this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2025
719 points (98.1% liked)

World News

49001 readers
2413 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

From age and ID restrictions on the Internet, to charging rappers with “terrorism,” the U.K. is demolishing the most basic civil liberties. If we let them, U.S. leaders may be close behind.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I re-read your comment and now I think I got the meaning better. Distasteful surely must be protected but that wasn't my point, my point was that hate-speech is often not distasteful is is harmful. It seems that it is not harmful enough, and if a hateful tweet doesn't make people go on a witch-hunt it's ok? That seems to be literal reading of the rules, but I find it lacking often.

Still, as others pointed out, whatever the rule is, it is used for oppressing the opposition

[–] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Distasteful surely must be protected but that wasn’t my point, my point was that hate-speech is often not distasteful is is harmful. It seems that it is not harmful enough, and if a hateful tweet doesn’t make people go on a witch-hunt it’s ok?

Is the harm directly from the speech? Ideas aren't actions & uncritically harming people is a choice.

We're all capable of reading stupid shit then taking it upon ourselves to harm people. Yet how many of us do? If I harmed someone, I wouldn't consider shit I read & uncritically acted on a valid excuse. I'd consider failure to think in the least bit critically before acting a total & culpable lapse in judgement.

Should we not hold every thinking person to that standard? Do you hold yourself to a different standard & think that would be a valid excuse?