a few steps beyond just being reprimanded on social media (social media that already engage in censorship). In fact, even prior to the anti-BDS laws people who had voiced "illegal in the West except in the US" opinions about Jewish influence had been pursued and done jail time for ostensibly violating tax laws.

I'm sure the Soviets were much worse (I'm keen on reading about that...) but it's still not what a lot of people would think of when they think of freedom in the West and in some cases the only difference is that non-secret police just arrest you during the day.

 

[noonipie]

ideally, both would be practiced in moderation. however, in legislation and in theory, freedom of speech should be protected over political correctness. it is highly important that we stop policing thoughts and speech of others first and foremost.