There is no "but" in "I believe in free speech". You do or you don't. No buts.
@scruffymonkey123
7 жыл бұрын
Well said.
@Zichronot
7 жыл бұрын
GravityBoy72 you're not allowed to harm others thru incitement of words. A weapon is controlled. Screaming FIRE in a theater illegal....If people simply used common sense and understood the power of language.We would never need any censorship on even behavior in movie theaters.BUT every generation gets more violent. And they believe that they can hurt others and be untouchable. Buckle up, take responsibility for your weapon . Hitler's oratory genius made the world quake. We should not need laws to keep you from calling for violence... unfortunately the USA lost all respect for law .Thanks to Obama's thug nation.We do need them.
@Zichronot
7 жыл бұрын
Kritesh Niraula First of all no one pulled your chain..And I said nothing about what you have gone on a liberal screeching session. I never said WHY it was... I am was not actually doing LAW. I was being philosophical. You @ss wipe.""you're not allowed to harm others thru incitement of words. A weapon is controlled. Screaming FIRE in a theater illegal" .What the fuck is your damage? Got damned ignorant people like you get on my nerves.. You bust into a convo and have NO Clue. Fucking willfully ignorant snowflake..
@GravityBoy72
4 жыл бұрын
@@MSM4U2POM I believe in free speech. And it has existed, it is enshrined in the American Constitution. The same constitution now easily usurped over a cold. Dark times.
@MSM4U2POM
4 жыл бұрын
@@GravityBoy72 Oh, don't talk nonsense. America probably has the closest thing to it, but that doesn't mean you can say what you like, without consequence. The constitution does protect free speech, but still allows limitations on certain categories; you still have public order edicts that prohibit incitement, and methods of redress exist for taking people to court for libel, slander, defamation, false witness and perjury where these elements of free speech are transgressed, just like everywhere else. Ditch the rose-coloured specs, and see things as they are, my friend. America no more has freedom of speech than it does the Eiffel Tower.
@henzo6753
7 жыл бұрын
Thank you for speaking out. We are losing this battle for our civilization. Everyone needs to wake up and raise your children to be adults.
@askyeshka726
7 жыл бұрын
Henzo Cranston pretty tough with all against us. schools are tyrannical and indoctrinating instead of educating.
@henzo6753
7 жыл бұрын
Raggedy daCat I know it. I have a 5 month old son(am I allowed to say son now?)and I am showing my wife all that is going on in schools and colleges. She is terrified. Follow Jordan Peterson and see what is happening in Canada. It really is unbelievable.
@davemacpherson4752
7 жыл бұрын
+Henzo Cranston parents need to assert their Authority with their kids instead of giving it away to Pub/Schools, Leftist Governments ❤️
@askyeshka726
7 жыл бұрын
Henzo Cranston have known Jordan for over six years.
@YouTubeIsAssHo
7 жыл бұрын
Brilliant speaker with brilliant points.
@Protocurity
7 жыл бұрын
One of the things I hate is codewords. When you have censorship, you get two (among many) things that happen: People who do legitimately hate things just use alternative language to describe what they hate. People who listen or are in the "know" pick up on the connotations, and suddenly you have campaigns against "international world bankers". People who know about things like this seek to prevent any kind of hate speech by dubbing everything a "codeword". The problem is, what censors call a codeword and what actually is a codeword have very little overlap. The people who are actually speaking hate continue to do so, but in more clever ways. The people who want to stop hatespeech ban everything because everything has the potential to be a codeword. The end product is that innocent people (note: practicing hatespeech is not necessarily indicative of guilt) get caught in the witch hunt, and society regresses backward.
@bethlemmon
7 жыл бұрын
I absolutely love this guy. I'm very impressed with the way he and other prominent British figures who speak out about these subjects. They have a ultimate grasp and beautiful use of the English language. I so wish I could speak so clearly and eloquently.
@pcbacklash_3261
7 жыл бұрын
If you love Brendan (he's my new hero!), you'll love his online magazine, Spiked: www.spiked-online.com/
@coreycox2345
7 жыл бұрын
This is well spoken. It would be one hell of a time for people to be afraid to speak out.
@scruffymonkey123
7 жыл бұрын
Freedom of speech is for all, ugly, offensive or otherwise.
