5.8.2.4. Western democracies also censor subjects such as child porn and hate speech (西方民主国家也审查儿童色情和仇恨言论等主题)
First, child porn and hate speech are also banned in China, so shut up. every type of speech is less free in Why does Ciro Santilli say that China is a dictatorship? (中国不是独裁！).
Second, if you don’t think child porn should be banned, there isn’t much point in arguing with you.
Now, hate speech is a very complex subject. Ciro Santilli (三西猴, anti-CCP fanatic, 反中共狂热, stupid cunt, 傻屄, CIA agent, CIA特工, 肏你妈的) does feel that we should be very careful when banning hate speech, and he is not sure if it should be banned at all, as perhaps it might just make matters worse.
But of course, there is also censorship in Western democracies, and there is a gray area between what should be censored or not.
Ciro Santilli (三西猴, anti-CCP fanatic, 反中共狂热, stupid cunt, 傻屄, CIA agent, CIA特工, 肏你妈的) only argues that there is on type of speech that must never ever be censored: political speech.
This way, the majority can always discuss and vote to change what can be censored or not.
In China, however, trying to discuss such changes in laws puts you in jail, so bad laws cannot be changed. This lack of freedom also gives the impression to many brainwashed Chinese that dicatorships are better because you see less conflict online. Which is great, until your human rights are violated, and you’ve got no one to talk to.
The lack of ability to discuss political problems leads to extremely serious problems:
-
Democracies have less corruption than dictatorships (民主国家的腐败比独裁国家少): politicians can censor anything bad that they did to stay in power
-
Why would democracy and freedom of speech make China less likely to start a war? (为什么民主和言论自由会让中国不太可能发动战争？): if the CCP leaders decide that a war must be made, everyone who opposes it will go to jail, and the war will be made
-
Most Chinese people don’t care about the minorities (大多数中国人不关心少数民族): if the CCP decides that some minority is a danger to their power, this minority gets fucked
Deciding on hate speech, means having to decide what level of hardcoreness we are willing to accept, and there is no clear right or wrong answer.
For example, which of the following do you think should be banned:
-
This scientific study suggests that white people do less well in IQ tests.
-
This scientific study suggests that black people do less well in IQ tests.
-
I’m an idiotic irrational racist and I dislike white/black people. I won’t kill them, but I dislike them, and I can’t change that, I’m really sorry.
-
Let’s all gather together and kill our black/white/gay/straight/Muslim/Christian neighbours tomorrow.
-
Let’s all gather together and kill our oppressive dictator/president tomorrow.
Ciro believes that none of the above should ever be censored, because any form of "hate-speech censorship" immediately opens a precedent for political censorship.
If someone is idiotic enough to organize illegal acts like hurting someone publicly before doing it, it will just make it easier for them to get caught.
And if its just empty words, just block those idiots to not see their posts, or downvotes their posts to reduce their impact.
And if the majority supports idiotic acts like killing someone because of their race, it will get done in a democracy regardless, because that’s what democracies do: they cater to what the majority wants.
There’s not point in censoring them. Such censorship only makes things worse, as the perpetrators will use that as publicity for their cause.
See also:
First, child porn and hate speech are also banned in China, so shut up. every type of speech is less free in Why does Ciro Santilli say that China is a dictatorship? (中国不是独裁！).
Second, if you don’t think child porn should be banned, there isn’t much point in arguing with you.
Now, hate speech is a very complex subject. Ciro Santilli (三西猴, anti-CCP fanatic, 反中共狂热, stupid cunt, 傻屄, CIA agent, CIA特工, 肏你妈的) does feel that we should be very careful when banning hate speech, and he is not sure if it should be banned at all, as perhaps it might just make matters worse.
But of course, there is also censorship in Western democracies, and there is a gray area between what should be censored or not.
Ciro Santilli (三西猴, anti-CCP fanatic, 反中共狂热, stupid cunt, 傻屄, CIA agent, CIA特工, 肏你妈的) only argues that there is on type of speech that must never ever be censored: political speech.
This way, the majority can always discuss and vote to change what can be censored or not.
In China, however, trying to discuss such changes in laws puts you in jail, so bad laws cannot be changed. This lack of freedom also gives the impression to many brainwashed Chinese that dicatorships are better because you see less conflict online. Which is great, until your human rights are violated, and you’ve got no one to talk to.
The lack of ability to discuss political problems leads to extremely serious problems:
-
Democracies have less corruption than dictatorships (民主国家的腐败比独裁国家少): politicians can censor anything bad that they did to stay in power
-
Why would democracy and freedom of speech make China less likely to start a war? (为什么民主和言论自由会让中国不太可能发动战争？): if the CCP leaders decide that a war must be made, everyone who opposes it will go to jail, and the war will be made
-
Most Chinese people don’t care about the minorities (大多数中国人不关心少数民族): if the CCP decides that some minority is a danger to their power, this minority gets fucked
Deciding on hate speech, means having to decide what level of hardcoreness we are willing to accept, and there is no clear right or wrong answer.
For example, which of the following do you think should be banned:
-
This scientific study suggests that white people do less well in IQ tests.
-
This scientific study suggests that black people do less well in IQ tests.
-
I’m an idiotic irrational racist and I dislike white/black people. I won’t kill them, but I dislike them, and I can’t change that, I’m really sorry.
-
Let’s all gather together and kill our black/white/gay/straight/Muslim/Christian neighbours tomorrow.
-
Let’s all gather together and kill our oppressive dictator/president tomorrow.
Ciro believes that none of the above should ever be censored, because any form of "hate-speech censorship" immediately opens a precedent for political censorship.
If someone is idiotic enough to organize illegal acts like hurting someone publicly before doing it, it will just make it easier for them to get caught.
And if its just empty words, just block those idiots to not see their posts, or downvotes their posts to reduce their impact.
And if the majority supports idiotic acts like killing someone because of their race, it will get done in a democracy regardless, because that’s what democracies do: they cater to what the majority wants.
There’s not point in censoring them. Such censorship only makes things worse, as the perpetrators will use that as publicity for their cause.
See also: