undefined | Better HN

0 pointsbkeroack8y ago0 comments

This is a false argument. Speech is not "harming someone".

This is a tactic that seems to be more common recently: trying to equate expression of ideas with violence, and then claiming that violence is acceptable to suppress this supposed "speech violence".

0 comments

4 comments · 2 top-level

glenndebacker8y ago· 2 in thread

As somebody who has been battling a whole part of his life against PTSD I find it very troubling that people in 2017 still believe that bs that you can only harm people when you use fysical violence.

bkeroackOP8y ago

My sympathies for your condition, but I regret to inform you that the rest of the world does not revolve around you and your symptoms. Speech is not violence harming you, however much you might want to claim it as such.

nippples8y ago

I agree. The job witch-hunt at conservatives in the IT industry is pretty harmful too.

walterstucco8y ago

> This is a false argument. Speech is not "harming someone".

it is indeed!

"This article reflects the tremendous interest in the freedom of information in the postwar years. The Soviet Union proposed an amendment that would deny this right to Nazi and fascist groups. This forced the drafters to discuss the question of how tolerant an already just society should be of intolerant groups like Nazis. Taking together Articles 19 and 7, they solved the dilemma by giving everyone two rights: the right to free speech (subject to the limitation of Article 29) and the right to be protected against hate speech."

they're granted by The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/projects/mmt/udhr/article_19.html

"Any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law."

https://www.article19.org/pages/en/hate-speech-more.html

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse