The end of free speech?

[Ori37]

We seem to be moving towards a culture of criticism which is so prevalent it's threatening to end freedom of speech and honest opinion. You can't post anything on Social Media without your comments being immediately perceived as purposefully hostile, and individuals are torn to shreds for the most innocuous things.

Jokes or light-hearted attempts at humour are taken literally. You only have to read a few threads on MN for examples. People are so busy troll-hunting they forget why they signed up in the first place.

Are people really so easily offended and quick to anger? If not, what is this new and emerging trend to attack and publicly denounce people who have no obvious malintent whatsoever? Where is the critical objectiveness, the desire for good, honest debate? It seems to have been replaced by the immediate desire to apportion blame for imagined insults.

What concerns me is the root cause for this hostile culture. People seem angry, and dissatisfied on a deep and collective level. There's an article in the news today about public figures who have signed an open letter denouncing the restriction of debate. It makes interesting reading.

Individuals can easily lose their jobs for saying something on Social Media that is taken the wrong way and wasn't meant to cause offence, academics and professionals are called into disciplinaries for quoting the wrong thing, places like MN which should be a safe space for a lot of parents to sound out their concerns and give advice are increasingly under threat by this hostile culture.

Whatever you say, however you say it, whoever you are, there will be someone who takes your comments personally, or reads bad intent where none was meant - despite the fact that in the majority of instances, it's blatantly clear that comments are innocent.

I'm all for a healthy, robust debate, and don't mind being disagreed with. But nowadays people forget the "debate" part and replace it with personal attacks, and things very quickly escalate into petty insults being flung. Original requests for help are ignored, the focus slips onto a perceived insult, hostile exchanges are undertaken, more individuals jump on the bandwagon and there it is, the demise of free speech.

AIBU to wonder where this will end up? What do you think? (No insults please! I'm not insulting anybody.)

@DeeCeeCherry

I notice free speech is certainly beneficial for those who want to insult and demean people calling them racists without any reason and for posts that had nothing to do with race. It obviously Ok for you for cause offence but not others eh?

Of course BLM would come up. Thats on of the lively subjects of debate on the matter of free speech. When theres been no racist comments at all to complain that people are being racist is well out of line.

But hey, free speech and all, not bad when its you that wants to benefit.

Free speech is not about wanting to say something specific it is about having the right to say anything-even if it offends - and wanting the same for others. Yes, I do want right wing people to express their views openly so that I can argue and engage with them; I do want racists to articulate their views so that I can expose the weaknesses in their understanding; I want sexists to say what they think so that I can prove them wrong. I don’t want people to feel afraid to state their views because this spreads from offensive things to mainstream and perfectly normal facts and opinions. And we end up where we are now. With reasonable people afraid of the consequences of saying reasonable things even in discussion forums.

Section 5 offenses are used by the police to shutdown free speech. There is a perfect example of the police state. It must be repealed!

You can't have a debate these days without being accused of something. You can't comment, even on personal matters, without someone, somewhere criticism you for being ageist/sexist/racist etc etc.

I agree, and if you can’t be accused directly then you can always be found guilty of ‘dog whistles’. It’s a great and all powerful accusation - “you didn’t any anything but I know exactly what you’re thinking and it must be wrong”.

In Scotland the new Hate Crimes and Public Order Bill will create new offences which may well inhibit freedom of speech. The draft Bill contains a freedom of expression ‘carve out’ for the offences relating to religion and sexual orientation so that you can’t be treated as having committed an offence by reason only that you have criticised religion, religious practices, sexual conduct etc. However there is no such carve out from the offence in respect of criticism/ comment in relation to the characteristic of transgender identity. So there could be some strange results. Eg in Scotland there was a recent ‘stromash’ (good Scottish word) when a SNP MP took a drag queen along to read to young children in primary school. If something like this was to happen again after the Bill passed in to law, what would happen to the protesting parents / media comment etc. ? If they commented adversely on the basis of the cross dressing element that might well be criminal, but if they criticised eg the sexualised nature of the presentation or homosexuality generally that might be fine under the freedom of speech carve out. Seems odd and inconsistent. If transgender status is innate so any challenge in respect of that is regarded as offensive and potentially stirring up hate and criminal under this new legislation, why is criticism/adverse comment in respect of sexual orientation (which most people think is innate) allowed in terms of the freedom of speech carve out?
As drafted the bill really has a hierarchy of protected characteristics - homosexuality seems to be lower down than transgender identity and sex doesn’t feature.
The Justice Committee has called for views on the Bill by 24 July so please comment if you would like to do so on freedom of speech grounds or otherwise. I can’t post a link but a google of Scottish Parliament Hate Crimes Bill should get you to the relevant place. My own view is that the new stirring up hatred offences should be dropped altogether but if not, the most desirable fallback would be to extend the freedom of speech carve outs to the other characteristics too.

