Hello! I’ve been searching for a reddit alternative, and yes, I’ve picked Lemmy and Raddle, but here’s the thing. My morbid curiosity is perked up, and a part of me wants to join the “free speech” alternatives, like Saidit, Poal, etc. What’s wrong with me that I want to join toxic places? I mean, yes I’ll find a whole new perspective (albeit wrong), on political topics, but a part of me wants to be the antagonist, and post lefty memes, and music with a left-leaning message (bands from r/rabm) I know that’s like kicking the hornet’s nest, so you don’t need to start in with “that’s a bad idea” I know it is. My main point/question is, is it wrong to join a site with potential hate speech? Does it make someone a bad person?

  • moreeni@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    wtf is freedom of speech if not a freedom of consequences from what you say?

    • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Freedom of speech is only freedom from government-sponsored consequences. As a member of We The People, you control the government. It is not democratic for the government to control you.

      Freedom of Speech does not impose a limitation on me, a private individual, from taking action against you on the basis of your speech. I’ll defend your right to say whatever the hell you want, but I don’t have to give you my soapbox to stand on.

    • stoy@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      There is a distinct difference.

      Freedom of speach means that the government can’t punnish you for talking shit, except in limited circumstances.

      Freedom of consequences from what you say, means that no one should be allowed to let what your say affect them in any way, this means that no one would be allowed to be offended by what you might say, nor that they would be allowed to act on such offence.

      In a functional society you want to have freedom of speach, but not freedom of consequences from what you say. This allows you to express opposing views in mostly resonable ways.

      • pmk@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        As long as the consequences are words and non-violent actions. Advocating violence as a consequence for someone expressing an idea is imho dangerous and should be avoided.

        • umbrella@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          yes, but words that incite violence are also very dangerous. there is a line to thread here.

          case in point: i don’t think goebbels actually directly harmed anyone, but his speech caused quite a lot of suffering, violence and death. his speech should absolutely not be rebutted with ‘just words’, there must be actual consequences to what he did.

          on top of it we live in a world where his propaganda techniques are still used for harm.

        • umbrella@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          it is dangerous, but so is speech that incites violence even if the perpetrator himself isn’t directly doing it. its a fine line to tread.

          case in point: i don’t think goebbels ever directly killed or harmed anyone, but his speech caused a lot of death and suffering, and someone like him should absolutely not be dealt with just words. keep in mind his propaganda techniques are still alive today.

        • stoy@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          The limited restrictions in the US is that you can’t for example yell “Fire!” in a room to try and cause panic.

          Here in Sweden, we also have hate speech laws, which basically comes down to “You can’t incite violence toward an ethnic group”

        • Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          It’s actually quite a common view outside of the USA, in my experience. Even the “limited restrictions” for governments to arrest you over speech can be quite wide, there are a lot of people in the world that want to ban blasphemy for instance (of their specific religion).

    • Zagorath@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      People telling you you’re and arsehole and treating you like what arsehole is then expressing their freedom of speech.

      It’s also a consequence of your speech.

      • moreeni@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        That’s fair but I don’t think there’s much freedom of speech if someone will murder you for what you’ve said

          • moreeni@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            That’s a possible outcome that I subconciously included in the list of consequences

              • moreeni@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                6 months ago

                No reason? Being murdered is still a consequence, isn’t it? Why wouldn’t I include it?

                • Zagorath@aussie.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Because “a consequence” doesn’t mean “any and every possible consequence anyone could think up”.

                  • moreeni@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    6 months ago

                    So a consequence isn’t a term to describe consequences, according to you. OK, I seem to get it now.