[Despanan]

Originally Posted by AshleyO

Do you think it's up to me to give you that answer? How exactly can I determine the damage of a racial slur? Perhaps they should be fined. How am I supposed to know as to the extent that the damage is caused by a racial slur? Obviously there's several levels of corrections that can be approached before I throw you into my gulags, Desp.

I'm trying to clarify what it means to you to be against free speech.

This doesn't even make any sense.

I'll explain:

I use Max Webber's definition for the state, as in "the state is the entity which manages to claim a monopoly on justified violence" ie: the police, the military, the judicial system.

The State is the mechanism which defends property, which defends the rich from the poor and the priviledged from the oppressed.

Generally, The State won't defend you unless you have property and privilege. If you have property an priviledge you generally don't have to worry as much about hate speech, as those who speak out against you don't have the power to make good on their threats.

Oh for fuck's sake. Will you at least realize that the concept of free speech doesn't even mean anything?

It means that the state has to, at least find a reasonable pretext to imprison and silence those who speak out against it. It's not perfect, or even particularly effective, but removing it vastly increases the power of The State, which would lead to GREATER direct minority oppression. It wouldn't lessen it.

What do you think the state is again? Force or government? Again, does force have to come from a blue uniform for it to be considered a state?

Government is the beurocracy. The state is the entity that monopolizes the legitimate use of force. It doesn't have to be police per se. But when you say you're against free speech it's commonly understood that you advocate deploying the state's violence against those who engage in speech you disagree with.

Have I misunderstood your position?

I beg to differ. A totalitarianism of the oppressed and the proletariat is very very different in function that a totalitarianism of the proprietors and bourgeois. If for example the governing model of OWS took over the US, their organ of force would be total. Sure, you wouldn't get thrown into the gulags, but I'm sure that under an OWS regime, there would be no place where one could get away with hate speech without a meaningful popular response.

Ehh, OWS by it's very nature doesn't take a position, so while I think aspects of the OWS modle would be useful, you wouldn't want to deploy it's too anti-state to be deployed as a totalitarian solution to hate speech.

Would you also be afraid of popular militias? Or a people's police?

Yes but for different reasons.

Why must the oppressed endure hate speech? Why must they even HAVE to contest with it at all?

Because we live in a world run on blood and hate.

No they don't. You don't know what reddit is like. You read the policy and then you ignore the very fact that there are subreddits such as "jailbait" and "creepershots" that are desperately defended because "freedom of speech". And the pisser is, IT IS FREEDOM OF SPEECH. Even if it was legislated against, we have a CULTISH cultural observance of freedom of speech. Even if the laws are in place to take shit like "jailbait" and "creepershots" down and even the hate speech seen in MRA subreddits; it doesn't change the culture that would still promote hate speech under the lofty ideal of freedom of speech. But then you'd quake in terror if somehow this observance of admitting that a subreddit opposes the freedom of speech goes beyond its nice and comfy little borders where everyone can continue with... you know, taking unwanted photographs of women in public to pornolize their image for later. The opposition to it is not due to wanting to strip people of the right to tell a truth or to know a truth if at least to borrow from what Alan was saying.

I really wonder why you bother with Reddit. It seems to really suck. In any case Reddit doesn't seem to understand what free speech is, nor what being against it entails.