Is Direct Democracy the Solution to Capitalism?

[BlackVision]

I really (really!) don't want to offend you but I find your views to be very 'American'.

I am anything but a flag waving pro-american. I have criticized many decisions that America makes. But I will acknowledge what it does right when it does. This is one aspect they do right.

-Eminem has been fined millions of dollars for anti-gay lyrics and calling his mother a ho.

Source? There are slander laws so if Eminem has to cough up for calling his mom a ho that would make sense. But I do not recall Eminem ever being prevented to perform in a concert in America. I do recall that there was an attempt to ban Eminem from entering Canada and perform a concert there.

-Britney spears got arrested for being 'too sexy' on a magazine cover back in the late 90s.

Source? Please tell me the criminal code in which Britney was charged. But my main point was freedom of speech. The ability to express one's viewpoint.

And I don't recall the Dixie Chicks ever being charged with anything.

-I live in Canada and have indeed seen small KKK-ish rallys without police doing a damn thing.

KKK rallies in Canada will likely violate this Canadian law.

Federal Criminal Code of Canada, Chapter 46, Section 319, Paragraph 2

"Everyone who, by communicating statements, other than private conversation, willfully promotes hatred against any identifiable group is guilty of an indictable offense and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years."

This code seems to be very broad and can easily be manipulated. All the protesters against Bush in the Republican National Convention could easily fit into this criminal code. This is why we cannot have such laws such as these.

Sorry I am going to have to go with netherlands on 'Most Free'.

I'm not fully aware of the freedom of speech laws of the Netherlands. I do know however that America has more freedom of speech than Canada, Germany, France, the UK, and other European nations.

And I do not think Freedom of Speech is necessarily a good thing, I find it to be a poor substitute for freedom of thought.

Freedom of speech would be the cornerstone of a democracy.

The police SHOULD have arrested those racist bastards on account of encouraging hate crimes.

I don't care how wrong you think a viewpoint is. While I will also condemn the KKK, they, along with everyone else, should have the full right to be able to have their own viewpoints without fear of persecution. Fascism. Know what it is?

When the government starts dictating what speech is good and what speech is bad, freedom is tarnished.

 

[Adam]

Wow. Surprisingly, I agree 100% with Blackvision about something. Personally, I'd quite happily defend the right to freedom of expression of people like the KKK. I'd defend the right of some idiot to say he likes putting kids in a microwave oven. I'd defend the right of any maniac or moron to say the most ridiculous and hateful things. Whether I agree or not is another matter, and whether I would defend people against the hateful physical actions of such people is another matter again.

 

[Selbstüberschätzug]

@Blankvision

Hitler cams to power not because of democracy but because of rests of Dictatorship (Dekret) in the “ Weimarer Republik”. But actually he was dependent on the rifles of his followers. Like every dictator in history.

Hence you can’t exclude those members of the people with undeveloped brains, you would open the door for individuals witch are feeling them selves wrong treated like Hitler was.

If you like to go so far back. Do you remember the processes around McCarthy the communist hunter?

 

[Smurf]

Well I disagree with you 2 then, Under no circumstances should a person be allowed to advertise any form of violent or to an extent, hatefull acts.

 

[Adam]

Like action movies?

 

[Smurf]

Like KKK rallys

 

[hitssquad]

Cosmopolitanism — a worldly view

People who have a world view

world·view n. In both senses also called Weltanschauung

Maybe he meant, "...a worldwide view" — as in that of cosmopolitanism.

 

[Adam]

So you would allow some things which advocate violence, like Stallone blowing up the evil bad guys, rather than calling the police, in an action movie; but not others like the KKK rallies?

 

[Smurf]

Adam, you know perfectly well the difference between an Action Movie and a KKK rally. And yes I meant a world-wide view.

 

[Adam]

I believe some murderers have claimed they were inspired to kill by movies.

But this is all intended to arrive at a simple point.

• What if you're the one in charge, and you say action movies are ok, but KKK rallies aren't?
• What if I'm the one in charge, and I say KKK rallies are ok, and action movies aren't?

Which one would you prefer? Which would be "right" or "good"? Which would be just, fair? Why would one view, one voice, be any more valid than the other? Why should one view, one choice, be any more valid than the other? Who gets to decide that Bob's opinion is worth less than Fred's? What if both Bob and Fred don't like the decision of the person who decided? Et cetera...

 

[Smurf]

I believe some murderers have claimed they were inspired to kill by movies

And I believe a woman once put her cat in a microwave and then sued the company for not telling her not to put pets in the microwave. The cat died.

