6 ms·

If you believe in civil liberties as rights and ideals, your belief shouldn't stop at borders.

• politician 10d ago
  [flagged]
  • vrganj 10d ago
    Do you think your country is the only one that thought of free speech? Your particular implementation is irrelevant, I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve by giving us a lecture on how some foreign country justifies their self-perception. That being said, it is somewhat humorous how you're confirming the stereotypes that apparently even that needs guns and violence over there somehow?
    • politician 10d ago
      [flagged]
      • Arainach 10d ago
        > Hmm, I would have expected more outrage from the US "free speech absolutists" over this US government decision The crowd that claims to be in favor of free speech should be in favor of free speech for everyone, not just US citizens. This thread isn't about the government - it's about how HN's very vocal "free speech" crowd are actually libertarians who want to say awful things and not get called out rather than people who stand up for the concept of free speech in general.
        • politician 10d ago
          Why is my position invalid? I'm in favor of the exact type of free speech provided by the Bill of Rights for citizens of the USA, of which I am one, and that I do not care about the fantastical universal "for everyone" form of free speech that is being pushed on HN? Let your own countries defend their own "free speech" rights. The UN cannot defend it for you, and you cannot defend it for yourself.
          • mitxela 10d ago
            So you only care about things that benefit you?
          • vrganj 10d ago
            So basically your position is imperialism mixed with some weird provincial fetishization of some document, not being pro free speech? And you wonder why people consider that both ugly and simultaneously ridiculous?
  • lokar 10d ago
    The Declaration of Independence, constitution and bill of rights aim to recognize and protect rights everyone is born with.
• xienze 10d ago
  Good point, we should also allow foreign organizations to contribute to US election campaigns and make Facebook ads because they might also believe in civil liberties as rights and ideals, uh... right?
  • mitxela 10d ago
    [dead]
  • Arainach 10d ago
    Money isn't speech.
    • x-complexity 10d ago
      As you said yourself: > > If you believe in civil liberties as rights and ideals, your belief shouldn't stop at borders. If you believe in civil liberties as rights and ideals, your belief shouldn't stop at money. Either the right extends everywhere, including money, or it doesn't.
      • Arainach 10d ago
        That doesn't follow. It's OK to say you wish a politician was dead. It's not OK to pay someone to kill them. It's OK to say that you support some criminal activity (let's say Luigi), but it's not OK to offer direct financial support for their crimes.
        • x-complexity 10d ago
          > It's OK to say you wish a politician was dead. It's not OK to pay someone to kill them. Both actions are equivalent, as such words are (social and/or political) capital bounties offered to the masses in return for fulfilling the death of said politician. Capital always exists, even in the form of words. To deny a variant of capital whilst allowing another variant is inconsistent/doublespeak. Just because it's not printed onto a piece of denominated paper, doesn't mean that such capital doesn't exist.