Free Speech in the UK Gets Worse

a reply to: Kurokage

The only way to limit hate speech and propaganda is with more speech, freer speech, not censorship. As with the what happened to the Nazis, censorship only made them martyrs for their cause, and gave them a platform with which to push their hatred.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
Yes the separation of powers in the UK is debatable.

No it's not. There is clear separation of the judiciary and the government. There's no debate.

The UK used to jail sodomites,

And many US states had sodomy as illegal 20 years ago. Some countries execute homosexuals. Your point being?

This may help in working through UK (English and Wales) law... Citizens Advice However, bear in mind that this is run through Scottish Courts which have differences. Often cases go to court to help set precedent and legal interpretation.

a reply to: paraphi

No it's not. There is clear separation of the judiciary and the government. There's no debate.

Yes there is.

And many US states had sodomy as illegal 20 years ago. Some countries execute homosexuals. Your point being?

That some laws are unjust.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Kurokage

The only way to limit hate speech and propaganda is with more speech, freer speech, not censorship. As with the what happened to the Nazis, censorship only made them martyrs for their cause, and gave them a platform with which to push their hatred.

Its not like handing out a few pamphlets at the mall or staging a small demonstration, the trouble is that the internet is global and a world stage for your mentioned platform in your reply.

a reply to: Kurokage

Its not like handing out a few pamphlets at the mall or staging a small demonstration, the trouble is that the internet is global and a world stage for your mentioned platform in your reply.

Except that the internet is limited and censored in many countries. So I wouldn't quite call it global, nor a world stage, let alone a problem, but a necessity.

Denying Nazi apologists and propagandists a platform is not a censoring free speech issue. It's a common sense, common values, common decency issue.

Civilized society simply cannot allow Neo-Nazis a platform.

I don't care if it hurts their feelings and makes them cwy.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Kurokage

Except that the internet is limited and censored in many countries. So I wouldn't quite call it global, nor a world stage, let alone a problem, but a necessity.

That's a bit nit picky, the internet is far more global and instant than anything before it.
Freedom in any country that holds its' freedoms in high regard is limited to what is acceptable in that country, so free isn't really free and the internet should be treated the same way.

originally posted by: Painterz
Denying Nazi apologists and propagandists a platform is not a censoring free speech issue. It's a common sense, common values, common decency issue.

Civilized society simply cannot allow Neo-Nazis a platform.

I don't care if it hurts their feelings and makes them cwy.

That’s what the Weimar government tried to do before the Nazis rose to power. Hitler himself said it made them stronger, and they used their persecution to justify enacting the Enabling Act of 1933.

Sorry, but your censorship didn’t work in the one time it should have.

On the other hand, Nazis in the US have a right to march and show off their swastikas. Zero Nazis have come to power there.

originally posted by: Kurokage

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Kurokage

Except that the internet is limited and censored in many countries. So I wouldn't quite call it global, nor a world stage, let alone a problem, but a necessity.

That's a bit nit picky, the internet is far more global and instant than anything before it.
Freedom in any country that holds its' freedoms in high regard is limited to what is acceptable in that country, so free isn't really free and the internet should be treated the same way.

Not only is it nit picky, it’s true. A problem with folks in liberal democracies is that they’re too busy enjoying their freedoms to defend them.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope


As average "normal" people, we're quite happily defending our "freedoms" here without resorting to extremes as we do in our day to day lives and that is how the internet should be used. Like I said, the internet is the most instant and global platform that's ever been available to humans.

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


As average "normal" people, we're quite happily defending our "freedoms" here without resorting to extremes as we do in our day to day lives and that is how the internet should be used. Like I said, the internet is the most instant and global platform that's ever been available to humans.

The Chinese and Turkish governments have other ideas on how the internet should be used, none of which involves freedom. You might be defending your own freedoms, but do little to defend the freedoms of others, especially when it comes to unorthodox views.

My question would be "was he investigated to see if he was a neo-nazi, had he done this before" . If the answer to those questions was no then why was he prosecuted? Why wasn't he given the benefit of the doubt that it was a joke, a bad joke, but a joke nonetheless? Why wasn't he just given a dressing down? Why prosecute him?
As for the statement that the powers that be are monitoring social media for these "crimes" they've no need to there are hundreds of (I don't know of an appropriate name to call them) Fuddy Duddies, Snowflakes (whoops go steady there as a flake was a derogatory name for a homosexual) or just general Busy Bodies with nothing to do but find indignation where no indignation exists.
As for small amounts of people (not elected) having too much power to alter the laws of the land I remember a group fronted by a Mrs Whitehouse that had untold of influence on what or what not was viewed on TV and Cinema.
Stop quoting the law in black and white scenarios, especially the police (the police are compelled to investigate crimes) because there are numerous cases of Police and the Crown Prosecution Service NOT investigating and even turning blind eyes away from crimes. MPs scandals, pedophilia etc.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: LesMisanthrope


As average "normal" people, we're quite happily defending our "freedoms" here without resorting to extremes as we do in our day to day lives and that is how the internet should be used. Like I said, the internet is the most instant and global platform that's ever been available to humans.

The Chinese and Turkish governments have other ideas on how the internet should be used, none of which involves freedom. You might be defending your own freedoms, but do little to defend the freedoms of others, especially when it comes to unorthodox views.

