Should we have freedom of speech or censorship on certain topics - With Norbert the tiger as a cohost

[Gog & Magog]

The only reason troons, niggers and their masters aren't being strung from lamp posts as we speak is because of various forms of censorship and nuspeak.

Nobody here is stopping you from doing it. Go fuck around and find out.

 

[Grub]

Until FBI shows up on your doorstep for fedposting

The FBI can eat a bag of dicks.

 

[TATE MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOODE!!]

Blahblahblag

I'm gonna exercise my freedom of speech to say you sound like a raging faggot.

 

[isalaide]

so if Biden and his handlers win, Gorsuch and Thomas being as old as they are... the jig is about up regardless.

Neil Gorsuch is 56. Barring misadventure or sudden illness, he must reasonably expect to live another four years? He's two years younger than Brett Kavanaugh.

 

[Higgs Bonbon]

Nobody here is stopping you from doing it. Go fuck around and find out.

Okay, so I go on a killing spree, targeting... I dunno, discord groomers. You know what'll happen? The news will report a string of senseless violence perpetuated against the LGBTLMNOP2QA+ community with no mention of the boykisser discords, the swapping of CSAM or the sheer amount of abuse happening. I will be put in the books as the alt right nazi chud preventing young queers from discovering themselves.

That's censorship.

 

[Norbert the Tiger]

Neil Gorsuch is 56. Barring misadventure or sudden illness, he must reasonably expect to live another four years? He's two years younger than Brett Kavanaugh.

You are right, it is Alito. Corrected. Point stands though.

 

[Teghern]

Censorship works if done correctly and done in tandem with a minimally competent public education and propaganda campaign. Americans in particular like to carry on about the Streisand Effect or Tipper Gore, but that is because censorship efforts were not really censorship efforts. Germany's censorship laws are the reason why the far-right has not risen to much greater prominence. Censorship works, both by limiting availability of harmful or subversive content AND by creating social stigma. Consider most people just go with whatever the prevalent, dominant viewpoint is, as demonstrated by the fact that Brown v Board of Education, Roe, Obergefell were all unpopular when first handed down, but simply handing down those decisojns without serious opposition gave them the appearance of authority, and the sheep most folllowed right along.

Censorship "works" but has limits, case in point; samizdat. Look at how ideologically captured former commieland was by shock therapy for a few years.
I would argue Germany's lack of rightist relevance is due to active suppression more than basic "you can't say that", that and it's status as defeated ideology, same reasoning why nobody backs the likes of poujadism or Irish unionism; losers are never popular and it has been a long time since anything right wing won anything in krautland.

A lot of justification for free speech stems from John Stuart Mill's On Liberty, but I marvel that anyone can take that seriously. Just take a quick view of American popular culture and ask whether the best ideas win out. Some leftist pig opined that Avengers is in effect the "American Iliad." The sitcom Friends, vulgar gangster rap music, Katy Perry. The list goes on. Nazi Germany had Faust, Beethoven, Wagner, Hamlet. Victorian Britain had censorship but produced objectively superior literature and ideas.

Nobody gives a shit about dead rich guys from 200 years ago trying to slap an intellectual lineage on anything is doomed because most people lack the capacity to think beyond last decade nevermind last era, it is tradition now though so it is what people know so they're loathe to change it because at heart we're all proto-boomers.
Your whining about popular degenerate culture is an opinion I share but you have to bear in mind the exact same sentiment has been held since the days of Sumer, new stuff always sucks. Just don't pay it any energy and time will take care of it, Shakespeare wasn't the only playwright but history only gives us the good stuff.

- Even if I agree with the idea that freedom of speech is some sort of individual human right, the thought leaders behind these ideals had no way of anticipating things like multinational conglomerates concentrated in the hands of elite, hostile ruling class. Disney is not a person, despite the legal fiction that currently rules as stating it is so.

- Many things protected protected by the First Amendment are not really speech. Pornography is not speech, but a vice and should be comparable to prostitution, a form of sexual stimulation. It does not connote any intelligible idea or concept. Before the 60s, there was no controversy whatsoever that the 1st Amendment did not protect such content.

American "law" is the consequence of writing shit down instead of relying on something of actual substance like popular will or parliamentary sovereignty, you did it to yourselves, utterly talmudic tier jurisprudence.

I would go beyond that and assert things that promote race-mixing should be banned. Consider how Japan saved herself from European colonzation, she expelled all European missionaries, crucifying some to make an (mostly European missionaries and some. Many misguided would say that the "human rights" of the Japanese were "violated" but in fact it spared Japan from colonization.