I posted a brief post about the silencing and harassment of Raquel Rosario Sanchez above and for some reason it has been hidden for more then five hours by MN. Very odd.

There seem to have been a surprising amount of comments from you and PPs agreeing with you, OP, given you don't have free speech anymore. How much more would you have said before your free speech was removed?

There seem to have been a surprising amount of comments from you and PPs agreeing with you, OP, given you don't have free speech anymore. How much more would you have said before your free speech was removed?

Do you honestly think many of the posters on here would have expressed the views they have done if this was not an anonymous Internet forum? Have you seen what happens to public figures if they declare that biological sex is a real thing or that going on a about white privilege is not a useful way of tackling racism? The only people capable of ‘getting away’ with saying such heretical things and keeping their jobs are those already tarred with the Nazi brush - such as writers for Spiked or DJs on Talk Radio.

TheReal, there seem to be quite a lot of people IRL saying both those things and they all seem to have jobs beyond shock jocks.

Now my views are a little tempered by the unrepresentative sample of people I know IRL. Every single person I know IRL saying those things are the ones who for many years have frequently given massive offence to all and sundry and never being able to 'take it' themselves.

I agree @Ori37 I’m always worried that I’m going to offend someone but then I keep saying to myself ‘why is their opinion more important than mine?’ They agree with trans, I don’t. So there. I said it. I want free speech but don’t feel I have it or am allowed it.

Comment is Free as long as it is uncontentious.

Do you honestly think many of the posters on here would have expressed the views they have done if this was not an anonymous Internet forum? Have you seen what happens to public figures if they declare that biological sex is a real thing or that going on a about white privilege is not a useful way of tackling racism?

Quite. In fact even if you dare to defend the freedom of speech of people who hold "problematic" opinions you may find yourself living with the “consequences”...

thepostmillennial.com/canadian-literary-editor-fired-after-supporting-free-speech/?__twitter_impression=true

medium.com/@dctvbot/i-regret-nothing-c05401636032

Well, if the G-word is prepared to publish it then it must be true...

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/11/the-spectre-of-censorship-and-intolerance-stalks-todays-left

Vitriolic self righteousness on both left and right of the political spectrum - and it's threatening to tear society apart.

^^This seems so true

Everyone feels they have a "right" to not be offended with a need to feel "safe" emotionally. There is an element of manipulative bullying and silencing.

You are absolutely right.

The possibility of offending someone shouldn't ever supercede the freedom of a person to say what they like.
No matter how offensive.

Who starts dictating what is and isn't offensive? Where do you draw the line?

It's a slippery slope.

Take comedy for example, everyone and everything is fair game no matter how offensive and quite rightly so.

Don't like something, look away.

Very very few people “cancelled” or “called out” on social media experience any real world repercussions

People are losing their jobs over this. We have the police visiting people in their homes on the basis of a twitter complaint. Telling people "you did nothing illegal, but we're here to tell you not to do it again"

The consequence of speech should be more speech (or legal action by the police if it constitutes a crime) Not a group orchestrating complaints and allegations against you to employer, customers and landlord until you are fired and silenced.

Sometimes the people doing the firing don't want to, but they can't afford to become the next target.

A woman appealing her lost position had her crowdfunder removed because the same people who wanted her fired didn't think she should be allowed to appeal.

Billy Bragg has said that young people today think that accountability is more important than free speech. What he doesn't understand is that he's going to get the same treatment. The people who have really been getting it are the Radical Feminists because of their attitudes towards trans women and the pro-Palestinian people because they are perceived to be antisemitic.

That's why Corbyn got really done over. Was not Bragg a Corbyn supporter? I wonder what we would uncover if someone did a thorough look at his social media comments over the last 10 years. I'm sure they would come up with something. It's people like him who are the most vulnerable.

Maybe he'll change his mind then like the feminist author Megan Murphy. She was banned from twitter and has now written a good essay defending free speech.
www.feministcurrent.com/2019/06/25/its-time-for-feminists-and-the-left-to-support-free-speech-before-its-too-late/

www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/jasmine-archer-jones-miss-swimsuit-uk-stripped-title-a4501236.html

Does this is adds anything to this friendly discussion?

I have no view and neutral on this but curious in the light of views expressed on this topic so far.

However there is bound to be polarised views as I suppose it’s all part of diversity and so intelligent people (not intended as intelligent ist or ism) able to agree to disagree if necessary rather than a negative lose lose total sum loss.

Be gentle spread peace, respect and tolerance not ignorance and hate as Covid is giving the world enough of a mental and physical challenge already! It would be nice to unite and focus minds and energy in tackling the common enemy that of the pandemic and pending economic and humanitarian disaster.