Who does free speech help more: liberals or conservatives?

I think that a lot of people right now think that liberals are the only ones who can get "offended" and that they are the only ones that have the ability to shut others down for their views.

However, take a simple look at history to know that these are not liberal traits at all. Religious people are the ones throughout history who get offended easily and shut others down for their views. And why would that change now?

It has to be a trick. There should be no reason for liberal people to be putting together a mechanism for suppressing free speech and freedom of press, freedom of assembly and freedom of opinion in conjunction with totalitarian surveillance unless it was a trick. No reason.

Any kind of smoke and mirrors the media is blowing around about suppressing free speech, suppressing free press and the like being a positive thing for people like gays and atheists are either idiots or outright lying on purpose.

It has never been the case throughout history and it is not the case now. Free speech is the ally of gays, atheists, scientists and liberals and always has been.

Setting up a mechanism (mechanisms are neutral, by the way) during the Obama Presidency that allows for total surveillance, search and seizure without a warrant or probable cause, and even setting the precedent for political crimes - such as either leaking classified information on the one hand, or having an unpopular opinion (more like an opinion that is dangerous to the establishment) on the other -

These are not things that benefit liberals or liberal society. They never have in the past and they won't now.

-----

And the reason for that is simple - liberals are usually interested in science and the truth. And in order for those things to happen, there has to be free speech, because legitimate criticism is the main, and really only ally, of liberals.

Why would you ever throw that away as a Democrat? Why?? It's not going to come back like a boomerang when it's needed - and it's certainly not going to come back when the Republicans have a majority -

Is there some kind of false belief / delusion going around that liberals and Atheists have won for All Time, even though they represent a gigantic minority in the population?

reply to post by darkbake


Having spent 30+ years in Massachusetts I can tell you first hand that if you do not agree with liberals you better not speak at all because a difference of opinion will cause most of them to enrage and engage in possibly horrific attacks.

Not that conservatives are probably much better. Liberals absolutely want to stifle free speech though.

reply to post by darkbake


I imagine it must be very frustrating to live in a system with only two main political orientations and parties, and none of them are what they pretend to be / meant to represent, while both work for the same people and push for the same agendas in the longrun.

Both conservatism and liberalism are prone to corruption and both eventually stagnate into an oppressive quagmire (giggity)

Free speech benefits neither conservative or liberal free speech has to be protected by the people against attack from conservative elitism and liberal recklessness both are equally dangerous.

Freedom of speech should benefit everyone!

Lib vs. Con, Right vs. Left, Repub vs. Demo is all divide and conquer nonsense.

reply to post by darkbake


I could not agree more. The whole Duck Dynasty thing comes to mind. So many rightwing Christians are crying that Phil's free speech has been infringed upon without showing any evidence that he was silenced by the government in any way. He was not arrested or sued by the government, yet they cry. Freedom of speech is often abused by those that do not understand it. It only protects you from the government. It does not protect you from boycotts, bosses, contacts, or most importantly, free speech in response. Republicans trot this old horse out all the time while misrepresenting it. Liberals seem to understand that what they say has consequences and nothing in the constitution prevents that.

reply to post by OccamsRazor04


So you think freedom of speech means you are above reproach by those that might oppose you? Please show me one single example of liberals shutting down freedom of speech with it actually being the liberals freedom to respond. Meanwhile Christians are boycotting more corporations than any other group for what they are free to say. I will wait, breath held.

reply to post by darkbake


The thing is, conservatives really don't understand liberal thinking at all.

Hence, they do their best to grasp liberal thinking with false generalization.
Even a popular anti-progressive thread today clearly shows this.

theMediator
reply to post by darkbake

 

The thing is, conservatives really don't understand liberal thinking at all.

Hence, they do their best to grasp liberal thinking with false generalization.
Even a popular anti-progressive thread today clearly shows this.

That is a problem - I have had trouble transitioning from a conservative family to a liberal arts college. And from that experience, I can share that conservatives don't understand liberals - and taking away their free speech is going to do nothing because of that -

Except send them underground to talk among-st themselves. The only real chance you have of converting a conservative person to a more liberal mind-set is by

#1) Letting them speak
#2) Engaging them in speech.

Other strategies, like ignoring them, are a terrible idea. There is no way that would ever work to make conservatives more liberal, ever - does anyone else see the tactical mistake here?

It's either a disaster waiting to happen, or we are talking about a societal schism, possibly state-by-state, either way it will probably increase racism and sexism and reduce scientific progress in the red states.

reply to post by darkbake


I feel that free speech is a basic Human right, along with the right to exist, to water, food and comfort.

It affects the individual, regardless of political persuasion, more if that right is suppressed or diminished..in fact removing free speech would ultimately affect everyone.

Offence is subjective...highly so. What will offend one, will delight another.

And ultimately, being offended is part of the Human condition, along with being happy, confused, worried etc.

People tend to place too much importance on offending or attempting to curtail it..it's inevitable that people will be offended, and those offended by one thing or another, cover the entire political spectrum of people not limited to Liberal or Conservative bias.

The basic Human right of self-expression, and it's preservation from those who would deny it, specifically free speech in whichever form it takes, idealist, religious, political, whimsical, sexual, emotional etc. is far more important than any offence that may be generated from that act of expression.

To offend is a celebration of the diversity of the Human condition, and our ability of independent thought and the communication of the same.

