[ SECRET POST #3027 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3027 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________



16.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 099 secrets from Secret Submission Post #433.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: A relatively "balanced" article

[dethtoll]

The thing is that democracy DOES determine what speech is and is not acceptable. Not through any established political mechanism but through how people act. This ties in with the concept of social norms, in that what's acceptable to say or do and what's not acceptable are dictated by the people, and can change over time. This is why doing something that goes against the grain, or even disagreeing with the majority, can be considered a revolutionary act.

Re: A relatively "balanced" article

[(Anonymous)]

What I mean to say is that, from a purely democratic point of view, the will of the people should be able to determine what is acceptable both from a social and a legal point of view. That is to say, there is an argument that if you believe in democracy, then democracy should be able to sanction speech.

Re: A relatively "balanced" article

[(Anonymous)]

No. Because all you need is one charismatic nut to convince people that [GROUP] is evil and needs to be exterminated.

Re: A relatively "balanced" article

[(Anonymous)]

I'm not saying that pure democracy is a good thing

I'm not advocating this as a system

There are good reasons we have a liberal constitutional structure on top of democracy

I'm saying there is this theoretical tension between democracy and liberalism, that the two aren't the same, that someone who supported democracy would not necessarily support liberal ideas like free speech, and that this tension does play out in actual political issues

Re: A relatively "balanced" article

[dethtoll]

I would argue that that's a failing on democracy's part rather than that of free expression.

Re: A relatively "balanced" article

[(Anonymous)]

Sure.