I'd prefer the first one. I see it as an assessment of what will cause more damage, if a toddler sees Sylvester Stallone killing a bunch of russians, he'll run around with his toy gun for an hour. Its a form of entertainment and any half wit can see that. Don't bring up examples how kids shoot up schools after seeing violent movies, where i come from kids shoot up space aliens in the arcade after seeing violent movies, if it works in Canada it can work somewhere else too.

 

[Adam]

It's the same here. We tend to be able to discern entertainment from real life here. Some places aren't so lucky.

However...

What about a politcal party rally encouraging war in Afghanistan?
What about army recruiters outside on the footpath, telling people why they should join up?
What about an information booth handing out pamphlets about abortion and pro-choice stuff?

And mostly, what about the most important question, which I asked before: Who gets to decide?

 

[Smurf]

What do you mean 'Who gets to decide'??

..I do!

no seriously elaborate on that.
Who does get to decide?

 

[Adam]

Okay. What if the political party in power for the moment sets in place a Board Of Acceptable language Monitoring, and legislation to back it up. The BOALM consists of some people you've never met. People who have never asked for your opinion, and probably don't give a damn. They decide that the KKK can't have rallies. They also decide that internet message boards promote seditious ideas. In particular, given their love for all people and groups, and their determination that nobody should be marginalised due to belonging to some minority group, they toss you in prison because you wrote on an internet message board that the ideas of one particular group (the KKK) are nasty. You specifically targeted that group. You said their ideas are bad, and you proposed limiting their rights. It is the BOALM's duty to the people to lock you up. It's fair, isn't it?

If not, why not?

 

[Smurf]

The KKK promotes hate in a racist fashion. That wrong. If a party is in control of your country and says that anyone can express themselves anyway they want and then a few rich guys get together and obtain totally media monopoly and suddenly the only ideas being advertised are their own, is that fair?

 

[Adam]

But you've just been tossed in prison for promoting hate. The BOALM threw you in prison for your nasty dislike of a group of people, for your printed desire to limit the rights of a group of people.

What do you tell the lawyer? Is it fair?

 

[Smurf]

but I am not promoting hate at all. I'm just saying the KKK is (extremely) misguided.

 

[Adam]

but I am not promoting hate at all. I'm just saying the KKK is (extremely) misguided.

... To the extent that they should have fewer rights than you.

 

[Smurf]

Everyone should be prohibited from advertising racism. I'm not saying throw people in jail for talking about it, but the larger scale things should definitely be cencored.
They will not have fewer rights than me.

 

[Adam]

But you should be allowed to say "Everyone should be prohibited from advertising racism"?

 

[Smurf]

Why not, that's not advertising anything except my desire for a more pleasant world.

 

[Adam]

Wasn't Hitler expressing his desire for a more pleasant world?

 

[Smurf]

Funny.

I don't think we're going to agree on this one any time soon.

 

[Selbstüberschätzug]

I don’t said anything about if on should allow “advertising violents”. In the process of a takeover of power it wouldn’t made much difference if a new Hitler would do this ore not. After violence of this kind is established you can’t stop it with any law, because you won't find someone to execute it.

 

[BlackVision]

Hitler cams to power not because of democracy but because of rests of Dictatorship (Dekret) in the “ Weimarer Republik”. But actually he was dependent on the rifles of his followers. Like every dictator in history.

I did not say Hitler. I said Nazi Party. The members of the Nazi Party in the parliament were all elected by the people. They eventually got the majority of the seats. Once again elected by the people. Hitler got into power because he was appointed as the Chancellor. And then when the President died, he had full power.

 

[BlackVision]

If a party is in control of your country and says that anyone can express themselves anyway they want and then a few rich guys get together and obtain totally media monopoly and suddenly the only ideas being advertised are their own, is that fair?

Monopoly laws and freedom of speech are not even remotely close.

 

[BlackVision]

but I am not promoting hate at all. I'm just saying the KKK is (extremely) misguided.

Misguided yes. But they're still entitled to freedom of speech. Violence, etc are a different matter.

 

[BlackVision]

Everyone should be prohibited from advertising racism.

Do you recall the song "Don't Want No Short Short Man" I would say that puts a negative stereotype toward short men. Do you believe that should be restricted as well?

It's not good when the government starts dictating what is good speech and what is not. When someone says something extremely ridiculous, it should be quite easy to point it out anyways with the freedom of speech everyone else has as well.

 

[Monique]

In China you'd better not be openly critical about politics: that might land you in trouble. Talking about racism should not be prohibited, actually acting out of racism should be.

 

[Selbstüberschätzug]

Did you know that the "Nazi paty" dependent on Hitler just from the beginning? The hole propaganda, the hole powertake was not imageable without this man. The Nazi-movement organised and controlled by him, who was alone just from the start.