Violence vs. Free Speech

https://yro.slashdot.org/story/17/06/19/180226
The opinion in Matal v. Tam means that Simon Tam, lead singer of an Asian-American rock band called "The Slants," will be able to trademark the name of his band. It's also relevant for a high-profile case involving the Washington Redskins, who were involved in litigation and at risk of being stripped of their trademark. The court unanimously held that a law on the books holding that a trademark can't "disparage... or bring... into contemp[t] or disrepute" any "persons, living or dead," violates the First Amendment.
Click to expand...


https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/6i79ym/supreme_court_unanimously_strikes_down_law/

Kennedy said:
A law that can be directed against speech found offensive to some portion of the public can be turned against minority and dissenting views to the detriment of all. The First Amendment does not entrust that power to the government?s benevolence. Instead, our reliance must be on the substantial safeguards of free and open discussion in a democratic society.
Click to expand...


.




















.
















.






take my love
take my land
take me where I cannot stand
I don't care
I'm still free
you can't take the slants from me


tumblr_lljftbwMSN1qaf4ez.jpg

​
 


There are those that are featured front and center at every given opportunity by the media class. And then there are those that are routinely dismissed or outright silenced by that same media. Those trying to speak the truth as they see it are dogged by a bourgeois elite that wish to control all dissemination of information. The media class serves as a bulwark to any ideas that they do not already accept. Those seeking the truth or to at least speak on a matter honestly must do so despite the efforts by those in the media.
Click to expand...
 
CNN (and all outlets circling the wagons) claim their reason for freaking out over a gif is that it incites violence against journalists. If that's true, I expect them to be all over this story:

https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAc...icsvarious_independent_journalists_are_being/
Various Independent journalists are being tracked and assaulted because a credentialed journalist took their pictures at the G20 summit and accused them of being Fascist Nazis.
Click to expand...


EDIT: more info
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKZUjpqgRo4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4UqyFt5xNc
 
Last edited:
On the subject of free speech this should concern us all

But now, a group of 43 Senators ? 29 Republicans and 14 Democrats ? want to implement a law that would make it a felony for Americans to support the international boycott against Israel, which was launched in protest of that country?s decades-old occupation of Palestine. The two primary sponsors of the bill are Democrat Ben Cardin of Maryland and Republican Rob Portman of Ohio. Perhaps the most shocking aspect is the punishment: anyone guilty of violating its prohibitions will face a minimum civil penalty of $250,000, and a maximum criminal penalty of $1 million and 20 years in prison.
Click to expand...

https://theintercept.com/2017/07/19...-support-for-boycott-campaign-against-israel/
 
IANALawyer, but I'm damn skippy that the first ammendment makes this unconstitutional.
 
I'm going to leave these here. All of Shapiro's answers are worth hearing, but the heart of it all can be heard in Carolla's opening speech a few minutes in.



EDIT: here's the unabridged 3 hours long version (fast forward to 45 seconds to get to the actual start)

 
Last edited:
On Monday evening, news broke of a memo regarding Google?s Leftist bias and their perverse attempts to impose diversity quotas at the company. The memo, by an unnamed employee, drew quick fire from the management structure; on Tuesday evening, the employee, unmasked as James Damore, was fired.

There was just one problem: there was nothing wrong with the memo.

As I wrote yesterday, the memo essentially made three contentions: first, that Google had a Leftist bias which prevented them from hearing other viewpoints; second, that part of the discrepancy in employment between men and women at Google could be attributable to group differences between men and women; and third, that Google could try to make employment easier for women in general through a series of non-illegal means.

But that?s not what you?re hearing from Google and the media. Instead, you?re hearing them deliberately misrepresent the nature of the memo, cast aspersions at the author, and pretend that he said things he clearly and openly dismissed in the memo itself.

Here are a few of the things Damore didn?t say.

1. Women Are Biologically Unfit For Tech. CNN actually ran a segment today claiming that this was Damore?s suggestion. That?s patently false. In fact, Damore openly says the opposite. The media seem completely unable to comprehend the difference between the statement ?women on average are different from men? and ?this particular woman is different from this particular man.? That?s because they are stupid, on average. But here?s Damore, explicitly stating that women are not unqualified as individuals:

"I?m not saying that all men differ from all women in the following ways or that these differences are ?just.? I?m simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences may explain why we don?t see equal representation of women in tech and leadership. Many of these differences are small and there?s significant overlap between men and women, so you can?t say anything about an individual given these population level distributions."

