Contemporary threats to free speech

A place to bring a contemplative / Dharmic perspective and opinions to current events and politics.
User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 3348
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Contemporary threats to free speech

Post by Mr Man » Sun May 27, 2018 8:12 pm

Pseudobabble wrote:
Sun May 27, 2018 7:41 pm
Mr Man wrote:
Sun May 27, 2018 7:23 pm
And why do you think that? Do you think he wasn't in contempt of court?
He was - but doubtless someone less.. irritating to the prevailing morality would be treated less in a less heavy-handed manner.
His arrest didn't seem particularly heavy-handed
Pseudobabble wrote:
Sun May 27, 2018 7:41 pm
Mr Man wrote:
Sun May 27, 2018 7:23 pm
And who do you think it might be that has conspired?
The trial outside which he was filming is one which is likely to inflame tensions if it were more widely publicised. Making a stink outside the courtrooms would be a great annoyance to those wishing to preserve a conciliatory narrative.
These trials do normally get publicised after the convictions. The story of one was even made into an award winning TV show.
Pseudobabble wrote:
Sun May 27, 2018 7:41 pm
Sam Vara wrote:
Sun May 27, 2018 7:02 pm
But it isn't really that likely is it?
A small chance of death is ok :thinking: ? Anyhow, the man in question is not short of enemies, so I'm not sure what you're statement is based on.
I think you have misquoted Sam Vara. No murder is not okay. Yes it is possible another inmate will murder him.

User avatar
lyndon taylor
Posts: 1835
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 11:41 pm
Location: Redlands, US occupied Northern Mexico
Contact:

Re: Contemporary threats to free speech

Post by lyndon taylor » Sun May 27, 2018 8:23 pm

They have protective custody for target prisoners in prison and jail, they also have solitary for police officers etc sentenced to prison, there is no possibility he will be set loose in the general prison population, so the murder speculation is pretty bogus.
18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community, sincerely former monk John

http://trickleupeconomictheory.blogspot.com/

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 3975
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: Contemporary threats to free speech

Post by Sam Vara » Sun May 27, 2018 8:41 pm

Mr Man wrote:
Sun May 27, 2018 7:58 pm
That he was arrested on Breach of the Peace and then charged for something else is, in my opinion, is insignificant.
OK, we all attribute different amounts of significance to things. I'm happy to differ amicably on that one.
You think the Conservative Government is involved in a conspiracy against Tommy Robinson? Really?
I doubt if it is discussed at cabinet meetings, but yes, I do. And it involves the media too. Robinson is a provocateur who represents a considerable threat to the narrative which the government and the media is spinning around globalisation, national identity, and immigration. Live-streaming "Muslim rapists" outside a court is certainly a breach of his conditions (if not of the peace!) but the Government's wider concern is that stunts like this could spark a general backlash against minorities and the way that they and Englishness have been represented. Perhaps this is no more significant than the police being experts in white working-class thuggery, and selling the government a line about this being more significant than the other threats which they are clearly not up to dealing with. But something is happening; the game is changing.
Well it is a possibility but fairly unlikely don't you think?
I can't give you numerical odds, but when I'm talking about the government dealing with a person who is politically and ideologically inconvenient to them, estimating the chances of his political murder at "fairly unlikely" makes me think that our rulers could try a little harder.

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 3975
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: Contemporary threats to free speech

Post by Sam Vara » Sun May 27, 2018 8:55 pm

lyndon taylor wrote:
Sun May 27, 2018 8:23 pm
They have protective custody for target prisoners in prison and jail, they also have solitary for police officers etc sentenced to prison, there is no possibility he will be set loose in the general prison population, so the murder speculation is pretty bogus.
It wasn't bogus when he was attacked in prison before. He complained of Muslim gangs running the prison wings, and the prison officers turning a blind eye to the danger he was in. Following this, a spokesperson for a Muslim group raised his case regarding prison attack with the Home Secretary.

User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 3348
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Contemporary threats to free speech

Post by Mr Man » Tue May 29, 2018 5:32 pm

So Robinson pleaded guilty to contempt of court and expressed deep regret.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-44287640

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 3975
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: Contemporary threats to free speech

Post by Sam Vara » Tue May 29, 2018 6:25 pm

Mr Man wrote:
Tue May 29, 2018 5:32 pm
So Robinson pleaded guilty to contempt of court and expressed deep regret.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-44287640
Yes, standard practice as part of a plea for leniency. He appears to be taking more effective legal advice.

