• shawnshitshow@sopuli.xyz
    461·
    1 year ago

    despite what “free speech” absolutists would like to believe, the vast majority of the world does not wish to tolerate hate, racism, and bigotry. refusing to accept these is not suppression, it’s maintaining healthy and welcoming communities.

    it’s no different than swimming pools having a basic “no shitting in the pool” policy. if you want to shit in the pool, you are going to have to go swim with others that are ok with swimming in shitty water.

    with that said, I hear exploding-heads may be what you’re looking for

    • five@lemmy.kde.socialOP
      323·
      1 year ago

      “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear”

      I personally believe that a community that support free speech is going to be healthier on the long run than one that doesn’t.

      exploding-heads seem to have rules against not being authentic, trolling and slurs

      • BestBouclettes@jlai.lu
        221·
        1 year ago

        You should read about the paradox of tolerance and why free speech should be limited to what doesn’t hurt or limit others’ access to freedom.
        Being able to trash talk minorities (completely random example obviously) is not free speech, it’s hate speech that will ultimately devolve into atrocities.

        Also, please share the kind of things that you think should be allowed without naming them (in full details like “racist slurs”, or “calls to violence against a minority”, or “cryptoscams”) , I think it could be interesting.

        • five@lemmy.kde.socialOP
          16·
          1 year ago

          Censorship is also a gateway to disasters and history is filled with examples. I cannot read french but i can understand that your instance has rules against trolling. I have been accused of being a troll by some in this thread so if i was in your instance i could technically have been censored.

        • kava@lemmy.world
          210·
          1 year ago

          And when you start banning speech arbitrarily to “protect people” you are creating the mechanisms by which government can prevent “speaking truth to power”.

          For example look at the pandemic and the “truth” fact-checks by the big social media companies. Sure nobody cares now because they were censoring anti-vax loonies but next think you know there’s a popular leftist movement and it’s designated as dangerous and censored by force across the internet- using same mechanisms built during COVID.

          We cannot give an inch to the government. Every overstep is power they will never give up willingly again.

          • NewEnglandRedshirt@lemmy.world
            61·
            1 year ago

            I’m unsure what your point is. Are you talking about social media companies, or are you talking about the government? Because free speech is about censorship from the government, not private corporations

            • kava@lemmy.world
              14·
              1 year ago

              Federal government pressured social media companies to do this. It was all in the name of fighting misinformation. Which again - is fine now but it doesn’t take much imagination to see how this can go wrong should the wrong person be elected.

              Large monopolistic companies are in many ways extensions of the state.

      • DeathbringerThoctar@lemmy.world
        111·
        1 year ago

        It doesn’t mean people have to listen to what you’re telling them, and it certainly doesn’t mean that if someone doesn’t want to hear it you have a duty to say it. Cowards afraid of personal responsibility use this argument.

        If any rules at all, particularly ones about no trolling or slurs, bother you than you don’t want freedom of speech at all. You want freedom from consequences for your speech. Grow up.

        • five@lemmy.kde.socialOP
          212·
          1 year ago

          Nobody is forcing you to follow this thread. What I’m looking for is stated in the title: a list of instances that support free speech

          • DeathbringerThoctar@lemmy.world
            132·
            1 year ago

            Sorry, I thought thought I had the right to tell you what you didn’t want to hear.

            Go back to Twitter. You obviously don’t recognize freedom of speech when it’s happening right infront of you.

          • Veraticus@lib.lgbtEnglish
            52·
            1 year ago

            Uh as you pointed out free speech means you are required to interact with opinions you find offensive.

            Are you saying you don’t support free speech, snowflake? If you do you’ll stay in this thread.

  • Greyscale@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
    333·
    1 year ago

    In the same vein as “States rights to do what?”, I want to ask: Free speech to say what?

  • LapGoat@pawb.social
    322·
    1 year ago

    yeah sure, just reply to my comment with a list of the things you want to be able to say that you cant say here and ill point you in the right direction.

      • LapGoat@pawb.social
        201·
        1 year ago

        yeah yeah yeah I hear you, but what im asking you is: what is it exactly that you want to say, that you apparently can’t say here?

        personally, I have said everything I want to say and have had zero problems. free speech up the wazoo, ya know?

        • five@lemmy.kde.socialOP
          112·
          1 year ago

          The instance you are in pawb.social for example have rules against cryptocurrencies, nfts and “misinformation”

          • LapGoat@pawb.social
            231·
            1 year ago

            yeah I dont really care to talk about crypto, nfts, and misinformation there. Im more there to look at cute furries and technology.

            there are other spaces for those things, and if I wanted to post misinformation id undelete my Facebook account.

            you haven’t answered the question lol.