He reiterates that point later in the memo:

"I?m also not saying that we should restrict people to certain gender roles; I?m advocating for quite the opposite: treat people as individuals, not as just another member of their group (tribalism)."

He even includes this chart:

DGtiMn7WsAEWz1j.jpg


2. Diversity Is Bad. Damore opens the memo by stating, ?I value diversity and inclusion.? Actually, Damore offers an entire section of his memo devoted to ?non-discriminatory ways to reduce the gender gap.? He suggests that Google ?make software engineering more people-oriented with pair programming and more collaboration,? ?allow those exhibiting cooperative behavior to thrive,? ?make tech and leadership less stressful,? and ?allowing and truly endorsing (as part of our culture) part time work,? as well as changing stereotypical biases about male performance. Damore states that he believes that ?arbitrary social engineering of tech just to make it appealing to equal portions of both men and women? would be foolish, but if there is a goal of helping the company succeed, such measures could be worthwhile.

3. Sexism Doesn?t Exist. The memo author explicitly dismisses this notion as well. Damore writes that he is ?not denying that sexism exists.? He adds:

"I hope it?s clear that I'm not saying that diversity is bad, that Google or society is 100% fair, that we shouldn't try to correct for existing biases, or that minorities have the same experience of those in the majority. My larger point is that we have an intolerance for ideas and evidence that don?t fit a certain ideology."

4. The Memo Promotes Violence! This is the most extreme claim being made by Leftists about the memo. It?s a lie. In fact, one of the rationales behind the memo was to prevent the PC-led violence that has infected college campuses:

"This same compassion for those seen as weak creates political correctness, which constrains discourse and is complacent to the extremely sensitive PC-authoritarians that use violence and shaming to advance their cause. While Google hasn?t harbored the violent leftist protests that we?re seeing at universities, the frequent shaming in TGIF and in our culture has created the same silent, psychologically unsafe environment."

The Left doesn?t like the memo, so they?re openly lying about the content. Read the whole thing yourself rather than buying those lies.
Click to expand...

http://www.dailywire.com/news/19464/fake-news-4-things-google-manifesto-doesnt-say-ben-shapiro
 
I am touching none of that, except asking what makes this a free speech issue? The engineer was fired by Google after speaking about Google policies; the government was not involved.
 
PelicanHazard said:
I am touching none of that, except asking what makes this a free speech issue? The engineer was fired by Google after speaking about Google policies; the government was not involved.
Click to expand...

Freedom of speech and the 1st amendment are two different subjects. I assume if he was a POC and/or LGBT and questioned the potentially illegal hiring practices of his employer and was fired for it... well, I imagine a very different narrative from the media and public.

But apparently the guy is suing Google, so I'm thinking of investing in a popcorn machine.
 
PelicanHazard said:
I am touching none of that, except asking what makes this a free speech issue? The engineer was fired by Google after speaking about Google policies; the government was not involved.
Click to expand...
Google is within their rights for firing him, regardless of how you or I feel about it.

That CNN report, however...
 
JimCorrigan said:
Google is within their rights for firing him, regardless of how you or I feel about it.

That CNN report, however...
Click to expand...

Haven't read much into it, but the most obvious issue to sue over would be if Google fired him with just cause, meaning no severance package or anything, or without it. That makes a world of difference and a judge will have to be the one deciding if there was just cause.
 
calvinhobbes said:
How bitterly ironic... they include the chart and then ignore it completely when it fits their "Left-wing is baaad!" agenda. People who lean left or right also represent populations with significant overlap.
Click to expand...

Ben Shapiro usually uses the name "leftist", but that is not in reference to everyone on the left. He's said that he hated the way the word liberal was being sullied by certain people on the left who are completely illiberal in their ideas and policies. So he began using the word Leftist for those illiberal people on the left, rather than participate in smearing the name liberal, which he has voiced admiration for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top