Murican Free Speech

Originally posted by Rockydonovang
Free SPeech Zones, the confiscation of property and forced relocation of those who smoke weed, private prisions(again imprisonment is a restriction of someone's freedom), bail system, presidents threatining the press with legal power, the goverment paying for pro military propoganda and patriotism, the unjustified restrictions of rights for ex criminals, the restrictions regarding third party candidates, higher minimum ages for youth, and so much more are a suffecient to make the case that america isn't the most free planet. You can likely also make the case it is, but it's certanly up for discussion even though the dmb's and surts get triggered when people challenge their make believe fantasies of the world.

By all means, let's discuss it: name the country that does it better.

See cuz your little rant you just went on? Is kinda making it seem like I said our system was perfect. I did not do so.

Oh and bro? America is not a planet.

Originally posted by Surtur
By all means, let's discuss it: name the country that does it better.

Norway, 100% for sure.

Netherlands and Belgium also come to mind.

But those are called "socialist" countries that have "no freedom" by conservatards.

Imagine what the US would be like with our amazing money, power, and spirit but operated more closely to countries like Netherlands or Norway?

Originally posted by dadudemon
Norway, 100% for sure.

Netherlands and Belgium also come to mind.

But those are called "socialist" countries that have "no freedom" by conservatards.

Imagine what the US would be like with our amazing money, power, and spirit but operated more closely to countries like Netherlands or Norway?

https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2016/norway
Freedoms of expression, media freedom, and the right to access government information are guaranteed under Article 100 of Norway's constitution. The penal code prohibits hate speech, which can be punished with up to three years in prison.

Annnnd in what I could find for Belgium holocaust denial is illegal, and hate speech is also illegal, at least according to wikipedia.

Womp womp womp

Also I see plenty of conservatives criticize the left for referring to those countries as socialist. They make the point that those countries are actually capitalist countries which in some instances have more market freedom through less regulation than the US and that that, as well as inordinate tax rates, are how they support their welfare and healthcare stuff.

You'll see Ben Shapiro point out all the time that those countries aren't socialist.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2016/norway
[b]Freedoms of expression, media freedom, and the right to access government information are guaranteed under Article 100 of Norway's constitution. The penal code prohibits hate speech, which can be punished with up to three years in prison.

Annnnd in what I could find for Belgium holocaust denial is illegal, and hate speech is also illegal, at least according to wikipedia.

Womp womp womp [/B]

Sounds like great freedom places to live minus the restrictions on hate speech; that's too much of a moving bar and results in thought-policing. The UK and Canada have those things, as well.

This guy got in big doodoo for being racist in Norway:

http://www.loc.gov/law/foreign-news/article/norway-supreme-court-rules-on-boundaries-of-hate-speech/

Policing Hate Speech is a dangerous slippery slope, IMO. It's better to allow it than prohibit it for maximum freedom.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
Also I see plenty of conservatives criticize the left for referring to those countries as socialist. They make the point that those countries are actually capitalist countries which in some instances have more market freedom through less regulation than the US and that that, as well as inordinate tax rates, are how they support their welfare and healthcare stuff.

You'll see Ben Shapiro point out all the time that those countries aren't socialist.

Norwegians did not take too kindly to Sanders referring to them as socialist, as well.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Sounds like great freedom places to live minus the restrictions on hate speech; that's too much of a moving bar and results in thought-policing. The UK and Canada have those things, as well.

This guy got in big doodoo for being racist in Norway:

http://www.loc.gov/law/foreign-news/article/norway-supreme-court-rules-on-boundaries-of-hate-speech/

Policing Hate Speech is a dangerous slippery slope, IMO. It's better to allow it than prohibit it for maximum freedom.

Norwegians did not take too kindly to Sanders referring to them as socialist, as well.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Norway, 100% for sure.

Netherlands and Belgium also come to mind.

But those are called "socialist" countries that have "no freedom" by conservatards.

Imagine what the US would be like with our amazing money, power, and spirit but operated more closely to countries like Netherlands or Norway?

Well no it's dipshit letists that call countries like that socialists lol. It's why Denmark told Bernie Sanders to shut the f*ck up and stop calling them socialists.

It does make me smile these folk always cite mostly white countries there for their propaganda.

Originally posted by Surtur
Well no it's dipshit letists that call countries like that socialists lol. It's why Denmark told Bernie Sanders to shut the f*ck up and stop calling them socialists.

It does make me smile these folk always cite mostly white countries there for their propaganda.

No, definitely conservatards refer to European countries as socialist shitholes.

There are some libtards who do it, too, of course. But the conservatards have the monopoly on this.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-press/2016/norway
[b]Freedoms of expression, media freedom, and the right to access government information are guaranteed under Article 100 of Norway's constitution. The penal code prohibits hate speech, which can be punished with up to three years in prison.

Annnnd in what I could find for Belgium holocaust denial is illegal, and hate speech is also illegal, at least according to wikipedia.

Womp womp womp

Also I see plenty of conservatives criticize the left for referring to those countries as socialist. They make the point that those countries are actually capitalist countries which in some instances have more market freedom through less regulation than the US and that that, as well as inordinate tax rates, are how they support their welfare and healthcare stuff.

You'll see Ben Shapiro point out all the time that those countries aren't socialist. [/B]

I guess I'm confused at why these countries are better then us then when it comes to this stuff lol. Not if everything you just posted is true.

