Free Speech

   Freedom of speech means there are is no responsibility and absolutely no
   punishments or obstacles (such as [1]censorship), imposed by anyone
   (government, [2]corporations, [3]culture, society, technology, ...),
   against merely talking about anything, making any public statement and
   sharing or publication any kind of [4]information at all. Adopting free
   speech is not about increasing the degree of speech tolerance as many
   erroneously think, it's rather a complete change of values and a switch of
   mentality, letting go of old, primitive kind of thinking and making the
   leap to a new intellectual level, to absolutely eliminating the very
   concept of limiting or punishing any kind of expression, therefore free
   speech has to be by definition absolute and have no limit, otherwise it's
   not free speech but controlled, limited speech -- trying to add exceptions
   to free speech is like trying to limit to whom a [5]free software license
   is granted; doing so immediately makes such software non-free; free speech
   "with limits" is like free lunch for a low price or vegetarian food with
   only a little meat in it -- it's not the real thing, it just wants to be
   called X without actually being X. Free speech also comes with zero
   responsibility exactly by definition, as responsibility implies some forms
   of punishment; free speech means exactly one can say anything without
   fearing any burden of responsibility -- if anyone says "free speech comes
   with responsibility", he has absolutely no clue what he's talking about,
   he is not against censorship, he just advocates self censorship (i.e.
   censorship done internally rather than externally). If you unable to say
   something or afraid of saying it because of any kind of punishment -- for
   example sharing someone's private information or a pirated movie, saying
   that you hate your boss, that you'd like to fuck your cousin, that there
   is a bomb on a plane, that you'd like to kill someone -- you have no free
   speech. True freedom of speech is an essential attribute of a mature
   society, sadly it hasn't been implemented yet and with the [6]SJW
   [7]cancer the latest trend in society is towards eliminating free speech
   rather than supporting it (see e.g. [8]political correctness). Speech is
   being widely censored by extremist groups (e.g. [9]LGBT and
   [10]corporations, see also [11]cancel culture) and states -- depending on
   country there exist laws against so called "[12]hate speech", questioning
   official versions of history (see e.g. [13]Holocaust denial laws present
   in many EU states), criticizing powerful people (for example it is illegal
   to criticize or insult that huge inbred dick Thai king), sharing of useful
   information such as books ([14]copyright censorship) etc. Free speech
   nowadays is being eliminated by the strategy of creating an exception to
   free speech, usually called "hate speech", and then classifying any
   undesired speech under such label and silencing it.

   The basic principle of free speech says that if you don't support freedom
   of speech which you dislike, you don't support free speech. I.e. speech
   that you hate does not equal hate speech.

   Free speech is based on the observation that firstly limiting speech is
   extremely harmful, and secondly that speech itself never harms anyone, it
   is only actions that harm and we should therefore focus on the actions
   themselves. A death threat or call for someone's murder doesn't kill --
   sure, it may lead to someone being killed, but so may for example playing
   sports. If any kind of speaking leads to people dying, you have a deep
   issue within your society that definitely does NOT lie in not applying
   enough censorship; trying to solve your issue with censorship here is like
   trying to solve depression by physically deforming the depressed man's
   face into a smile and pretending he's OK. Offending someone by pointing
   out he's an idiot also doesn't count as speech causing harm, it's just a
   sad case of someone who is unable to bear hearing truth (or a lie), in
   which case he shouldn't be listening to people any more than someone with
   epilepsy should be watching seizure inducing videos.

   Some idiots (like that [15]xkcd #1357) say that free speech is only about
   legality, i.e. about what's merely allowed to be said by the law or what
   speech the law "protects". Of course, this is completely wrong and just
   reflects this society's obsession with law; true free speech mustn't be
   limited by anything -- if you're not allowed to say something, it doesn't
   matter too much what it is that's preventing you, your speech is not free.
   By the twisted logic of "free speech with consequences" you always have
   free speech, even in North Korea -- you aren't PHYSICALLY prevented to
   speak, you just have to bear responsibility for your speech, in this case
   a bullet. A bullet is a bullet, be it from a government gun or a drug
   cartel gun, a gun pointed at one's face always makes one not want to talk,
   no matter who the gun belongs to. If for example it is theoretically legal
   to be politically incorrect and criticize the LGBT gospel but you
   [16]de-facto can't do it because the LGBT fascist [17]SJWs would
   [18]cancel you and maybe even physically lynch you, your speech is not
   free. It is important to realize we mustn't tie free speech to legal
   definition (also considering that a [19]good society aims to eliminate law
   itself), i.e. it isn't enough to make speech free only in legal sense, a
   TRUE free speech plainly and simply means anyone can literally say what he
   wants without any fear at all. Our goal is to make speech free
   [20]culturally, i.e. teach people that we should let others speak freely,
   even those -- and especially those -- who we disagree with.

   Free speech extends even to such actions as shouting "fire" in a crowded
   theatre. In a good society with free speech people don't behave like
   monkeys, they will not trust a mere shout without having a further proof
   of there actually being fire and even if they suspect there is fire, they
   will not panic as that's a retarded thing to do.

   Despite what the propaganda says there is no free speech in our society,
   the only kind of speech that is allowed is that which either has no effect
   or which the system desires for its benefit. Illusion of free speech is
   sustained by letting people speak until they actually start making a
   change -- once someone's speech leads to e.g. revealing state secrets or
   historical truths (e.g. about [21]Holocaust, human [22]races or government
   crimes -- see [23]wikileaks) or to destabilizing economy or state, such
   speech is labeled "harmful" in some way (hate speech, intellectual
   property violation, revealing of confidential information, instigating
   crime, defamation etc.), censored and punished. Even though nowadays just
   pure censorship laws are being passed on daily basis, even in times when
   there are seemingly no specific censorship laws and so it seems that "we
   have free speech" there always exist generic laws that can be fit to any
   speech, such as those against "inciting violence", "terrorism",
   "undermining state interests", "hate speech" or any other fancy issue,
   which can be used to censor absolutely any speech the government pleases,
   even if such speech has nothing to do with said causes -- it is enough
   that some state lawyer can find however unlikely possible indirect link to
   such cause: this could of course be well seen e.g. in the cases of
   [24]Covid flu or Russia-Ukraine war. Even though there were e.g. no
   specific laws in European countries against supporting Russia immediately
   after the war started, government immediately started censoring and
   locking up people who supported Russia on the Internet, based on the above
   mentioned generic laws. These laws work on the same principle as
   [25]backdoor in software: they are advocated as a "safety" "feature" and
   allow complete takeover of the system, but are mostly unused until the
   right time comes, to give the users a sense of being safe ("I've been
   using this backdoored CPU for years and nothing happened, so it's safe");
   unlike with software backdoor though the law backdoor isn't usually
   removed after it has been exploited, people are just too stupid to notice
   this and governments can get away with keeping the laws in place, so they
   do.

See Also

     * [26]nigger
     * [27]censorship
     * [28]loquendo

Links:
1. censorship.md
2. corporation.md
3. cutlure.md
4. information.md
5. free_software.md
6. sjw.md
7. cancer.md
8. political_correctness.md
9. lgbt.md
10. corporation.md
11. cancel_culture.md
12. hate_speech.md
13. holocaust.md
14. copyright.md
15. xkcd.md
16. de_facto.md
17. sjw.md
18. cancel_culture.md
19. less_retarded_society.md
20. culture.md
21. holocaust.md
22. race.md
23. wikileaks.md
24. covid.md
25. backdoor.md
26. nigger.md
27. censorship.md
28. loquendo.md