User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 3348
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Contemporary threats to free speech

Post by Mr Man » Tue May 29, 2018 6:54 pm

Sam Vara wrote:
Tue May 29, 2018 6:25 pm
Mr Man wrote:
Tue May 29, 2018 5:32 pm
So Robinson pleaded guilty to contempt of court and expressed deep regret.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-44287640
Yes, standard practice as part of a plea for leniency. He appears to be taking more effective legal advice.
You're comical apologist Sam. What is your legal background? Not much I imagine given your "it's also notable that he was arrested for one offence and then charged with another. This happens, but is rare." comment.

Have a look at your and Pseudobabble's first comment's relating to this - buying into daft conspiracies.

So was his arrest really "one of those contemporary threats to free speech?"

PS for some reason I had thought you and all the mods had opted out of "News, Current Events & Politics".

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 3975
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: Contemporary threats to free speech

Post by Sam Vara » Tue May 29, 2018 8:44 pm

Mr Man wrote:
Tue May 29, 2018 6:54 pm
You're comical apologist Sam.
I might be comical, but I'm not in any sense an apologist for Robinson or anyone else.
Have a look at your and Pseudobabble's first comment's relating to this - buying into daft conspiracies.
I don't need to take a look at my own comments, as I wrote them. I can't see any evidence of either Pseudobabble or myself "buying into daft conspiracies". You'll go back to getting minimal answers if you are rude, Mr. Man.
So was his arrest really "one of those contemporary threats to free speech?"
Yes, I'm happy to see it that way.
PS for some reason I had thought you and all the mods had opted out of "News, Current Events & Politics".
Not for any justified reason, it seems!

User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 3348
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Contemporary threats to free speech

Post by Mr Man » Tue May 29, 2018 9:09 pm

Sam Vara wrote:
Tue May 29, 2018 8:44 pm
Mr Man wrote:
Tue May 29, 2018 6:54 pm
PS for some reason I had thought you and all the mods had opted out of "News, Current Events & Politics".
Not for any justified reason, it seems!
:shrug:

User avatar
Leeuwenhoek2
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 10:24 pm

Re: Contemporary threats to free speech

Post by Leeuwenhoek2 » Tue May 29, 2018 10:37 pm

Sam Vara wrote:
Sun May 27, 2018 8:41 pm
OK, we all attribute different amounts of significance to things. I'm happy to differ amicably on that one.
Sam. I'm delighting in the felicity of the words and the harmonious but constructive mindset modeled by them.
Tending towards harmony without sacrificing logic or avoiding what was said. :twothumbsup:

My goal is to practice to interact in a similar manner until it's my first and default response.

User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 3348
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Contemporary threats to free speech

Post by Mr Man » Tue May 29, 2018 11:24 pm

Leeuwenhoek2 wrote:
Tue May 29, 2018 10:37 pm
Sam Vara wrote:
Sun May 27, 2018 8:41 pm
OK, we all attribute different amounts of significance to things. I'm happy to differ amicably on that one.
Sam. I'm delighting in the felicity of the words and the harmonious but constructive mindset modeled by them.
Tending towards harmony without sacrificing logic or avoiding what was said. :twothumbsup:

My goal is to practice to interact in a similar manner until it's my first and default response.
Hi Leeuwenhoek2

The thing is the words relate back to this
it's also notable that he was arrested for one offence and then charged with another. This happens, but is rare.
Is that comment accurate. Is it rare to be arrested for "breach of the peace" and then charged with another offence?

This is from "The Secret Barrister" blog, posted today
It is perfectly common for a person to be arrested on suspicion of one offence, and then ultimately charged or dealt with for another. In this case, it appears that Yaxley-Lennon was arrested and detained for causing or threatening a breach of the peace, and that the court, upon being made aware of his activities, directed that he be brought to court to be dealt with for contempt of court.
https://thesecretbarrister.com/

So you got taken in by his language?

User avatar
Leeuwenhoek2
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 10:24 pm

Re: Contemporary threats to free speech

Post by Leeuwenhoek2 » Sun Jun 03, 2018 8:53 am

Mr Man wrote:
Tue May 29, 2018 11:24 pm
Leeuwenhoek2 wrote:
Tue May 29, 2018 10:37 pm
Sam Vara wrote:
Sun May 27, 2018 8:41 pm
OK, we all attribute different amounts of significance to things. I'm happy to differ amicably on that one.
Sam. I'm delighting in the felicity of the words and the harmonious but constructive mindset modeled by them.
Tending towards harmony without sacrificing logic or avoiding what was said. :twothumbsup:

My goal is to practice to interact in a similar manner until it's my first and default response.
Hi Leeuwenhoek2

The thing is the words relate back to this
it's also notable that he was arrested for one offence and then charged with another. This happens, but is rare.
...
So you got taken in by his language?
The immediate context of the post from which quoted Sam Vera are quite different from the words which you quote above.