There's a difference between freedom of speech and preaching hate though, and I understand that Countries like China and Turkey want to control every aspect of internet access to their populace, but that's not what is being spoken about here. For example -You're entitled to say you dislike an individual, but generalising and saying a particular race of people should be gassed, is a step too far and should have some sort of consequence.

originally posted by: badw0lf

originally posted by: Painterz
a reply to: badw0lf


It could be illegal under the Incitement to Hatred laws, that are most often used against Islamic hate preachers, could it not?

If somebody is posting videos featuring 'gas the jews' as a tagline, that probably qualifies as potentially an offense under hate speech legislation. Certainly worth while having the police look at it for potential law violation.

Now we're taking it into the realm of context. He didn't advocate gassing anyone. Slogans to piss his partner off. But this is ignoring context, and charging people with crimes despite it.

Fine if thats all it was, then why use Youtube as a vehicle to convey that message so publically, I have a small resentment for youtube and its own lack of policing the videos uploaded, my own take is this, would he have performed this incident in the middle of a busy town, if so would he expect it to cause offence, then why would hiding behind a screen name of "count dunkula" make it any less offensive?

a reply to: Kurokage

There's a difference between freedom of speech and preaching hate though, and I understand that Countries like China and Turkey want to control every aspect of internet access to their populace, but that's not what is being spoken about here. For example -You're entitled to say you dislike an individual, but generalising and saying a particular race of people should be gassed, is a step too far and should have some sort of consequence.

No there is no difference. Speech is speech, and as soon as it is constrained or suppressed, it is not free. There is no consequence of speech beyond marking paper with ink or creating sound waves. There are, however, consequences to actions, and censorship is an action that has very dire consequences to open societies.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Kurokage

There's a difference between freedom of speech and preaching hate though, and I understand that Countries like China and Turkey want to control every aspect of internet access to their populace, but that's not what is being spoken about here. For example -You're entitled to say you dislike an individual, but generalising and saying a particular race of people should be gassed, is a step too far and should have some sort of consequence.

No there is no difference. Speech is speech, and as soon as it is constrained or suppressed, it is not free. There is no consequence of speech beyond marking paper with ink or creating sound waves. There are, however, consequences to actions, and censorship is an action that has very dire consequences to open societies.

Have you not heard of "The pen is mighty than the sword"? Speech is not just words arranged any old way, they have meaning, and power, humans are not robots. With the use of the internet "speech" can spread far and wide. Communication is one of the main reasons why we are the dominant species on the planet, and its how that communication is used on a wide stage.

a reply to: Kurokage

Have you not heard of "The pen is mighty than the sword"? Speech is not just words arranged any old way, they have meaning, and power, humans are not robots. With the use of the internet "speech" can spread far and wide. Communication is one of the main reasons why we are the dominant species on the planet, and its how that communication is used on a wide stage.

I have heard of it and it's complete bullocks. Tell that to the man who was recently sentenced to death in Pakistan for insulting the prophet on facebook. The sword is mightier than the pen in every single instance.

I read this :

When YouTuber “Count Dankula” uploaded an offensive video of his girlfriend’s pug, Buddha, whom he filmed responding to phrases such as “gas the jews” and “Sieg Heil” while images of Hitler and goose-stepping Nazis appeared on a TV in the background, I bet he never expected the police to come knocking on his door. But, as we’ve come to expect from certain progressive bastions of the free world such as the UK, he was promptly arrested for it.

According to the Count Dankula, the video was a silly joke to annoy his girlfriend,

This is where I stopped. What moron videos the said event to "annoy his girlfriend" and then posts the results on the internet! Only an utter moron OR someone who is trying to be racially offensive in a sideways manner. Idiots or racists would fall for this........hence this topic!

Sorry but this topic has been started by a right wing moron.

ATS is getting fricking worse.

originally posted by: yorkshirelad
I read this :

When YouTuber “Count Dankula” uploaded an offensive video of his girlfriend’s pug, Buddha, whom he filmed responding to phrases such as “gas the jews” and “Sieg Heil” while images of Hitler and goose-stepping Nazis appeared on a TV in the background, I bet he never expected the police to come knocking on his door. But, as we’ve come to expect from certain progressive bastions of the free world such as the UK, he was promptly arrested for it.

According to the Count Dankula, the video was a silly joke to annoy his girlfriend,

This is where I stopped. What moron videos the said event to "annoy his girlfriend" and then posts the results on the internet! Only an utter moron OR someone who is trying to be racially offensive in a sideways manner. Idiots or racists would fall for this........hence this topic!

Sorry but this topic has been started by a right wing moron.

ATS is getting fricking worse.

I'm more liberal than you'll ever be. Anything left of Mao is right-wing for you guys.

a reply to: odzeandennz

its illegal in Germany to do the nazi salute or shout their 'catch phrases'...

The video was done with humor in mind. Should comedians therefore be held accountable for what they say? Should sarcasm be made against the law? When hurt feelings are placed by law above freedom of speech, then you no longer have freedom of speech. Better be careful you don't offend someone with your point of view, and there would be no "discussion" about the issue, because feelings would matter more than the words it would take to defend yourself.