Originally posted by dadudemon
No, definitely conservatards refer to European countries as socialist shitholes.

There are some libtards who do it, too, of course. But the conservatards have the monopoly on this.

I disagree, dipshit leftists too stupid to know what socialism is love touting these places.

Conservatives usually tend to diss these countries in response to some moron going "look at Denmark!"

Originally posted by Surtur
I guess I'm confused at why these countries are better then us then when it comes to this stuff lol. Not if everything you just posted is true.

Originally posted by Emperordmb
I think DDM is making talking about overall freedom.

Okay, but I was talking specifically about freedom of speech.

What can they do that we can't? Shout fire in a crowded theater?

Originally posted by Emperordmb
I think DDM is making talking about overall freedom.

Correct. No country has the ideal state of freedom "overall." All of them do well in one area and terribly in another. Freedom of Speech means nothing if you're dying in a ditch. Each of the major freedoms are tied to and are symbiotic with each other.

So just to be clear, you define freedom in some part based on what the government provides for its people?

Originally posted by Emperordmb
So just to be clear, you define freedom in some part based on what the government provides for its people?

I define freedom in a Lockean since.

Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness/Property (depending on which quote you want to pull out).

You cannot pursue property, unless you're a monster (the fiercest monsters obtain the greatest property in an anarchy), in an anarchy. You cannot pursue happiness if you're constantly being beaten and in a ditch for not being part of a particular gang. You cannot pursue life if you have poor healthcare.

So it seems quite obvious that the people need a government that is for them, by them, and of them. 🙂

Notice anything in common with my points?

Edit - To directly answer you question because I hate weasels who are too much of a coward to answer a binary question.

No. The government, by definition, cannot provide freedom to people. The government can create a framework within which citizens can operate to maximize their freedom. There needs to be consequences for violations of others freedoms.

I believe that is the bigger piece in the philosophy of freedom between the EU and USA.

EU believes their freedoms are granted and protected by the govt to form a cohesive society.

While in the USA we believe we are born with individual freedoms and its the govt's job to make sure they are protected (while still reserving the right to protect certain freedoms individually.)

In a nutshell, mostly😛

Originally posted by dadudemon
Correct. No country has the ideal state of freedom "overall." All of them do well in on area and terribly in another. Freedom of Speech means nothing if you're dying in a ditch. Each of the major freedoms are tied to and are symbiotic with each other.

This is about speech lol. Only speech.

So does this mean no Norway does not in fact have superior freedom of speech than we do?

Again: this is only speech I'm discussing.

Originally posted by snowdragon
I believe that is the bigger piece in the philosophy of freedom between the EU and USA.

EU believes their freedoms are granted and protected by the govt to form a cohesive society.

While in the USA we believe we are born with individual freedoms and its the govt's job to make sure they are protected (while still reserving the right to protect certain freedoms individually.)

In a nutshell, mostly😛

Well yeah if the rights come *from* the government it means they can take back those rights as well. That's another way the UK f*cked up and it's why Americans say the rights are inherent.

Originally posted by Surtur
Well yeah if the rights come *from* the government it means they can take back those rights as well. That's another way the UK f*cked up and it's why Americans say the rights are inherent.

Which is why I summarized it without a lot of fluff.

I still believe the USA has a better system in regards to speech and how we view our rights/freedoms in regards to individuals (people not corporations.)

Originally posted by Surtur
This is about speech lol. Only speech.

This isn't a Comics vs. discussion. It's not about "only speech" because it was be stupid to think "only speech freedoms can be considered when disusing freedoms."

Originally posted by Surtur
So does this mean no Norway does not in fact have superior freedom of speech than we do?

Again: this is only speech I'm discussing.

Okay, in that case, no, the US is among the worst out of all modern countries when it comes to freedom of speech because I define that freedom in the following ways:

1. The ability to pursue an education independent of financial means. "Freedom of Speech" is also "Freedom of Thought" which encompasses education and the economic means to pursue that education. This is slowly becoming a non-issue because of the information age, however. Which is great. We need an open internet and inalienable rights with the information networks to pursue this new avenue of speech freedoms related to education. So this requires net neutrality rules and internet freedoms which we kind of suck at and need to improve.

2. Our press is among the most restricted out of modern countries. We treat our press rather terribly compared to other modern nations. We can do better.

3. We imprison people at much higher rates and in raw numbers compared to any other country in the world. The ability to express your speech is extremely limited when you're incarcerated, obviously. The US is the worst in the world in this category. The biggest demarcation in our freedom of speech rating.

4. The basic human right of healthcare greatly restrict our ability to free speech. We are not allowed to pursue speech-y things while our health is failing and costs too much for us to express our speech through economic means. Remember, true speech is the power to actually get your message to others without reprisals. That takes power and money.

The ability to have freedom of speech is dependent upon health (life), money (property and life), and the pursuit of happiness (true freedom to do what you want without harming others). The US sorely lacking compared to other modern countries in these areas.

You probably dislike how I've pointed out how the Freedom of Speech clearly has a symbiotic relationship with other rights and freedoms. But I warned you. I gave you hints. If you want this only about the freedom of speech while ignoring how the "Freedom of Speech" as cross-functional relationships with other basic freedoms, you'll get the political science book thrown at you.

That reads almost exactly like AOC's green plan in creating associations.