@scruffymonkey123
7 жыл бұрын
Someone asked me the other day, knowing that I voted for Trump (US citizen here, which might not need this clarification except for the fact that many non-citizens voted, believe not at your peril fellow citizens) if I was a racist. The answer came naturally, which was, I am now, because every other person who is not white in this country is now quite racist, exceedingly so in some cases, BLM being the leading example of a hate group in this country. So in summation I would like to explain that roads to reconciliation exist, but with the temperament here being what it is, for now, I am a racist.
@javiersds8081
7 жыл бұрын
I'm stunned by his words. Who is this guy?? I didn't know him. Brilliant explanation. I totally agree with him, specially on the ending part... How am I supposed to spot a racist person if they're not allowed to speak their minds (using racism as an example) ?!? I want people who hold hedious ideas to be transparent, I want to be able to spot them immediately, I don't want them to shut up!!!!
@Zichronot
7 жыл бұрын
If you incite violence with your words.You need arrested along with the perpetrators of the actual act. If you hurt others, thru incitement .You are as guilty as they are. We censor fire called in theaters. You're not allowed to harm others.
@mr.coolmug3181
7 жыл бұрын
In a multicultural and multiracial society, you have to have laws against speech, in order to keep the lid on the bubbling racial, religious, and cultural inconsistencies. We didn't need hate speech laws in the past when our society was a coherent monoethnic and monoreligious nation.
@clausthomsen6410
7 жыл бұрын
I would much rather shine the biggest spotlight available on these ideas, then proceed to engage them on their arguments, and show how bad those ideas are. To take your analogy of a lid, what tends to happen when you keep a lid on a pressure cooker? eventually it explodes. When you deprive people of the ability to fight their battles with words, eventually people are going to start fighting those battles with their fists. This is exactly what we don't want to happen, we need to expose bad ideas for what they are, not drive them into the shadows and let them fester and grow and pretend nobody has those ideas.
@OneVoiceMore
7 жыл бұрын
So many SJW buzzwords. NO. You do not have to have laws against hate speech. I particularly like your metaphor of a lid on a bubbling pot. I reeeeeeally want you to do this in your own home. Put a pot on to boil. Put a tight lid on it. Really seal it down. Clamp it down. Eradicate that hateful bubbling. Then... wait a while. See if you like the outcome. The only way to truly silence someone is to kill them. But, then again, that IS what the left is best at.
@sanniepstein1007
7 жыл бұрын
Dead wrong!
@iga27
7 жыл бұрын
Great speech Brendan! Aren't we lucky that we can still hear people like you and a few others;
@Johnconno
7 жыл бұрын
Chomsky has been saying these things for nearly half a century, it's still good to hear them repeated. In a compact version...
@astragaal9239
7 жыл бұрын
I hate anyone who advocates for hate speech legislations or defends it, they are responsible from that, they are promoting it. - I am a victim of hate speech and in the terms of the legislation of the UK my "feelings" on the matter are paramount. In law they are guilty. - The hate speech laws are idiotic and are not enforced with parity and are defininitionaly unjust and should be struck down.
@andrabook8758
5 жыл бұрын
The madness must end. Enough with the speech police!
@nascar0509
7 жыл бұрын
I always love the "incitement to religious hatred" B.S. but never any mention of incitement to hatred of those who do not believe in religion , hell no that's perfectly fine nobody seems to be able to recognise how hypocritical and the double standard!
7 жыл бұрын
You just don't understand what simple phrases mean.
@OneVoiceMore
7 жыл бұрын
Vengineer, you are quite possibly the stupidest person in this comments section. You just practiced HATE SPEECH against people who believe in free speech, and you did so with the most infantilizied reasoning I've seen in some time. You seriously hold in contempt the idea of free speech? You seriously believe that some of the tallest intellects in human history are stupid? Or did you catch me out with sarcasm I missed? To the OP, I don't think you understand context, nor basic phrases, or you'd realize how silly your post sounds. The world is a simple place, children. Say what you want. But keep your hands to yourselves. The only sort of speech which should be mitigated is speech that is so loud that it actually causes physical damage, or which directly threatens to do so. We already have plenty of laws, with teeth, to deal with people who threaten violence. God, nursing the left back to sanity will be exhausting.
@scruffymonkey123
7 жыл бұрын
Troll.