            • five@lemmy.kde.socialOP
              112·
              1 year ago

              I would like to reply to all sort of comment and idea according to free speech

              in case you missed it

              • TheLepidopterists [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
                242·
                1 year ago

                Until you actually clarify everyone is going to assume you’re mad that you can’t say the n-word and are a huge bigot.

                EDIT: at this point, even if you clarify, I personally will assume you’re just covering your ass

              • LapGoat@pawb.social
                161·
                1 year ago

                ah you misunderstant, let me be more clear.

                what exactly is it that you wish to say/post that you cannot do here, in this comment section?

                • five@lemmy.kde.socialOP
                  313·
                  1 year ago

                  Do you have some understanding problems? I created this thread asking if there’s a list of instances that support free speech, what i would like to reply in general i already said to you two times

      • Ardipithecus [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
        111·
        1 year ago

        Free speech isn’t some magic phrase that exists in a vacuum. All online communities have restrictions on what can be said (most basically, violent threats as an example). Say whatever you want, but be ready to accept those consequences.

        Maybe this is a bad assumption, but I would guess you’re from the US (like me). Our First Amendment protects our speech from “Government Interference” (still not totally true, but w/e). Free Speech doesn’t mean consequence free speech in various spaces.

        Regardless, you admitted earlier you’re upset you can’t use slurs so this is probably falling on deaf ears…

  • 𝘋𝘪𝘳𝘬@lemmy.ml
    292·
    1 year ago

    There cannot be “free speech” instances because every instance (or more generally speaking: any online community) I am aware of that claims to be “free speech” ends up being an alt-right echo chamber, a platform for hate speech, or a site to share questionable pornographic content.

    Unfortunately you need moderation if your Internet platform is open to the public.

    • ristoril_zip@lemmy.zipEnglish
      232·
      1 year ago

      The people who make these posts looking for “free speech” are really looking for no consequence speech. They like to pretend they’re fans of the town square but ignore the fact that people can get run out of the town square, they can get shouted down in the town square, and they can get drowned out by the others in the town square.

      They want to be able to say hateful things without being accountable for their hate. That’s not free speech as envisioned by anyone who is an actual advocate of open society or free speech.

      What we have on Lemmy is probably the closest thing we’ll ever get to a public square in the Internet. Someone can go and say their hateful thing. Then they can get run out of the instance they’re on and go find another one. If they say hateful things and get run out of there, they can find another one. Who knows, one day they might find an instance full of like minded hateful people who don’t run them out. Of course, they’re likely to find that instance is not federated very well or broadly. Much like people from non racist towns don’t like to have much to do with towns widely known to be full of racists.

      • 𝘋𝘪𝘳𝘬@lemmy.ml
        81·
        1 year ago

        … and if they can’t find a town square where they can spew their hate, they can still found their own town!

        The people who make these posts looking for “free speech” are really looking for no consequence speech

        This is why I intentionally use “free speech” instead of free speech. Free speech is important and and essential part of every society.

      • 𝘋𝘪𝘳𝘬@lemmy.ml
        112·
        1 year ago

        I remember Voat which started as “free speech” alternative to Reddit. When I checked the site out the first thing I saw was an underage anime character without clothing on the front page.

        Not sure if this is what we want the Threadiverse to be associated with. (Well, actually I am sure that we don’t want that.)

    • five@lemmy.kde.socialOP
      16·
      1 year ago

      I did not ask for alt-right instances or unmoderated, i asked for a list of instances that support free speech

  • ᴇᴍᴘᴇʀᴏʀ 帝@feddit.ukEnglish
    23·
    1 year ago

    I doubt there are truly any. Even on the free speech advocating instances, I imagine if you started posting terrorist threats and/or scat porn you’d quickly find their limits on free speech (bonus points for combining the two in one post).

    If you just want to say nasty things about minorities (which these kinds of posts are often code for) or hype some crypto scam then there are instances for that.

      • five@lemmy.kde.socialOP
        313·
        1 year ago

        As title i’m wondering if there’s a list of lemmy instances that support free speech

          • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
            21·
            1 year ago

            Wdym “free speech for who” and “about what”? Ain’t really “free speech” if it’s limited in who it applies to. By that standard, North Korea has free speech, as long as you’re a member of a well-connected family speaking in support of the government.

            • CmdrShepard@lemmy.oneEnglish
              11·
              1 year ago

              Oh is that why we see so many North Koreans expressing their opinions on the internet?

      • five@lemmy.kde.socialOP
        15·
        1 year ago

        I don’t remember saying that. What i asked for is a list of instances that support free speech. Most popular instances like lemmy.ml and lemmy.world don’t seem to support it as they censor even basic swear words /slurs

  • dan1101@lemm.ee
    211·
    1 year ago

    Freedom of speech is for the government, not privately run servers. This sounds like a Republican not wanting people to disagree with him. That’s fine but maybe try 4chan or that trump twitter site?

