• Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I mean… There are other models? Being a Nazi publically is illegal in a number of countries. America doesn’t have restrictions on hate speech but Canada does. Here’s how it works here :

    You are totally allowed to express your opinions in private, to other people directly. If you are at my house and call me a slur - still legal. You are a fucking asshole and I am allowed at any time to tell you to leave for any reason and if you refuse to leave my house you are then commiting a completely different arrestable offence.

    But if you take your paint and decide to mark a big swastika on the side of your house or wave a sign with “we should kill ____ people” (for any of the protected categories of people race/sex/sexuality/religion/gender/mental illness etc. ) on an overpass or assemble in a big group white pointy hoods with the express purpose of working yourself up to a genocide. That is illegal.

    It’s the aspect of public expression which makes it illegal.

    Americans tend to think that any checks on their freedom of speech is a sudden descent into 1984 but laws like this have quietly existed on our books for the past 30 years.

    • wagesj45@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      That is certainly a way to do it, but I don’t think limiting public expression is good. Bad things done with noble intent are still bad things.

      • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hard disagree. Advocacy for genocide or groups historically known to enact genocide has zero public merit. They deserve no devil’s advocate and literally nothing good comes from treating them as a valid position. At best they have a negative value of contribution to peace, social tolerance and the real everyday mental and physical welfare of people habitually eradicated by genocidal regimes.

        The step these groups require to make their desired outcomes happen is to be normalized and to have the sense that they represent a majority. Allowing them to build concensus and harass their targets in public with the express permission of the law allows that foothold. Sometimes we should agree certain actions don’t belong in the places we share. That public space should reflect a democratic attitude of mutual respect, safety and tolerance.

        • wagesj45@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          And I would argue that if these ideas are gaining any kind of foothold broadly, the rest of the citizenry is abjectly failing to meet their social obligations. Society doesn’t get to just coast; we all have to be out there every day expressing and pushing for what society should be. Make the public square so full of good ideas that the fringe ass holes are drowned out.

          And the harassment that you describe is possible because too many of us don’t engage and make clear by our actions and speech what isn’t socially acceptable.

          It is an uncomfortable idea that the rise in authoritarianism around the world is somehow our fault. No snowflake and avalanches and all that. But if we are sleepwalking into a world where garbage in the public square isn’t fought against by overwhelming numbers of people, we kind of get what we deserve as a whole and everyone suffers, especially those that are disadvantaged. We are responsible.

          And no, it is not good enough to simply hand over the responsibility to “fix” this to the state-sanctioned-violence branch and your local paramilitary police force. The hearts of men can’t be legislated away; they must be won. With hard work and public display. And if we try to coast and just “keep it out of the public” these ideologies will definitely fester in private.