5 ms·

Social media ban for under 16s is the latest half witted idea enacted by the government here.

throwawaythekey 2y ago
This week we've had the federal laws strengthend to a one year minimum jail time for nazi salutes. I think saying "punch a nazi" unironically could now also get you a year in jail, but I'm not sure about that one.
- Juliate 2y ago
  Oh, you feel the need to defend nazis?
  - throwawaythekey 2y ago
    No, the neo-nazis can defend themselves. I just support personal freedoms.
    - Juliate 2y ago
      You’re deflecting. As such you demonstrate that you will not be an ally in case of a surge of unethical behavior. The point isn’t for nazis to defend themselves - it is to defeat them while you can.
      - throwawaythekey 2y ago
        I'm not deflecting I think we just have different points of view. > The point ... is to defeat them while you can. That can be your point, and with that framing almost anything is permissible! My point is generally to let free, open democracy run its course without putting our fingers on the scale too much. I'm not scared of people doing a salute in the style of a movement that's been dead for almost a century. I'm not scared of communists flags or chants, or people chanting from the river to the sea. I think it's all healthy as long as it's non violent. The argument that it leads to violence is not logically sound and very minority reportesque.
        Juliate 2y ago
        > The argument that it leads to violence is not logically sound and very minority reportesque. That a nazi salute, corroborated with converging political views…? You obviously don’t understand, don’t see how things happen. Or you do, and you know downplaying “nazi wannabees” is part of the game. It’s not about being scared but principled: an open democracy does not tolerate ideas going against its very foundations: it makes sure these are, expressed maybe, but kept in a very strict perimeter which they ought no get out from.
        throwawaythekey 2y ago
        We don't ban Maoists or Stalinists or Mussolini style facists. We don't ban Napoleonics or Confederates. After WW2 there was a period of strong Jewish support for nazi rights. Were they not an open democracy? Is the risk in 2025 stronger than what they faced? I don't know really, is it that every era needs a boogeyman or is it just that we are on a grand cycle away from liberality? Both maybe?
        Juliate 2y ago
        We don't? Maybe you don't. From where I am (France), maoists, stalinists, mussolinists, napoleonics or confederates are pretty badly considered, maybe only considered weird and silly as long as they are just spouting vague theory stuff or giving some substance to the conversation. But as soon as they associate their "thing" to a violent/segregationist personality/behaviour, you can be certain that they are banned, and in no gentle manners. Wow, I don't know either. Saying nazis could be sort of boogeyman or victims?... that tolerating nazis would be liberal? Wow. Sounds like a line from "OSS 117: Cairo, Nest of Spies". You seem not to understand how a society works or what liberal even means... A liberal cannot tolerate ideas that are explicitly against tolerance, as those lead to illiberal behaviours. The best illustration of it is the actual suppression of speech that is happening in the USA, by the very people that reclaimed freedom of speech. Or again, you do know. Either way, you're certainly not in the middle, you're actually supporting the violent ones to be violent, asking the ones reacting to that violence to accept it as it is. Not too good looking.
alt227 2y ago
Banning Social Media for under 16s is a great idea. Hopefully other countries follow soon.

This week we've had the federal laws strengthend to a one year minimum jail time for nazi salutes. I think saying "punch a nazi" unironically could now also get you a year in jail, but I'm not sure about that one.

Juliate 2y ago
Oh, you feel the need to defend nazis?
- throwawaythekey 2y ago
  No, the neo-nazis can defend themselves. I just support personal freedoms.
  - Juliate 2y ago
    You’re deflecting. As such you demonstrate that you will not be an ally in case of a surge of unethical behavior. The point isn’t for nazis to defend themselves - it is to defeat them while you can.
    - throwawaythekey 2y ago
      I'm not deflecting I think we just have different points of view. > The point ... is to defeat them while you can. That can be your point, and with that framing almost anything is permissible! My point is generally to let free, open democracy run its course without putting our fingers on the scale too much. I'm not scared of people doing a salute in the style of a movement that's been dead for almost a century. I'm not scared of communists flags or chants, or people chanting from the river to the sea. I think it's all healthy as long as it's non violent. The argument that it leads to violence is not logically sound and very minority reportesque.
      - Juliate 2y ago
        > The argument that it leads to violence is not logically sound and very minority reportesque. That a nazi salute, corroborated with converging political views…? You obviously don’t understand, don’t see how things happen. Or you do, and you know downplaying “nazi wannabees” is part of the game. It’s not about being scared but principled: an open democracy does not tolerate ideas going against its very foundations: it makes sure these are, expressed maybe, but kept in a very strict perimeter which they ought no get out from.
        throwawaythekey 2y ago
        We don't ban Maoists or Stalinists or Mussolini style facists. We don't ban Napoleonics or Confederates. After WW2 there was a period of strong Jewish support for nazi rights. Were they not an open democracy? Is the risk in 2025 stronger than what they faced? I don't know really, is it that every era needs a boogeyman or is it just that we are on a grand cycle away from liberality? Both maybe?
        Juliate 2y ago
        We don't? Maybe you don't. From where I am (France), maoists, stalinists, mussolinists, napoleonics or confederates are pretty badly considered, maybe only considered weird and silly as long as they are just spouting vague theory stuff or giving some substance to the conversation. But as soon as they associate their "thing" to a violent/segregationist personality/behaviour, you can be certain that they are banned, and in no gentle manners. Wow, I don't know either. Saying nazis could be sort of boogeyman or victims?... that tolerating nazis would be liberal? Wow. Sounds like a line from "OSS 117: Cairo, Nest of Spies". You seem not to understand how a society works or what liberal even means... A liberal cannot tolerate ideas that are explicitly against tolerance, as those lead to illiberal behaviours. The best illustration of it is the actual suppression of speech that is happening in the USA, by the very people that reclaimed freedom of speech. Or again, you do know. Either way, you're certainly not in the middle, you're actually supporting the violent ones to be violent, asking the ones reacting to that violence to accept it as it is. Not too good looking.

alt227 2y ago

Banning Social Media for under 16s is a great idea. Hopefully other countries follow soon.