PC censorship vs debate and free speech, worrying trends.
Discussion
Spanna said:
Outside of universities there is no place to properly share your own free speech as it's all privately owned businesses that may do as they wish. They may turn off your account if they don't like it.
The problem now is even universities will shut down those with an unlikeable view point if pressured enough. Activist groups have wised up to it, they only need to mildly suggest a riot and the uni will shut it down on safety concerns.
Universities are where free speech and logic are already dead.The problem now is even universities will shut down those with an unlikeable view point if pressured enough. Activist groups have wised up to it, they only need to mildly suggest a riot and the uni will shut it down on safety concerns.
chrispmartha said:
All those people that think you're not allowed to say what you think, post what you think on here, it may get deleted but at least you will have said what you really think rather than saying you can't say what you think... the floor is yours
We have a number of competing systems and I believe without a shadow of doubt there is a superior system in every way. With years of social development and with facts and evidence its now obvious to me we have a winner. The other ways should be consigned to the history books and allowed to fail. You will always have fanatics clinging onto the restrictive controlling old systems. But in life we have winners and losers and the others are just losers. But I've always been a Android user and cant stand apples IOS and don't even get me start about Windows. Is this "growing trend of censorship" partly fanned by the fact there are now so many platforms for views to be expressed? Social media gives a voice to everyone - so the irrelevant nutters who would be unheard of in the past now have a chance to get their views out there. And the anonymity of the Internet lets many a coward express views/make threats that they would never do face to face.
I really don't know if censorship is any worse than it was, say, twenty years ago. And there has always been a PC viewpoint for as long as I can remember. I feel social media (including sites like this) has perhaps amplified some of the problems and drawbacks of us all having a voice.
I really don't know if censorship is any worse than it was, say, twenty years ago. And there has always been a PC viewpoint for as long as I can remember. I feel social media (including sites like this) has perhaps amplified some of the problems and drawbacks of us all having a voice.
Funk said:
Universities are where free speech and logic are already dead.
ThisHave a look at what is going on in American universities and tell me Universities have free speech.
Someone said earlier that MPs have the freest speech. But this is not for the most part a legal issue. It is about people expressing an opinion, or even basic scientific fact, then a storm of people claiming it is an "ism".
It has cost people their reputations, even their jobs and careers, and it seems to be getting worse every year.
A good article I read said that the "liberal" part of "liberal democracy" had separated from democracy, in that they no longer believed in it. It seems clear to me that those who call themselves "liberals" don't actually believe in liberalism either.
Colonial said:
Free speech doesn't mean it is free from consequences. Or free from others criticising it.
It does seem like some of the proponents of "it's political correctness gone mad" just want their opinions, and only their opinions, heard.
Indeed. Poor misunderstood darlings. Haymarket is oppressing them as well as 'MSM', 'elites', 'lefties', muslamic ray guns. You'd think they'd get tired of carrying victim card, but you'd be wrong. It does seem like some of the proponents of "it's political correctness gone mad" just want their opinions, and only their opinions, heard.
Edited by jjlynn27 on Friday 18th August 06:38
Colonial said:
By consequences I mean people disagreeing with it. Arguing with it.
Just sayiing it's "free speech innit" to shut off any attempt to provide a counter is just, well, pathetic, hypocritical and juvenile.
You are almost alone in that use for the word "consequences". Just sayiing it's "free speech innit" to shut off any attempt to provide a counter is just, well, pathetic, hypocritical and juvenile.
It is normally used as a vague threat, followed by agitation to have dissenting posters banned from the thread or the site. Then we get a little round of back slapping in an echo chamber no longer worth reading. That, I would say, is pathetic and juvenile. Just dumb tribalism. And - of course - a form of censorship. Not debate. That is "consequences" as it is normally meant.
Thorodin said:
In the current news the resignation of Sarah Champion, an excellent MP, wasn't a resignation. It was a constructive dismissal because of, in her words, '...the offence caused by the extremely poor choice of words..' (in my view they were extremely accurate words and long overdue). The great leader Corbyn demanded her resignation because he feared the party might lose thousands of votes in her Labour constituency. So PC culture is in fact political expediency which from an alleged democrat is disgusting. But you won't hear that on our national favourite TV channel.
She wasn't attacked and then sacked because of what she said. She is one of the 80 (or so) MPs who went against Corbyn. That's why she walked. Corbyn was waiting for an excuse. Edited by Thorodin on Thursday 17th August 20:07
grumbledoak said:
You are almost alone in that use for the word "consequences".
It is normally used as a vague threat, followed by agitation to have dissenting posters banned from the thread or the site. Then we get a little round of back slapping in an echo chamber no longer worth reading. That, I would say, is pathetic and juvenile. Just dumb tribalism. And - of course - a form of censorship. Not debate. That is "consequences" as it is normally meant.
Ok, the left wing dominates Pistonheads and is trying to bring about a socialist state where we sit around and knit yoghurt. It is normally used as a vague threat, followed by agitation to have dissenting posters banned from the thread or the site. Then we get a little round of back slapping in an echo chamber no longer worth reading. That, I would say, is pathetic and juvenile. Just dumb tribalism. And - of course - a form of censorship. Not debate. That is "consequences" as it is normally meant.
Well done for derailing another thread.
Derek Smith said:
Thorodin said:
In the current news the resignation of Sarah Champion, an excellent MP, wasn't a resignation. It was a constructive dismissal because of, in her words, '...the offence caused by the extremely poor choice of words..' (in my view they were extremely accurate words and long overdue). The great leader Corbyn demanded her resignation because he feared the party might lose thousands of votes in her Labour constituency. So PC culture is in fact political expediency which from an alleged democrat is disgusting. But you won't hear that on our national favourite TV channel.
She wasn't attacked and then sacked because of what she said. She is one of the 80 (or so) MPs who went against Corbyn. That's why she walked. Corbyn was waiting for an excuse. Edited by Thorodin on Thursday 17th August 20:07
We have freedom of speech, being able to hop onto a computer and post and comment on this thread is testament to that.
Try doing that in China or North Korea or closer to home Turkey or Russia.
It's more about actions having consequences i.e. the recent Sarah Champion article, freedom of speech to post it, but where the consequences of her actions fair and proportionate?
Personally I don't think they were, but the freedom of speech was there to allow her to do so.
Try doing that in China or North Korea or closer to home Turkey or Russia.
It's more about actions having consequences i.e. the recent Sarah Champion article, freedom of speech to post it, but where the consequences of her actions fair and proportionate?
Personally I don't think they were, but the freedom of speech was there to allow her to do so.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff