thismeintiel said:
When you are selectively enforcing them, mainly along the lines of ideology, yes. And those who have endured true fascism will be the first to warn others of the slow creep of fascism. You don't wake up one day and find yourself in a fascist state. It starts out slow and acceptable for a large group of people. Usually taking down the "extremists." But, they are extremists, so no one defends them. Then, they slowly work towards the center. But, those people in between didn't despise those viewed as extremists, or maybe just defended their right to speak, so the ones supporting these bannings say nothing, even liking them being taken out. Then, they hit the middle. This is usually when people actually start to get concerned, but may be too afraid of those in charge or the more extreme elements on their side to do anything. Before you know it, it has spread to all sides of the political spectrum. Martin Niemoller's poem, slightly altered, works perfectly. First they came for the conspiracy theorists, but I did not speak out, for I wasn't a conspiracy theorist. And if you think the future of fascism is just the government, and not the government plus big corporations that are in bed with them, you will never see it coming. |
You're saying a Democracy can only exist if free speech is 100% guaranteed, once there is a little restriction in free speech every Democracy will inevitably fail. That's not true, we can set stops in between the two extrems. You're trapped in a all or nothing mentality but the reality works different. West Germany banned swastikas and other Nazi symbols. Did Germany became a Dictatorship? No, infect this bann or censorship helped Germany to became a funktioning democracy.
free speech is only one of several civil rights every human has and sometimes the different rights collide with each other and we have to find a compromise. Securing freedom of speech to 100% all the time will inevitably hurt other civil rights.
