Japan will now punish you for saying mean things.

SadMadoka said:

It's not stupid to defend the right of people to be free from state-sanctioned violence and imprisonment for expressing their thoughts.

Countless people died to protect freedom of speech in my country, and I will not dishonor their sacrifice.


So you want it to be a crime to "spread stupidity"?

The Internet is rife with it, so you would effectively be turning a significant percentage of literally everyone into criminals.

If you merely meant Twitter banning users or whatever, they already do that.


If someone was directly responsible for someone dying, that would be murder. Insulting someone is not remotely close to that.


It's obvious that suicidal people are mentally unwell.

So what? I am not responsible for how anyone reacts to my words, and I am under no obligation to babysit anyone.

Their actions are their own responsibility, regardless of circumstances. No one forced them to die.

If a proverbial droplet is all it would take, any number of things (and people who interacted with that person) could also be blamed.

(It's not like I would try to get anyone to kill themselves, anyway. When I say I/me, I am speaking generally to convey the principle of the matter.)


What exactly is "moral harassment"?

All sorts of absurd things are a crime in many countries. That does not mean they should be.

It's not stupid to defend the right of people to be free from state-sanctioned violence and imprisonment for expressing their thoughts.

Countless people died to protect freedom of speech in my country, and I will not dishonor their sacrifice.

So you want it to be a crime to "spread stupidity"?

The Internet is rife with it, so you would effectively be turning a significant percentage of literally everyone into criminals.

If you merely meant Twitter banning users or whatever, they already do that.

If someone was directly responsible for someone dying, that would be murder. Insulting someone is not remotely close to that.

It's obvious that suicidal people are mentally unwell.

So what? I am not responsible for how anyone reacts to my words, and I am under no obligation to babysit anyone.

Their actions are their own responsibility, regardless of circumstances. No one forced them to die.

If a proverbial droplet is all it would take, any number of things (and people who interacted with that person) could also be blamed.

(It's not like I would try to get anyone to kill themselves, anyway. When I say I/me, I am speaking generally to convey the principle of the matter.)

What exactly is "moral harassment"?

All sorts of absurd things are a crime in many countries. That does not mean they should be.

Article 222-33-2
Repeated acts having as their object or effect a deterioration of an employee’s working conditions likely to (i) infringe his rights or dignity, (ii) alter his physical or mental health, or (iii) compromise his promotion, are punished by two years of imprisonment and 30,000€ ($35,000 USD) of fine.

Article 222-33-2-1
Repeated acts having as their object or effect a deterioration of one's partner's life conditions likely to (i) infringe his rights or dignity, (ii) alter his physical or mental health, are punished by three years of imprisonment and 45,000€ ($52,000 USD) of fine.

[...]

The penalties are of 10 years of imprisonment and 15,000€ ($175,000 USD) when harassment lead the victim to kill herself or try to kill herself.

Article 222-33-2-2
Repeated acts having as their object or effect a deterioration of someone's life conditions likely to (i) infringe his rights or dignity, (ii) alter his physical or mental health, are punished by two years of imprisonment and 15,000€ ($17,500 USD) of fine.

[...]

Catalano said:
do they even have insults in their language? looks like a dumb law

Meusnier said:
This is difficult to reply when things are atomised this way...

I will not defend the right of people to say that the gas chambers did not exist (cf. the Gayssot Law in France).

Pick your battles more carefully.

... Indelicate patriotism and non-argument.

Countless people might have died to protect the 2nd Amendment, and many more died because of it. Either way, that many died for a cause does not make it justifiable or "honourable."

Yes, exactly! Spreading conspiracy theory would become a crime (Nabe's Dream), but I would prefer to favour the dismantlement of Twitter and its likes or at least restrict the use of this website to non-politicians, non-journalists, etc and make rules that prevent Paul the butcher and Peter the baker from expressing their views about Middle East politics.

This is fine in my books. You are not allowed to speak if you read none (you are allowed to read books that are not in my bookshelves though, but if you only read 1984 and Harry Potter in your life, go back planting salads).

Not enough clearly.

I did not claim otherwise.

You are never safe from mental health issues, this is why the legal notion of moral harrassment exists.

If a PI in Academia keeps asking you to work at night, leaves you little time to rest, prevents you from taking holidays, says that you are worthless, and that you end up killing yourself, they are causally and penally responsible for that.