This is foolishness, Japan was never under threat of being colonized (Cambodia though maybe), you've been watching too much Shogun.
What Nippon went through was a warring states period that many countries have had, England had a quite short one with the three kingdom wars during which comparable actions were also taken against designated subversive foes (Irish and Catholics for us), totally a political thing we can safely leave muh rayce out of it IMO.

it is pretty clear that the Cultural Marxists only intended to use these free speech ideals subversively, invoking it before the march through the institutions was complete, only to pull it right out from under us once they achieved cultural and political dominance. Now that they have captured all the cultural and political centers of power, they no longer parrot these ideas. Note that three supreme court justices have indicated they would not regard socalled hate speech as constitutionally protected speech, so if Biden and his handlers win, Gorsuch and Thomas being as old as they are... the jig is about up regardless. So many who claim to be opposed to the left would not deign to restrict their "rights" even if they had an opportunity to do so. A major socalled conservative commentator has stated he would not prevent munchie parents for indoctrinating children with transgender bullshit, but would only prevent the surgeries (up until 18 ). FUCK THAT--transgenderism is wrong, and once there is political power and will to do so, anyone who touts those ideas should get beaten to death (think of that opening scene where the guard brutalizes that inmate), or far worse. Goons and stormtroopers and right-wing death squads. A similar position of absolute intolerance should and must be embraced for other things that are morally repugnant, including pop media that pushes misgenation or promotes ghetto black undertow "culture."

And now we get to the real meat, state power being used against me? how could this be?
Do you really not see that your declared enemies being out in the open is a good thing and that where it not for the protection of being theoretically allowed to do what you want they'd instead be simmering below?

 

[Norbert the Tiger]

The only reason troons, niggers and their masters aren't being strung from lamp posts as we speak is because of various forms of censorship and nuspeak

The only reason this characterizes the society we find ourselves in is because we did not censor and ban The Frankfurt School when it was imported from Nazi Germany. Those elements, and worse things that originated from it, were made possible because things were tolerated, it is that tolerance that made the civilizational collapse we see today possible.

Edit--

This is foolishness, Japan was never under threat of being colonized (Cambodia though maybe), you've been watching too much Shogun.

Ever hear of the San Felipe incident?

 

[Higgs Bonbon]

The only reason this characterizes the society we find ourselves in is because we did not censor and ban The Frankfurt School when it was imported from Nazi Germany. Those elements, and worse things that originated from it, were made possible because things were tolerated, it is that tolerancr what made the civilizational collapse we see today possible.

Why censor them when we could have just killed them and shown what they advocated for? That's like saying a criminal's crimes should be censored before the jury.

 

[isalaide]

You are right, it is Alito. Corrected. Point stands though.

I definitely have Thomas in the death race over Alito. Also an outside bet on Surprise Cancer for Roberts.

I would prefer it to be Thomas as he is a convert and therefore inherently untrustworthy as opposed to those born to the faith. Gorsuch hangs out with the Anglicans, but everyone knows they're just Henry VIII Catholics and he bears the moral and religious training of his Jesuit education still.

 

[Cheeseknife]

For any Christians in the thread, remember that God himself is very much against our modern conceptions of "freedom of speech" and requires varying degrees of censorship.
Much if this is implied by all the commandments, but at least 2 of them are pretty direct:

You shall have no other gods before Me.​

You shall not make idols.​

>You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.

Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.​

Honor your father and your mother.​

You shall not murder.​

You shall not commit adultery.​

You shall not steal.​

>You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

You shall not covet.​

Just and FYI if you think Jesus Christ was some kind of free speech advocate. He wasn't.
#1, #2, #4, and #5 all imply compelled speech or censorship.

 

[Norbert the Tiger]

I definitely have Thomas in the death race over Alito. Also an outside bet on Surprise Cancer for Roberts.

I would prefer it to be Thomas as he is a convert and therefore inherently untrustworthy as opposed to those born to the faith. Gorsuch hangs out with the Anglicans, but everyone knows they're just Henry VIII Catholics and he bears the moral and religious training of his Jesuit education still.

The point is tangential though. Law is downstream from culture, and the view that hate speech etc should not be protected is mainstream in academic and cultural centers. The longer normy conserative types harp about "muh constitution," the more and more leftist hegemony is a fait accompli. There still may be time, but you are not going to win by voting your way out, and "respecting other people's rights," particularly when the other side only gives lip service to these things to lull their marks into a false sense of security.

