The most comprehensive survey on various freedoms in the World that I know of ranks Germany at 94, ahead of France at 90 and the US at 86. (100 is the perfect score)
Freedom of speech is also a guaranteed right in the German constitution, as it is in the European Convention on Human Rights and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
In every jurisdiction there are limits to the freedom of speech. This applies to the US as well as everywhere else:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exce...
Yes, there is. At least in my experience as a happy EU citizen.
So want to cut the hyperbole and substantiate your claim?
Free Speech, in the USAmerican sense, seems to be strongly curtailed in the UK.
You do see the flawed reasoning, don't you?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_v._California
There are myriads of other exceptions to 1st Amendment protections (including, even if people often don't think of it that way, intellectual property rights):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exce...
The whole idea that "Free speech is protected in the US but not in Europe" is just an (libertarian?) meme with no basis in fact.
Bottom line: No country has absolute freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is one of the basic liberties, and it's balanced against others. Different countries come to different conclusions on the balance. Generally speaking Germany tends more towards Freedom than the US according to comprehensive surveys [2].
Specifically When it comes to denying history, citing the US Supreme Court: "[There is] no constitutional value in false statements of fact".
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exce...
[2] https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world-2018-table-cou...
You'd have to go with something like "show that the massive decline in the Jewish population of Nazi Germany was by means other than genocide".
Which is also impossible, but due to truth instead of poor epistemology.
It's just that these people are dingbats who have decided ahead of time to deny the Holocaust and desperately search for any shred of broken evidence for this claim.
This is a good thing, because while freedom of speech is important, the general wellbeing of the population and preventing people getting hurt is important as well. It is my belief for example that allowing racist remark under the banner of free speech, hurts more than it helps. It leads to an overall negative impact in the wellbeing of the population. I think the same balance was considered when prohibiting holocaust denial.
Question: why use a throwaway account?
It's an image of itself that the US likes to project though.
Ex: what if the government one day decides that criticizing the government is too offensive?
Unfortunately, I don't see this happening anymore. I don't want to sound gloomy, but the web back in the day had a completely different feel to it. I'm sure I'm not alone in saying that I can feel it's vibrancy dying. Maybe it started a while ago.
Anyway, there's still hope with decentralization and such. I suppose we'll just have to wait and see.
I fail to see how speech does hurts anyone. Would you mind elaborating? Should it not be solely the responsibility of whoever hears said speech to decide on whether to act on it? Does censorship of any shape or form not actually hurt the ones that wanted to listen to said speech the most?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/feb/20/austria.thefar...
If you're happy with the status-quo, you're hardly a good test for your society's freedom of speech, no?
Freedom of speech means the freedom to say unpopular things.
Since that comes up from time to time...
In germany games with nazi imagery are as legal as books or movies containing nazi imagery. Legal through the art/science/research/teaching/reporting exception §86 StGB (3) [0]
What has recently changed is that the organization that does the age ratings for games changed its stance. Now they consider the exception rather than treating it as a show stopper.
It doesn't matter, Diaspora is decentralized. You can host your own instance. You can enter an instance _living_ in your country of choice.
And don't get me started on the puritanism
You might want to read Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
There is no practical right to free speech in the EU, this happened a few weeks ago: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6316567/Woman-corre...
BTW, the decision you linked to is about Austria, not the EU. The ECHR merely held that Austria is allowed (not required) to ban certain kinds of speech. Other Council of Europe member states are free to permit them.
Surely not the US? Right?
Treating freedom of speech as completely disjoint from freedom of press is wrong.
Obviously there are exceptions, in the form of breaking contracts. Can't go around leaking classified information or industrial secrets - contracts you agreed to when you signed up for the gig.
If you can't even exercise free speech where it really matters in regards to your democracy, you hardly have total freedom of speech.
Also Snowden is hardly the only example of whistleblowers from within a branch of a democratic government speaking out. However the US is an extreme outlier in how it handled the matter.
Another thing many western democracies manage to do without is an equivalent to the US's National Security Letters, which are also a form of the government policing speech where it might matter.
So apparently you have to be afraid to speak out when it really matters, but at least you can deny the holocaust I guess.
In the USA things like defamation, incitement to riot or lawless action, speech covered by copyright, terrorist threats etc. may land you in big trouble. In the EU same thing for for example holocaust denial. And in other places, such as for example Russia, the constitution might grant you the freedom of speech, but the system enforcing the constitution does not.
It is difficult to compare countries directly because of different laws and legislative systems. The use of some form of proxy metrics like the Freedom of Press Index might be useful, but then the question becomes which metrics should be used, and when presented with several metrics, there is a danger to select only those metrics which enforce existing viewpoints.
"Article 10 – Freedom of expression
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary"
Yes, that's a lot of caveats, but if you have a substantive true idea or non-extreme politics you're fine. What you're not free to do is make calls for genocide etc.
that's the bit I don't agree with. it leaves room for a lot of interpretation. there was a woman in Austria who was fined for saying that mohamed was a child rapist (which you could argue it is true given that he slept with underaged girls).
I don't agree to people being fined if they say something about Mohamed or God. That is not free speech IMO.
Americans are often "horrified" at free speech in Germany because glorifying Nazis and terrorists is forbidden there (as in France and a handful other European countries).
My take is that this platform at least probably allows posting pictures with nipples, unlike most US-based services.
Well US is in many ways slowly starting to look like Nazy germany in its beginings. I hope this turns around because i really dont want nuke war. But it seems germany atleast tries to do something and learn from the past. While US in its hard defense of indivilualism (its just illusion btw) is really loosing it. I mean some people in us gov now are literaly evil and want to harm others. Thats never a good sign.
> escalates further.
"... it could be more on fire."
Now? Wow. That is incredibly naive.
The worst symptoms of individualism, in my opinion, come mostly from a general American distaste for public programs, like, say, single-payer (government) health care.
Generally, I feel like America has the most problems with a representative democracy. Our winner-take-all system naturally leads to two parties, and public opinion doesn't actually influence policy. Money influences policy. I see that as the big problem, not individualism.
So you're saying a country that censors Nazis but not nudity has crazier stances on free speech than one that censors nudity but not Nazis?
Ever heard of the paradox of tolerance?
No, I said the contrary. I am rather content with the state of free speech in France (and by extension, Germany, which is almost the same on this respect) because it fits very well my own view of how a tolerant society, respectful of its citizens, should behave.
I don't think he said that, just the opposite. I don't think he was being sarcastic. Hard to say, though, with this internet text thingy.
> Hard to say, though, with this internet text thingy.
Tell me about it. Poe's Law[0] is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to communication difficulties on the web, and with trolls (paid trolls even) and algorithms that favor imflammatory content for stronger virality and increased watch time it's getting worse.
Then again, that was exactly one of the main things that Adam Curtis was warning about in HyperNormalisation, and Clay Shirky in his work in general[1][2]. We're still coming to grips with this new medium of communication and haven't quite figured out adequate protective systems against abuse and exploitation yet.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe's_law
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HyperNormalisation
[2] https://www.ted.com/talks/clay_shirky_how_the_internet_will_...
I live in Berlin and we have the most vibrant community of privacy, security etc I've ever seen.