@MrSoggyjocks
7 жыл бұрын
I do think some forms of speech should be penalized. That girl who was secretly and actively encouraging her troubled boyfriend to commit suicide, which he did, she deserves some sort of jail time. Relentless verbal bullying in schools can have tremendous psychological damage. But at the same time, I think defining words which can or cannot be said is essentially fascism. Can you scream FIRE in a crowded theatre where there is the potential for a stampede and people getting trampled? I mean, I am immune to hateful words, take your best shot I don't care. But there are vulnerable people who are not developed or mature enough to defend themselves, perhaps they are mentally incapacitated in some way. Its a difficult situation to define laws around. If you push someone to the edge and they end up committing self harm, you should not be able to walk away scot free, which requires some sort of law to punish their behaviour. But by the same token, someone should not be able to claim victimhood when they were perfectly capable of dismissing the words as just that... words. Just saying 'no censorship under any circumstances' can lead to harm for a minority, but enforcing censorship over the majority sits equally unwell with me.
@scruffymonkey123
7 жыл бұрын
No. No. Sticks and stones MrSoggyjocks. Free will of the individual shall define their actions. Verbal bullying cannot harm you, if it does than you have swallowed the victim pill, and there is no redemption for self-destruction. If the truly weak succumb to verbal assault, that is the way of Darwinism. No forms of speech should be penalized, ever, end of story. The world is awash with victims of unspeakable horror, don't add a so-called verbal or literary insult to be combined with this horror, or our future will be filled with a facist denial of free speech.
@MrSoggyjocks
7 жыл бұрын
scott A mentally disturbed man stands on a precipice of a cliff and is obviously thinking about jumping. This man is not rational, nor is he in full possession of his faculties (so the free will/sticks and stones argument goes out the window because he is not stable. It is unreasonable to expect a mentally disabled person to behave rationally). Is it ok to stand there and scream at him to jump? You are standing in a mass of people at a concert. You are in the mosh section, where it is wall to wall bodies. There are thousands of people. Is it ok to scream 'allahu akbar, i have a bomb', knowing full well that there is a chance that a reasonable person may panic, inducing herd mentality and a mass exodus likely resulting in people being crushed to death. A man holding a hair dryer is behaving erratically and walking down the street. You know it is a hair dryer, and you dislike the man over some past altercation. The police arrive and before they have a chance to assess the situation, you scream out he has a gun. The police officer draws his weapon and shoots the man to death. You break up with your wife, you were cheating on her. The divorce is messy, and you're angry. So you put up a message on craigslist pretending to be your wife, asking for men to come and rape her, because she is in to that sort of thing. You say she likes being strangled during sex. You tell them the security code to her alarms, and where she hides her spare key, and when she will be out of the house. Is this an example of free speech which should be protected? After all, they are just words... and free will blah blah blah These are situations where a penalty is required. In the example in the previous post where the girl encouraged her boyfriend to commit suicide, she was charged with involuntary manslaughter, and the charge seems appropriate to me. But i believe it is an extremely difficult situation to legislate.
@MrSoggyjocks
7 жыл бұрын
***** Then why was the woman that encouraged her boyfriend to commit suicide charged with involuntary manslaughter... she was 'well within her rights'. They must not understand the law according to youtube? fox6now.com/2016/07/04/massachusetts-highest-court-rules-girl-accused-of-texting-boyfriend-urging-suicide-must-stand-trial/ Are they well within their rights with the other examples? The mosh pit? www.foxnews.com/story/2008/10/01/bomb-threat-rumors-blamed-for-india-stampede-that-killed-168.html Completely fine... 168 deaths... no problem Posting your ex wifes details and pretending that your her, saying she likes to be raped and strangled? ktla.com/2016/07/18/woman-accused-of-impersonating-ex-boyfriends-pregnant-wife-to-ost-rape-fantasy-ads-on-craigslist/ I guess the prosecutors must have forgotten she was well within her rights? Have you got children? Do you know people with young children? Can i threaten to rape and murder your young children face to face at a park? Can i walk up to them in the sandpit, and start talking about how i would love to see them naked? How i would love to feel them squirm on my penis as i choke them to death? I mean... just words yeh? Vibrations in the air... pixels on a screen... should be completely fine in the eyes of the law right.... LOL Can i go around saying you are a bankrupt pedophile, and that you have aids, and are a convicted fraudster whose served jail time for embezzling funds? Ever heard of libel laws? Do you understand what the impacts to an innocent business person are if those claims are made publicly. Loss of revenue, loss of opportunity... But FREE SPEECH at all costs... YAY the things that i have typed here are ugly things. But they are merely to demonstrate a point How fucking utterly simplistic.... we live in a world of shades of grey, and people who only see black and white are either stupid or disingenuous.