      • sweetviolentblush@sh.itjust.works
        111·
        1 year ago

        I’m going to keep on deadnaming Elon’s company until he stops deadnaming his trans kid, so it’ll probably always be twitter to me

    • five@lemmy.kde.socialOP
      18·
      1 year ago

      Free speech is a right everyone should have. I’m looking for a list of instances that support free speech and grands that right. This is totally unrelated to US politics

  • sylver_dragon@lemmy.worldEnglish
    191·
    1 year ago

    One great thing about Lemmy, you can always start your own instance. However, I strongly suspect that you will quickly find your instance defederated from just about every major instance. The thing is, that “free speech” doesn’t mean other people have to put up with anything you say. It does mean that you are free to go about saying whatever you want and are free from prior Government restraint on your speech. That isn’t completely without limits however, making specific or terroristic threats have generally been ruled to not be protected speech. You can also be held accountable, after the fact, for the effects of your speech.

    For example, you are free to yell “fire” in a crowded theater, no matter how many people incorrectly state otherwise. And, in fact, if there is a fire in said theater, you really should. However, if you yell “fire” in a crowded theater, with the intention to cause panic, and that panic results in injury or death, you will be held accountable for your negligence. It’s not the speech which is illegal, it’s the negligence. Government limitation on speech has to be very narrow and have a vary good reason for doing so. That’s a high bar which many laws have failed to meet.

    All that is to say, “free speech” is about Government action, not private action. Once you are on my property, I don’t have to tolerate your speech. If you show up on my front lawn and start screaming “I hate puppies!”, it’s my right to tell you to get the fuck off my property. And, the police will assist me in enforcing that right. Though, at that point the issue is trespass and not your speech. There is some limiting of my property rights when I am operating as a commercial entity; but, telling someone to leave, because I don’t like what they are saying, is not among those limitations. Technically, I could run a store front and tell anyone to leave who states “Nazi’s are bad”. Yes, they are objectively right, but it’s my property and I can restrict speech on my property in that way. The same logic applies to online forums.

    That brings us around to your request and later response to someone asking about the limitations you dislike:

    Doesn’t seem true, most instances have a long list or rules and doesn’t seem to tolerate basic slurs

    So ya, that’s not a “free speech” issue. The Government isn’t doing anything to you. It’s just that no one wants to be around you. You’ve decided to act in a way which many of the major Lemmy instance owners don’t want on their servers. And it’s their right to tell you to leave. Maybe, instead of looking for a Lemmy instance to support your anti-social behavior, take some time to reflect on why it seems that you are being isolated. As the old saw goes:

    If everyone around you seems to be an asshole, try looking in a mirror.

    • MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
      311·
      1 year ago

      That’s a whole lot of words for what amounts to pedantry over the specific meaning of something where the intended meaning was both conveyed and understood

  • orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts
    192·
    1 year ago

    Why don’t you just share with the class exactly what you think you should be allowed to say instead of being so oddly cryptic.

    I mean, my instance has rules and I enforce them. Should I not be permitted to do that?

    All I hear from this is a snowflake upset about the fact that they can’t use “basic slurs” (whatever the hell that means) without facing repercussions. Imagine that. People disliking the use of offensive words towards the underprivileged. The audacity.

    • five@lemmy.kde.socialOP
      17·
      1 year ago

      You are free to do what you want on your instance. I asked for a list of instances that support free speech

      • orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts
        81·
        1 year ago

        You’ll find that most are—and probably more so than corporate platforms since they’re user-driven and hosted. They aren’t beholden to shareholders and advertisers. The reality though is that the majority of users and instances won’t tolerate slurs and similar stereotypes, insults, etc. and the instances they federate with won’t either. Conspiracy theories? You’ll find plenty of spaces for that kind of stuff. The same goes for right and left-wing stances too.

        Hexbear, for example was found to be far too extreme in its views for some instances and users, and those instances took it upon themselves to no longer federate with them. That’s the catch with being able to freely express views. They are not immune or free from criticism and being relegated to obscurity.

        Communities like this are always fractured into echo chambers and safe spaces for people. That’s the benefit of them. It’s not like going outdoors where you’re subjected to everything and have no way to filter it. People aren’t seeking out a giant pool of collective noise; they are seeking out the specific music they want to hear.

    • nutbutter@discuss.tchncs.de
      7·
      1 year ago

      There are still a lot of caveats. For example, your server hosting provider can block you for posting objectionable content, like anti-LGBT references. If you host at home, you ISP can ban you. Then comes the domain extension. The domain extentions are controlled by some company or the other, like .com is managed by verizon, .zip is managed by Google etc. They, or the domain provider can also terminate your contract.

      Onion domains may be a solution, but if you post seriously objectionable content, like leaking CIA secrets, you can expect someone to knock on your door soon.