It may be the case that his words "relate back to" that which you say they do. The words you quoted were not in the post to which I responded. Nor were they the idea to which I believed Sam was responding to.
Please note that the forum provides a link back to post to which I responded.

So was I "taken in by his language"? Maybe. Perhaps the segment of conversation that I read and responded to was, in itself, out of context.

In the partial context in which I read Sam's response, his response seemed to follow logically from the previous sentence and made sense in a way that I thought artful.

discursive:
1. digressing from subject to subject.

I wasn't following every sub-thread of this long and discursive thread.

User avatar
Mr Man
Posts: 3348
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 8:42 am

Re: Contemporary threats to free speech

Post by Mr Man » Sun Jun 03, 2018 10:30 am

Leeuwenhoek2 wrote:
Sun Jun 03, 2018 8:53 am

The immediate context of the post from which quoted Sam Vera are quite different from the words which you quote above.

It may be the case that his words "relate back to" that which you say they do. The words you quoted were not in the post to which I responded. Nor were they the idea to which I believed Sam was responding to.
Please note that the forum provides a link back to post to which I responded.

So was I "taken in by his language"? Maybe. Perhaps the segment of conversation that I read and responded to was, in itself, out of context.

In the partial context in which I read Sam's response, his response seemed to follow logically from the previous sentence and made sense in a way that I thought artful.

discursive:
1. digressing from subject to subject.

I wasn't following every sub-thread of this long and discursive thread.
Thanks for the reply Leeuwenhoek2.

User avatar
Leeuwenhoek2
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 10:24 pm

Re: Contemporary threats to free speech

Post by Leeuwenhoek2 » Sun Jun 03, 2018 7:13 pm

Of relevance to that which drives threats to free speech.

Tolerance: “a willingness to permit the expression of those ideas or interests that one opposes.”
A review of social science work on political tolerance/intolerance especially on university campus
https://heterodoxacademy.org/the-skepti ... -are-high/
Abstract: A series of essays published in March argued that American college students are just as supportive of free speech as they have ever been, so there is no “free speech crisis” on American college campuses. In this essay we show that this optimistic reading of the most widely used longitudinal dataset (the GSS) greatly overestimates political tolerance because of a methodological artifact: it asks about speakers that are not very controversial anymore, such as a “communist” or a “homosexual.” When we examine data about speakers that are strongly disliked today, we find much higher rates of political intolerance, particularly among college students on the left. We argue that this political asymmetry tells us nothing about the left or right in general, but rather about who is feeling psychologically insecure in the last few years. We think these re-interpretations of the GSS, along with an analysis of two recent datasets, undercuts the skeptics’ main argument and contradicts their thesis, while pointing to productive new ways to address the conflicts roiling many campuses.
... [Relative to attitudes in the 1950s ] Speakers who are regarded as homophobic, transphobic, or Islamophobic can be thought of as the communists or atheists of today. They are the most intensely disliked, particularly, it seems, on college campuses. If we want to know whether college students are more tolerant today than they were in generations past, it makes little sense to ask them if they’d tolerate a communist, an atheist, or a homosexual making a speech. The rising lines of tolerance in Figure 1, using the Stouffer method, do not show that young people are becoming more tolerant of speech across the board. Rather, an approximation of the least-liked groups method suggests that students on the left are intolerant toward many speakers, particularly those who, presumably, are seen to violate their core values (see e.g., Graham & Haidt, 2012). Most of the groups that current students––particularly liberal students––would consider disinviting are linked to bigotry, but notice that the “anti-feminist” is not anti-woman; the speaker is opposed to feminism, a family of political/intellectual movements. Nearly half of the very liberal students surveyed said that such a speaker should not be allowed to offer such critiques on campus.

One might argue that the speakers opposed by the left are objectively worse than the speakers opposed by the right. It is likely that students on both sides believe–and can explain–why the speakers they dislike are uniquely awful and dangerous ...
... PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER: WHAT IS CHANGING AND WHY?
The skeptics tell a story of high and uniformly rising tolerance on college campuses. They offer a narrative in which all is well for free speech on college campuses, and that those who raise alarms are engaging in a “moral panic”––an over-the top alarmist frenzy, fueled by right-wing media. We agree that the right-wing media is now doing what it can to raise alarm, and that it often exaggerates or distorts events on campus, but that does not mean that all is well on campus.

