I am not for absolutism because in some cases it can be disallowed. But only for very specific reasons and that the government is afraid of different ideologies isn’t a valid reason.
It sure is when the government represents the interests of the working majority. And the government is the only body that can decide what speech is or isn’t allowed, so your whole statement is self contradictory. If you accept that some speech is harmful and needs to be suppressed, then it becomes a question of degrees. And westerners thinking that they got the level of censorship fundamentally right while everyone else has it wrong is just plain old chauvinism. Western societies are currently the most polarized societies with some of the lowest levels of social cohesion. Anybody looking at the west and thinking that this is a good model should get their head checked.
Again, there is nothing to support the assertion that the level of speech tolerance in western societies is desirable or a net positive on society as a whole. You are a product of a particular society which plays an anchoring effect in what you consider to be the right level of free speech. This alone is not a rational basis for deciding that this is fundamentally the right amount of free speech we should strive for.
I can’t believe that this such is a difficult concept for free speech zealots to wrap their head around.
free speech absolutism is an infantile ideology
deleted by creator
here, educate yourself https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
It sure is when the government represents the interests of the working majority. And the government is the only body that can decide what speech is or isn’t allowed, so your whole statement is self contradictory. If you accept that some speech is harmful and needs to be suppressed, then it becomes a question of degrees. And westerners thinking that they got the level of censorship fundamentally right while everyone else has it wrong is just plain old chauvinism. Western societies are currently the most polarized societies with some of the lowest levels of social cohesion. Anybody looking at the west and thinking that this is a good model should get their head checked.
deleted by creator
Again, there is nothing to support the assertion that the level of speech tolerance in western societies is desirable or a net positive on society as a whole. You are a product of a particular society which plays an anchoring effect in what you consider to be the right level of free speech. This alone is not a rational basis for deciding that this is fundamentally the right amount of free speech we should strive for.
I can’t believe that this such is a difficult concept for free speech zealots to wrap their head around.