This tweet was the first I’d heard of it.
|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
EconomicsSamizdatistas |
The EU vs. free speech on the InternetJune 3rd, 2016 |
 11 comments to The EU vs. free speech on the Internet |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
Yes, what makes you think that wasnt deliberate.
This will be used for global censorship by the big companies.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/sep/30/angela-merkel-caught-on-hot-mic-confronting-mark-z/
German Chancellor Angela Merkel was overheard on a hot mic confronting Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg over anti-immigrant posts, amid complaints from her government that the social network isn’t doing enough to curtail racist comments.
The two were overheard exchanging words on a live transmission broadcast on the United Nations website, as participants took their seats at a U.N. development summit in New York on Saturday, Bloomberg reported.
After Ms. Merkel asked Mr. Zuckerberg about offensive posts on the refugee crisis, the Facebook CEO said “we need to do some work” on the issue.
“Are you working on this?” Ms. Merkel asked in English, Bloomberg reported.
“Yeah,” Mr. Zuckerberg reportedly responded, before the transmission was disrupted.
To be fair to Zuck, not many people would have had the presence of mind to tell Merkel to get lost, in what I presume was a brief conversation.
“Yeah….” can mean a lot of things and probably not ‘we share the same concerns as you and we are working to address these in a manner that will please you.
As for Merkel….well, I don’t think this surprises anyone
The march away from free speech towards politically permitted speech continues.
We all know what this means: no criticism of Islam, Muslim refugees, or (in the USA) of illegal immigration.
I quote myself, shamelessly:
Lest that second sentence confuse, think of how traffic signals in principle constrain liberty of movement, but also make movement possible in congested areas. Which in no way justifies putting them up where they are not needed.
http://www.vocativ.com/325190/arrests-for-social-media-posts-surge-in-london/
1. Ban hate speech
2. Define hate speech as anything that opposes or criticizes you
3. Profit (politically)
Notice how surreptitiously any criticism of certain “sensitive” cultures or religions is now considered “racist”, except anti-semitism of course, which the left are hurriedly trying to define as not racist even though it is precisely that.
I’m surprised that a poster to this blog has not heard of it months ago. I’d be less surprised about people in general. Obviously, the point of this kind of thing is to make opponents feel isolated. It works best if most people do not know it is happening. But I suspect that will not work out as well for them as the perpetrators hope.
The Weimar republic had hate-speech laws: 3 year maximum sentence for insulting a Jew religiously, 2 year maximum sentence for insulting a Jew racially, or 1 year maximum if it was rather defaming than threatening, plus fines, etc., court injunctions to up penalties for repeat offences or, in civil cases, to control any who attempted to boycott Jewish stores etc. The German Jewish community was well supplied with legal expertise and government connections, so these laws were used. (OF course, other groups were also able to use these hate-speech laws; I mention Jews specifically for obvious historical reasons.)
Those who do not learn from history are condemned to relive it. (Not exactly, I hope.)
Reprising Niall, even such a civilized country as Canada made the same mistake. And it surely has come back to bite the Jews (and others) who fail to bury their brains and lift their rears to Muslims who want to make a Thing about it.
(Not just Jews, of course.)
Yes the E.U. is determined to wipe out Freedom of Speech.
The lead story in the Economist magazine this week is on threats to Freedom of Speech – but their beloved E.U. is really one if these threats.
Oh, Niall, if only I had the time to keep up with everything. As it is I get most of my news from this blog and there are too many computer games to play to bother with everything the EU is up to.