...Based their review of the scholarly literature and on maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis ... of a data obtained from a national sample, Sullivan et al. (1982) proposed the model [see below]. This model has stood the test of the time, although there remain some “enigmas of intolerance”
Image
NOTE: The paper includes a longer discussion of these factors which I have not quoted here
we have drawn on political science work from the 1980s to offer an account of exactly why political intolerance may be increasing on the left on college campuses in recent years: because more and more students are feeling psychologically insecure, losing faith in democratic institutions, and facing (or at least hearing about) real threats from off-campus right-wing sources.

User avatar
Leeuwenhoek2
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 10:24 pm

Re: Contemporary threats to free speech

Post by Leeuwenhoek2 » Sun Jun 03, 2018 8:55 pm

On Social Power Dynamics in Political Discourse
- Christian Gonzalez is a political science major at Columbia University and a columnist for the Columbia Daily Spectator.
In The Righteous Mind, Jonathan Haidt argues that progressives are primarily motivated by the desire to help victims of oppression. Most causes of the left are thus conceptualized as problems between oppressors and oppressed (for instance, Israel as the oppressor of Palestine, men as the oppressors of women, and whites as the oppressors of other racial groups). Although this theoretical approach undoubtedly has its merits, analyzing problems in terms of oppression poses difficulties to the fostering of viewpoint diversity, because anyone who disagrees with leftist interpretations can easily be perceived to be making apologetics for oppression.

Suppose that the four following axes of oppression exist. First, there is capitalist oppression — the billionaire class continues to augment its wealth at the expense of everyone else. Second, there is racial oppression — a legacy of slavery, Jim Crow, and other informal and undeclared means of discrimination continue to suppress black economic, political, and educational outcomes. Third, there is gender oppression — misogyny prevents women from reaching the highest levels of political and economic power. Fourth, there is imperial oppression — the United States uses its enormous military to secure access to oil and other resources in the Middle East and elsewhere, frequently committing ghastly war crimes along the way.

For a college student or professor who interprets oppression in this way, it is going to be very grating when a conservative comes along to say, for example, not just that capitalism isn’t oppressive but that poor people are the system’s primary beneficiaries, or that discrimination is not the reason why minorities are lagging behind whites, or that American foreign policy helps foster economic prosperity, international stability, and democratic freedom. Such conservative positions as these will appear as rationalizations, if not outright justifications, for what leftists perceive to be unequal structures of power and subjugation.

On this basis, then, one might think that leftists’ frustration is incurred because they either 1) believe that conservatives support evil systems or 2) believe that conservative positions will further entrench these systems, to the detriment of society’s most vulnerable people, even if conservatives do not personally have bad intentions. But such explanations for the frustration, I believe, only partially explain its origins. ... the analysis of leftist intolerance for right-wing views is incomplete without an understanding of the social power dynamics that allow leftists to get away with hurling accusations to an extent unavailable to their rightist counterparts.
The asymmetry between how the left and right engage with each other in academia and print media (whereby the former can insult the latter with relative impunity) seems, then, to have more to do with the tactics available to each rather than with either side’s principles. If the ratio of conservative to liberal professors was somehow reversed from roughly 1-10 to 10-1, I imagine that we would see vitriolic attacks within institutions of higher learning against Marxists, supporters of abortion, critics of U.S. foreign policy, and other scholars who took positions at odds with core conservative values.

Put simply, leftists make accusations of racism or sexism partly because institutional power dynamics allow them to, and partly to reinforce those very dynamics by discrediting others. Our society’s necessary and justified revulsion to prejudice makes it such that accusations of racism can tarnish entire careers. If a scholar can be successfully branded as prejudiced, then she can be readily dismissed; and this is, in part, what such accusations aim to do — to dismiss rather than to engage.

Conservatives, in turn, are forced to ask for the benefit of the doubt and to insist on the norms of civility because they tend to hold minority opinions in intellectual venues. If the right started slinging comparable insults at the left in universities or print media, it would be taken even less seriously there than it already is. It appears, therefore, that when people engage each other in print or in debate they make rhetorical decisions based on what the circumstances allow them.

Apart from seeking to redress the imbalance of opinions in intellectual spaces, I’m not sure how we can overcome these social dynamics so as to improve the state of our discourse.
-- https://heterodoxacademy.org/on-social- ... discourse/

------------------------------
Readers should note that a recent poll showed free speech intolerance around some issues arises on the right and left.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests