Skip to content

Civil Liberty

They really are desperate, aren’t they?

If the nasty people can say nasty things then of course, Twitter must fail:

The Twitter we once knew is dying. While the site is still functioning (for now), the signs of collapse are clear. The value of a social network is its users and the communities they build, so as Elon Musk burns trust and core users leave the platform in droves, Twitter as we knew it seems to be gasping its final breaths, even if the site itself manages to cling to life.

Stands to reason, dunnit?

Reality being that they’re desperate that it does fail – so that they can say that if nasty people get to have free speech then that’s not free speech, is it?

Isn;t this clearly just absurd?

Elon Musk needs to learn that more debate does not mean more truth
John Naughton
Beneath the billionaire’s blurry vision for Twitter lies the notion that it’s good to have a ‘marketplace of ideas’

The authoritarian every -where and -when. What the hell do you mean the proles get to discuss things? There is the revealed truth and they’d better get on with what we tell them to do. Or I tell them……

Now, I have my disagreements with La Bindel but……

This is taking it a little too far:

Woman’s Place UK organised the book launch. Judith Green, the campaign group’s co-founder, told The Telegraph: “It is outrageous and grimly ironic that two of this country’s pre-eminent feminist campaigners against male violence against women should be the subject of cancellation on an entirely bogus pretext.”

The event, scheduled for Nov 24, will be hosted by author Julie Bindel, who will interview Smith about her book, which warns about the continued threat of violence against women and the need for single-sex environments.

But on Wednesday evening, ticket holders were suddenly refunded their tickets, all trace of the launch was removed from the Eventbrite website, and organisers were informed by Eventbrite’s trust and safety team that the event violated policies on “hateful, dangerous, or violent content”.

Because you will speak doubleplusungood therefore you can’t use our software. It’s not exactly trust and safety, is it?

No, fuck off

Nicola Sturgeon’s plan to scrap jury trials for rape cases would see Scotland follow in the footsteps of the Nazis, the country’s senior female lawyer has warned.

Not entirely convinced that Godwin as the start of the conversation is entirely appropriate but I could be convinced.

A Scottish government consultation has raised the prospect of abolishing juries for serious sexual offences such as rape and attempted rape, which have a far lower conviction rate than other offences.

No. The jury is our backstop against the government deciding to sling people into jail. That’s what it’s for. The whole aim and purpose – even if English and Scottish law likes to mumble about this – is jury nullification. Nope, that’s not a crime. We don’t care what you rulers say the law is, care nowt for current fashion. We the people say this ain’t a crime. So, bugger off.

That’s the entire point of the jury system. Especially, mark this, when there’s political pressure to be jugging more people for it.

So, you know, a careful, considered and moderate response to this idea. Fuck off.

It’s necessary to actually understand censorship

A Chinese official landed in hot water after her posh outfit at a press conference went viral and sparked an online debate about appropriate attire for civil servants.

Yes, but:

It became one of the top trending topics on Chinese social media site Weibo on Tuesday, while posts with a relevant hashtag have received more than 26 million views.

China is a heavily censored social media space. That’s important.

In something heavily censored it’s necessary to entirely invert the way one thinks about a story. Sure, not only think about what they’re not allowing to be said. But also to think about what they *are* allowing to be said.

Why are they allowing some bird to be chased for wearing expensive earrings? The point here being that simply because of the censorship someone has indeed taken a decision to allow this story to run. As they do every story, about everything. Therefore thought has to be put to why are they allowing the story to run?

That’s just how it works under censorship. There’s a reason you’re being allowed to say this. What is it?

What free speech means

Mr Musk, who bought Twitter for $44 billion on Thursday, wrote on the social media platform that there could be “more than meets the eye” to the attack, before linking to an article about a conspiracy theory that Mr Pelosi knew his attacker.

Following a backlash Mr Musk appeared to have deleted the tweet about five hours later.

You’re free to be wrong about things…..

Honey, yes, this is your job

I fear my children are overexposed to technology. Experts say I’m right to worry
Sophie Brickman
The status quo puts the onus on parents to monitor what their children are engaging with when they log on – which puts a lot of strain on us mortals

A significant reason that it’s your job is that your views on what your children may get up to is different from that of other parents.

Thankfully, help is on the way. Last month, the US Department of Health and Human Services granted $10m to the American Academy of Pediatrics to establish a National Center of Excellence on Social Media and Mental Wellness. It is part of the Biden administration’s strategy to address an alarming national mental health crisis and has a mandate, according to the press release, to “develop and disseminate information, guidance, and training on the impact – including risk and benefits – that social media use has on children and young people, especially the risks to their mental health”.

Instead of government deciding what your children may see or do. You know, that freedom to raise your children as you, not they, see fit?

Trade offs, trade offs

Vaping has grown exponentially over the past decade. Vaping shops have proliferated along British high streets, the global market for vapes has increased 8,000-fold since 2016 and vape manufacturers sponsor football and Formula One teams. But it divides opinion sharply.

On the one hand, the tobacco industry – and, to some extent, Public Health England – argues that vaping is a much safer alternative to smoking and that it helps smokers give up. On the other, public health experts, including the World Health Organization, point to its dangers, for children and young people in particular, and urge much more caution than the liberal approach that the UK has decided to take.

Absolutely everything is a trade off. Is vaping 100%, exactly and wholly safe?

Nope.

Is it less bad for any- or every- one than smoking?

Yep.

So, very loose restrictions then.

Note the examples used

Alex Jones is righteously – according to Sir Simon – crushed by the law. And:

….but that does not curb the climate deniers, anti-vaxxers, trolls and QAnon followers….

He’s advocating the same sort of restriction on what may be said for those folk too. That’s why he mentions them.

He’s not exactly in favour of any form of free speech now, is he?

Here’s a radical thought

At present, early years settings in England must have one member of staff for every three children aged up to two years of age. For two years and over, there must be one member of staff for every four children.

In April, it was reported that Boris Johnson wanted to relax the legal limits on staff to child ratios in nurseries as part of a drive to reduce costs for parents.

When she was schools minister in 2014, Ms Truss supported going even further, saying: “Where there is an early years educator leading a group of children, we plan to allow ratios for two-year-olds to rise from four children per adult to six children per adult, and for ones and under to rise from three children per adult to four children per adult.”

Why not not have such regulations at all? Allow parents to choose?

My word, eh?

Tim Worstall
@worstall
What happened?
We have determined that this account violated the Twitter Rules. Specifically, for:
Violating our rules against abuse and harassment.
You may not engage in the targeted harassment of someone, or incite other people to do so. This includes wishing or hoping that someone experiences physical harm.

As a result, we’ve temporarily limited some of your account features. While in this state, you can still browse Twitter, but you’re limited to only sending Direct Messages to your followers –– no Tweets, Retweets, Fleets, follows, or likes. Learn more. Your account will be restored to full functionality in: 12 hours and 0 minutes.
You can start your countdown and continue to Twitter once you:
Verify your phone number
Delete the content that violates our Rules
1 Tweet
If you think we’ve made a mistake, contact our support team.

Who could have reported me for what reason?

@Frances_Coppola Ooooh! Super! “Launched in 2020, the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism (GPAHE) was founded by Heidi Beirich and Wendy Via” Couple of birds in a foreign country declare and there we are. Full proof, eh? No doubt, quick, burn the TERFS!

They read that as recommending violence against an individual.

Fuckwits.

It’s the way this is put which is so concerning

Fertility clinics are tightly regulated by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA). Donors are limited to ten families and undergo medical and psychological checks to qualify. However, private transactions between men and women exist outside the HFEA’s jurisdiction. There are no limits on the number of children they can have — one claims to have fathered more than 800 — parental rights are uncertain, and there is no safeguarding during the “insemination” process.

Because you can just see the next line not so gently forming in the air, can’t you? That such should be regulated. Who may have children and by whom *should* be something The State defines.

Quite so Honey, quite so

There are Tories of diverse origins and skin tones. What they need now is real difference
Nesrine Malik
It is positive to see more politicians of colour, but if the result is Sunak’s austerity or Badenoch’s culture war, how have things changed?

This is, indeed, the problem with diversity. As detailed in the book from a couple of decades back. We can have all sorts of skin colours but what if there is no intellectual diversity?

Which is rather the problem over on the left too, isn’t it? That there’re are all sorts of skin colours but everyone is still a troglodyte Trot?

Yes, this is tu quoque and this time it’s justified.

Only half right

In contrast, Mark Rutte, the Dutch prime minister, has described them as “a——-” in private and publicly raised questions over their right to protest.

“It is not acceptable to create dangerous situations. It is not acceptable to intimidate officials,” he said last week.

Intimidating officials is the point…..

Standard Trotskyism

Dominate the committee which creates the standards within which decisions are taken. Then anyone trying to take a decision which does not meet those corrupted standards can be denied, right?

Simukai Chigudu, who co-founded the Rhodes Must Fall movement at Oxford, also used the forum to suggest that free speech arguments are abused to “preserve existing power structures” and prevent expression of issues surrounding race.

The forum – which also includes the colleges Brasenose, Somerville, Magdalen and Mansfield – has held two meetings so far this year and aims to offer free speech guidance across the university this autumn.

During the first meeting, Mr Isaac said that the forum was going to attempt a “bold thing” and “create the principles of the framework by which we can deliver on Oxford and hopefully other universities’ commitments to deliver free speech”.

The difference between tolerance and approval again

It’s one of those standard mistakes made by non-liberals, not grasping the difference between tolerance and approval. The liberal stance is that sure, we might not desire to live as you do. We might even think that your way of life is less than optimal – to put it mildly. On the other hand you’re a competent adult and as long as there’s no third party harm how you fuck up your life is your business.

That’s tolerance.

This applies to sexuality, gender claims, work choices, paint colours and anything else we might want to think about. Approval is different:

Providers of sex education in schools are teaching children that prostitution is a “rewarding job” and failed to advise a 14-year-old girl having sex with a 16-year-old boy that it was illegal.

Outside organisations teaching children about sex also promote “kinks” such as being locked in a cage, flogged, caned, beaten and slapped in the face, The Times has found.

Approval is supporting people in those choices, telling ’em that they’re fine and dandy. Which isn’t to be liberal at all. Tolerance and disapproval coexist quite nicely, if it’s necessary to approve of choices made then we lose that freedom to be liberal in the first place. For forced approval means the loss of that freedom to choose.

Which is what’s going wrong here. As with so many others of those issues. The progressives have simply forgotten what liberal means.

Absolutely damn right

Ukrainian plans to seize as much as $500bn (£418bn) in frozen Russian assets to fund the country’s recovery have met firm resistance from Switzerland, the hosts of an international two-day Ukraine recovery conference.

The Swiss president, Ignazio Cassis, pushed back on the plan, saying protection of property rights was fundamental in a liberal democracy. He underlined at a closing press conference the serious qualms of some leaders that proposals to confiscate Russian assets will set a dangerous precedent and needed specific legal justification.

“The right of ownership, the right of property is a fundamental right, a human right,” he said in Lugano, adding that such rights could be violated, as they had during the pandemic, but only so long as there was a legal basis.

Having your house nicked just because you carry the wrong passport ain’t liberal democracy now, is it?

Yes, but this is free speech

Advertising agencies mounting a prolonged boycott of GB News are damaging its business, its chief executive has admitted, as he claimed the action represents a threat to free speech.

Angelos Frangopoulos said public debate was at risk because the channel was being put under “commercial pressure” to change its content a year after its launch.

Deciding to associate your commercial speech with – or with not – a TV channel is free speech.

Even if it’s because of an excess of woke twats in the ad agencies it’s still free speech.

Religious censorship

Cineworld has pulled a film chronicling the life of the Prophet Mohammed’s daughter after protestors rallied outside theatres, branding it “blasphemous”.

Hundreds of demonstrators picketed theatres in Bradford, Bolton, Birmingham and Sheffield following screenings of The Lady of Heaven over the weekend.

The British-made epic tells the story of an Iraqi boy who is orphaned when his mother is executed by ISIS militants.

The child is adopted by a woman who comforts the youngster with the story of saintly Fatima, and the viewer is transported back to the seventh century.

Islamic tradition forbids the direct portrayal of religious figures and the film’s director Eli King depicts Fatima as a faceless character, shrouded by a black veil.

But protestors have accused film makers of inaccurately depicting religious history and negatively portraying three of Islam’s most important figures.

Religious censorship by the mob too. It’s been what, 50, perhaps 60 years since we allowed Christians to determine what may be shown in this manner?