Without free speech, free expression...we are drones, no better than fleshy automatons. Offending others is the greatest evidence of a free society...we ought not be afraid of it.

OccamsRazor04
reply to post by darkbake

 

Having spent 30+ years in Massachusetts I can tell you first hand that if you do not agree with liberals you better not speak at all because a difference of opinion will cause most of them to enrage and engage in possibly horrific attacks.

Not that conservatives are probably much better. Liberals absolutely want to stifle free speech though.

Yeah I know - I've experienced this, it is nuts, and not productive in my opinion.

I hope this helpless state of affairs in the relations between political agendas is just a phase - and not human nature. Because I am a moderate, I will often disagree (so help me God) with someone on one side or the other.

And what I was originally going to write this thread about was how criticism is a very positive thing because it helps refine you. Without criticism, you don't get refined - you could be entirely wrong about everything, and without a critic, never know.

Criticism and active engagement in discourse and communication is the only way to grow, and the only way to have real relationships with people, as well, in my opinion - otherwise they are highly superficial - even your relationship with yourself has the potential to be superficial without critics.

See my signature again, right? That's because I love critics. They are amazing and when they do reach out and suggest constructive criticism it is so helpful.

But that all requires freedom. No freedom, it ain't happening.

MysterX
reply to post by darkbake

 

I feel that free speech is a basic Human right, along with the right to exist, to water, food and comfort.

It affects the individual, regardless of political persuasion, more if that right is suppressed or diminished..in fact removing free speech would ultimately affect everyone.

That makes sense, after all - free speech was right there in nature with food and water and shelter from the beginning of time - someone has to actually come and take it away before they can "give" it back.

How can someone take away something that they don't own in the first place? That's a good philosophical question. They have no moral authority to. It is theft.

reply to post by darkbake


I think trying to pigeon hole the ideal of speaking freely; of which is a Natural Right; into man-made and subjective compartments such as conservatives or liberals, does no Justice to the meaning of free-speech.

Why would it have to serve one over the other?

reply to post by ownbestenemy


I think it serves everyone equally well. Free speech allows for discourse, without free speech, you would never get to know your friends or partner. Sometimes you have to offend someone so they know where you are coming from -

Without that first step, there is no hope of progress.

If people were racist and no one ever heard about it because they were silent, there you go, does racism not exist in this scenario, or is it more dangerous because it is a hidden variable?

Up to about 30 years ago, liberalism was our greatest hope of preserving free-speech and liberty. But since having been infiltrated by soviet-style progressives, it has become the greatest enemy of free-speech and liberty. The Pendulum has swung to the other side and what is called "libertarians" (formerly right-wing nutjobs) hold the torch of freedom.

reply to post by Skyfloating


Well... I agree. That is unfortunate. And really strange.

Although on the right-wing side, there are a lot of conservatives (besides the libertarian types) who I'm not sure would allow a lot of the progressive things our society has come to enjoy if they had the option of suppressing them.

And I think they might jump on the Obama bandwagon here shortly, it's a possibility at least.

reply to post by darkbake

If people were racist and no one ever heard about it because they were silent, there you go, does racism not exist in this scenario, or is it more dangerous because it is a hidden variable?

Excellent point.

I would imagine it, like most subjects of contention would be far more dangerous simmering and festering under the surface, forcibly restrained as it were, rather than clear, open and up for honest discourse.

darkbake
I think it serves everyone equally well. Free speech allows for discourse, without free speech, you would never get to know your friends or partner. Sometimes you have to offend someone so they know where you are coming from -

Without that first step, there is no hope of progress.

Of course it does, but to obtain power, one must control the speech of the masses. That is why through history, all political types have attempted to control the speech of the plebes when it comes to how they speak out towards their governments.

The concept of the First Amendment was radically different and yet maintained liberty for the private citizen. While we, as freemen, have the Natural Right to redress and criticize our Government, we also hold the right privately to deny another their speech.

The concept of Free Speech is to enable and encourage the laymen of a nation to speak out, without fear of retribution for what is said, and to as you said, allow discourse. It matters not who it "serves" more, it matters most who holds it dear and fights the State when it is challenged or denied.

If people were racist and no one ever heard about it because they were silent, there you go, does racism not exist in this scenario, or is it more dangerous because it is a hidden variable?

I am sorry, I am not following this...

reply to post by MysterX


I think that is a legitimate point and not just theoretical - while liberals have been out there mopping up every last bit of racism in great detail in the big cities, I think they have been becoming lazy towards the growing racism in the badlands that cover something like 90% (totally an estimate) of the U.S. land mass.

At least I had the following experience: in Idaho there were extremely racist things going on. I talked to my cousin in Seattle, meanwhile, who said it was socially inappropriate to ask someone about their cultural heritage.

Meanwhile, in Idaho, I knew someone who was boasting about using illegals for low manual labor costs in his factory of some kind and the black family that moved into the neighborhood had the police called on them multiple times for "suspicious" behavior - and this was par for the course.

The black kid would try to hang out with white people in the suburb and be turned away. The thinking process was like... well, I like the kid, but what would my neighbors / wife / etc. think. That kind of thought process you know?

Free speech is an obvious essential to all in society, but it only goes as far as free thinking. Even though Americans can legally say what they want, the socially accepted way of speaking and thinking is still extremely narrow. In my judgement it is no less narrow on either side of political ideology, just with a shifted boundary (not to mention the narrowness of political thinking in America in general).