 

[Teghern]

For any Christians in the thread, remember that God himself is very much against our modern conceptions of "freedom of speech" and requires varying degrees of censorship.
Much if this is implied by all the commandments, but at least 2 of them are pretty direct:

You shall have no other gods before Me.​

You shall not make idols.​

>You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.

Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.​

Honor your father and your mother.​

You shall not murder.​

You shall not commit adultery.​

You shall not steal.​

>You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

You shall not covet.​

Just and FYI if you think Jesus Christ was some kind of free speech advocate. He wasn't.
#1, #2, #4, and #5 all imply compelled speech or censorship.

Not that I care for the diktats of Semitic desert demons but I would contest that those are self-specific and don't imply anything beyoind what a good Christian should be doing as an individual, censorship as a power implies an authority above and the commandments are very much what you as an individual should be doing not what you should be doing to other people.

Ever hear of the San Felipe incident?

Lost in my mind which is why I brought up Cambodia, Expelling barbarians and massacring foreigners is just something warring states era countries do as a matter of course look at what happened to the French in Sicily for a more occidental example.
Don't get wrong if the Spaniards had the chance they totally would have tried just like they did in the Philippines and their Portubros did in Ceylon/Malacca/ a half hundred other places, they'd have never managed it in glorious nihon though is what I'm saying.

 

[Cheeseknife]

Not that I care for the diktats of Semitic desert demons but I would contest that those are self-specific and don't imply anything beyoind what a good Christian should be doing as an individual, censorship as a power implies an authority above and the commandments are very much what you as an individual should be doing not what you should be doing to other people.

Lost in my mind which is why I brought up Cambodia, Expelling barbarians and massacring foreigners is just something warring states era countries do as a matter of course look at what happened to the French in Sicily for a more occidental example.
Don't get wrong if the Spaniards had the chance they totally would have tried just like they did in the Philippines and their Portubros did in Ceylon/Malacca/ a half hundred other places, they'd have never managed it in glorious nihon though is what I'm saying.

A society or a group consists of individuals.

 

[Teghern]

A society or a group consists of individuals.

Yes and mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell, it's a 2000 year old text that's seen more censoring than probably any other it can mean whatever we want it to mean, it's value as something infallible is nil.

 

[ConsentAccidentVictimNo98]

Everyone here deserves a top hat.

 

[Cheeseknife]

Yes and mitochondria is the powerhouse of the cell, it's a 2000 year old text that's seen more censoring than probably any other it can mean whatever we want it to mean, it's value as something infallible is nil.

It was here before long before us and it will far outlast us.

 

[TATE MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOODE!!]

For any Christians in the thread, remember that God himself is very much against our modern conceptions of "freedom of speech" and requires varying degrees of censorship.
Much if this is implied by all the commandments, but at least 2 of them are pretty direct:

You shall have no other gods before Me.​

You shall not make idols.​

>You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.

Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.​

Honor your father and your mother.​

You shall not murder.​

You shall not commit adultery.​

You shall not steal.​

>You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

You shall not covet.​

Just and FYI if you think Jesus Christ was some kind of free speech advocate. He wasn't.
#1, #2, #4, and #5 all imply compelled speech or censorship.

God damn. Man I thought the other guy was a faggot but here's some fairy worshipping cocksucker who probably loved getting fucked in the ass by his priest while singing hymns to his favorite frictional hero.

 

[WelperHelper99]

It was here before long before us and it will far outlast us.

And? The commandments are meant for His followers. All of those you listed are personal choices. If you aren't religious it doesn't matter for you. CHOOSING to censor YOURSELF is different than censoring the world. The 1st amendment protects the right for me to follow the 10 commandmens or not as long as I don't push it on others.

 

[trash cat]

A lot of justification for free speech stems from John Stuart Mill's On Liberty, the Marketplace of Ideas in particular and the absurd notion that the best ideas always win out.

I agree with many of your points.

There can be no 'marketplace of ideas' in a reality where:

• Advertising has been perfected by merging neuroscience with extremely advanced and difficult-to-detect methods of manipulation.

• The CIA and other hostile groups utilize massive enterprises like Operation Mockingbird to manipulate public opinion (where the intelligence community embeds countless fake journalists at CNN and other media conglomerates)

• Everything that's the public sees and hears is controlled by a few powerful corporations like Blackrock and Vanguard, which are the largest shareholders in the major media companies, and comprise a dominant minority with malevolent aims and goals.







These are just a few items, but you can't have a 'marketplace of ideas' until these genies are put back into the bottle.

I have my doubts that Pandora's box can be unopened at all.