• Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    8 months ago

    Bill of Rights says otherwise. We could just do what PLENTY of other democratic societies do and ban hate speech but then you get those slippery slope arguments. Somehow we can make inciting a riot or inducing panic illegal but not the Great Replacement Theory.

    • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Bill of Rights says otherwise

      Nope. The right to free speech doesn’t include the right to a platform to spew disinformation on.

      ban hate speech but then you get those slippery slope arguments

      Which are invalid, hence the Slippery slope fallacy . Hate speech is easy to identify and legislate against without banning legitimate speech. The people claiming otherwise tend to be people who routinely engage in hate speech and overly cautious neoliberals afraid of ever doing anything that could possibly be argued against in bad faith.

      • Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Nope. The right to free speech doesn’t include the right to a platform to spew disinformation on

        The government can’t remove you from a platform unless you’ve broken a law. That’s what I meant. Private companies on the other hand, that’s different.

        As for everything else I completely agree

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          8 months ago

          The government can’t remove you from a platform unless you’ve broken a law

          True, but nobody was suggesting that.

          Now that you mention it, though, repeatedly breaking laws against inciting violence DOES make that a legitimate course of action. As would banning hate speech and rigorously enforcing that ban.