@mavenous22
7 жыл бұрын
One day everything will correct itself, and it'll crush an entire generation in the most positive way possible. I'd love to hear O'Neill have a conversation or be part of a panel with Jordan Peterson.
@mooncitygaming5654
7 жыл бұрын
I 100% behind no censorship and free speech
@sylvanmoir4094
5 жыл бұрын
Hate speech is a new invention . I first heard of it about 10 years ago. Who says what is hateful? And is hate always bad - what about over the washing up? Presumably anyway something hateful can be hated? Where does that leave you? The idea is nonsense. It is nobody elses' business where I or anybody else hates. If we have even a tiny glimmering of awareness of all the work done since Freud and Jung and any other depth psychology, we would know the whole idea is nonsesese. Our predecessors had too much sense to give this notion the time of day- because it is so obviously license to police peoples' thoughts and feelings . Even a good parent does not exactly do that, but now we welcome our governments doing so? In sane - it is the beginning of the descent to Stalins gulags. Why are people now so mush-brained that they do not see this?
@catmandudes7949
7 жыл бұрын
I do believe in hate speech or free speech as long as they do not threaten people, if they threaten some one or say something that is not right action should be taken, but of course we should all have the right to say what we want good or bad.
@benm4290
7 жыл бұрын
For me, 'hate speech' is clearly defined, in my mind, as this - speech in which calls for and advocates the physical harm of an individual or group.
@SleepyMatt-zzz
7 жыл бұрын
Yes, but the problem is who gets to define what incitement of physical harm is (Like Csus said). Sometimes people spout things out of an irrational moment of rage or sarcasm, as an example, or are even acting hyperbolic. Context is important, and sometimes it is very simple to mis-judge or mis-characterize an individual's thoughts. To me "advocates the physical harm of an individual or group." is not clear enough. Is it an opinion like many seem to think, or is it marching through the streets demanding the heads of those you oppose? Personally speaking I'd rather have disgusting opinions spouted so that they can be displayed for the public to judge, because if you silence people like that than they go underground, and that is a far more frightening prospect.
@MurasakiBunny
7 жыл бұрын
Freedom of speech. Freedom from speech.
@Johnconno
7 жыл бұрын
Thank God I'm not at University now.
@jwindom270
7 жыл бұрын
remember what is simple true to what is normal if you know that answer is that you are #1
@thevo4100
7 жыл бұрын
Take your hat off indoors.
@TheJohnCooper
7 жыл бұрын
Notice how even in the title of debate. It's called "is hate speech free speech". Not "is free speech hate speech". Even there you have s subtle form of semantic bias - which sets the tone for people like Brendan to have to defend.
@andrabook8758
5 жыл бұрын
whatever happened to the pure joy of debating ideas. The pure joy of defeating legitimately bad ideas. Does no one enjoy true debate anymore?
@AndroidOO3
7 жыл бұрын
Dealing with the limits of freedom. The idea behind banning hate speech is that it has often lead to violence. (thinking leads to talking leads to action) I agree that policing thought is wrong but we must see this though the mind of a governing body with a problem it must address. To them policing hate speech may be the only opportunity to prevent such violent crimes as is has in the past. They are treating hate speech as threats, ideas or no. While the speaker sees this a a slippery slope or pathway to broader thought crime criminalization he hasn't recognized the purpose for their existence. I feel this is were the conversation should start. It's a lot like gun laws. There is a balance of only punishing the guilty, preventing extreme crimes, and guarding against a form of government with the power to take away our freedoms. I call this Dealing with the Limits of Freedom, for short. This answer to this question is the same in each situation. The best answers is not to ban things to prevent harm, we should look to improve our morals and investigate/address the problems of people who would commit these violent acts long before they happen. So why do people do these things? Money/Need? Emotion? Space? Poor/Abusive upbringing? A mind that is alien and incompatible with society? Welfare and aid programs didn't start out of the goodness of our hearts. If we think forwardly about these problems we act on prevention, then things like censorship will become unnecessary. But until then censorship is almost a necessity for future victims to live normal lives and to feel like someone is acting on their behalf.
@AndroidOO3
7 жыл бұрын
Maybe. That sounds like a lot of guessing and exaggeration and strong opinions without any reasoning behind it. You read panicked.
@pcbacklash_3261
7 жыл бұрын
Brendan, I have great respect for Douglas Murray, but I think I LOVE you!! :-D
@JensHove
4 жыл бұрын
Brilliant.
@kassandrin
7 жыл бұрын
BRILLIANT.
@davefreeman9847
7 жыл бұрын
I hate free speech.
@aeronomer8389
7 жыл бұрын
Brilliant
@alexseioo610
7 жыл бұрын
12:20 So what is he saying, speech inciting violence against specific groups of people does not exist or should be allowed??? More like allowing it. But this leads to growing hatred between opposing groups (nobody likes to be insulted, even racists) and results ultimately in violence. Like so often a middle ground between freedom and order is the optimal solution. And if hate speech is ok, where exactly do we draw the line between free speech and a call to commit a crime.
@jon4139
7 жыл бұрын
It's not that it's "ok", just that a law compelling against it is an evil in itself. He is arguing the principle of the thing. Plus making racist speech banned doesn't make it go away, I would say the best cure for a bad idea is a spotlight. What difference is someone thinking racist or someone saying it? the violence it ultimately leads to is illegal. Of course you can use people's actions and speech to presume their future actions but to ban the free expression of them you will have an ever harder time of ding that. People will just go underground and talk only to those who already share their groups, never getting called out on it. How is that preferable?
@joshk7286
7 жыл бұрын
I can't speak for him, but I like where the first amendment sets the line. You need to directly call for someone to harm someone else. "Bruno, break his kneecaps" kind of a thing.
@torontolarrivee7965
5 жыл бұрын
That hat...
4 жыл бұрын
Islam is RIGHT about women.
@blunelson8226
7 жыл бұрын
can I ask who is the only person who dislike this vedio? I would like to talk you about why you disagree with it.
@deadsparrow28
7 жыл бұрын
Look for some whining millenial who got triggered by the concept of 'free speech'.
@radwulfeboraci7504
7 жыл бұрын
OK so this guy is full of shit. Telling the world that you believe it's flat or that space aliens have contacted you or that Oreos are better than Chips Ahoy doesn't hurt people . ALL hate speech eventually ends up with innocent people dying which is why it is banned. You are the first base in normalizing hate which you say is innocent enough. Until some guy picks up a gun and goes into a church basement and slaughters 9 people at prayer. But then I guess you're okay with that.
@erokia
7 жыл бұрын
Radwulf Eboraci Someone's capacity for violence doesn't change because you silence them... if anything, that is more likely to allow such thinking to fester. Wouldn't you want a student to express their disturbed thinking so people can talk them down or get them professional help? We have real world examples of Brendan's approach to deflating hate, such as the way in which society countered a brief upswing in Neo Nazi support a few decades ago. The public was allowed to hear their "arguments", tolerant voices countered and prevailed, causing a reassuring crash in their supporters yet again. Getting any disturbed person to admit their thinking is the beginning of needed attention and therapy to prevent violence, so you have it exactly backwards. Numerous cases of imminently violent individuals are stopped because they let slip violent thoughts to friends or relatives who then report them or get them help. You assume that suppressing statements defeats their hateful idea?... That is wishful thinking.
@PiMiner
7 жыл бұрын
Radwulf Eboraci please name one instance where "hate speech has lead to people getting killed...
@joshk7286
7 жыл бұрын
Brian R nailed it. All censorship does is alert neutrals to the fact that you want to silence your political opponents and it makes your political opponents even more bitter and vengeful. A murderous racist doesn't think to himself "oh wow, progressives didn't censor my anti-black people rant? That must mean I have the green light to shoot up one of their churches." C'mon, get serious. All you're doing here is revealing your latent desire to silence the people who disagree with you once you arrive to power. According to whoever is in power, having the "wrong view" on any hot-button topic can be viewed as hate speech. That's how you get dictatorships.
Пікірлер: 109