This is a simplistic take on human psychology. No man can mentally seclude himself from outer influences, and if not penally responsible in some countries, you are morally responsible for pushing people in the wrong direction. I would be curious how you felt if you told someone (not necessarily a friend) in pain to kill themselves and that they actually end up doing it. Would you just think that they were stupid and wouldn't you feel some guilt?

Oh, that does not exist in American law?

No wonder that people hate so much their jobs in this country.

I gave an example above, and the official description is:


https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI000029336939/

Then why shouldn't moral harassment be a felony? This is not as if all employees had the possibility to easily change of jobs without letting their children starve to death in the meantime. Especially in work cultures that worship performance and reduce people to a one-variable function, particular care should be exercised on the way people act at the work place.

Needless to say, moral harassment is not restricted to the workplace. Penalties are harsher for partners.


https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI000042193490


https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI000037289658

Mirai said:
Some guy in Germany already got the police knocking on his door because he called a politician a penis so guess this is the future.

SadMadoka said:

I find it markedly more efficient to reply to specific points in this fashion.

Freedom of speech is everyone's natural right, whether you defend it or not, because their minds and bodies belong to them. You don't own their minds and you don't get to dictate what people think and feel, nor how they express it. (As long as it does not cause direct physical harm.)

Everyone has the right to be free from violence, theft and kidnapping (principally by the government) brought about by the expression of any thought.

Do you believe that you, as an individual, have the right to kidnap and imprison someone because they said something you didn't like? I'd hope not. And you cannot delegate a right (to the government) that you never had in the first place.

People will always have thoughts that do not coincide with your own. You need to come to terms with this.

There are exceptions that aren't protected under free speech, including defamation, true threats and so on.

What is this supposed to imply? That you're the final boss? heh...

I acknowledge that what I mentioned is not an argument in itself.

Nice bait, but we are talking about speech, which the first amendment covers.

If you want to cite cases where people died as a result of free speech, feel free.

Good luck with that, I guess. You'd never pull it off in the US or any other nation that values human rights.

Such elitism... It is beyond ridiculous to say that people who do not read lots of books shouldn't be allowed to speak.

Even if you were to somehow take over the Internet, how would you verify which people read which books?

If you are arguing that your positions are the valid ones, then you can respond to those you disagree with rather than attempting to censor them. Silencing the opposition doesn't lend you any credibility.

While external factors certainly exist, I am still responsible for my own mental health.

So many people are just looking to point the finger at anyone but themselves...

If someone tried to pull that crap on me, I would stop working for them. (Then again, I made the decision long ago to never work for anyone else again.)

If someone in that position decided to kill themselves, that would be their own fault for being such an irrational fool that they couldn't even try anything to end the abuse.

You cited laws that provide recourse for such situations. There is also the option to report misconduct to the relevant authorities before things end so badly. You can press criminal and/or civil charges, when applicable. Or you could try talking things out with everyone at the workplace.

And you can quit your damn job if you're not satisfied with it.

Not safe enough to quit? Well then...maybe capitalism isn't as life-affirming as some believe.

If the issue is whether they are being "pushed in the wrong direction"...then so many things and people could be blamed. In many instances, all this is too ambiguous to be meaningful. Of course, if you outright told someone to kill themselves, that is more clear-cut...but at the end of the day, speech is not murder.

I'm not the type of person to kick someone when they're down. If I knew they were suffering and they did nothing to harm me, I would have no reason to lash out at them.

I would normally never tell someone to kill themselves...but if I did, it would be someone who was obnoxiously cocky and saying more than a few things I strongly morally disagree with. Arrogant people (such as myself, admittedly) seem to be less likely to be suicidal, after all. If someone told me to kill myself, I would just laugh at them.

On the other hand, it can be hard to tell sometimes. One of my friends hung himself on Halloween 2004. I was joking around with him the night before and had no idea he felt that way. I felt an empty sucking feeling for weeks, because it was just so surreal and unexpected. I had nothing to do with his suicide...but if I did, I'm sure I would feel guilty.

First amendment, remember?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

Those are so incredibly vague it's horrifying.

Just about anything can affect one's mental health. Even compliments can be construed as insults.

So let me get this straight...if you are living with a romantic partner and you insult them (which is all it takes to alter someone's mental health, infringe their dignity and whatever other bullcrap you want to come up with)...you can go to prison for three years and be fined over $50,000 USD?!

Man, I sure am glad I don't live in a police state.

I did a Google search for moral harassment. Here's one definition I found:

"any abusive conduct—whether by words, looks, gestures, or in writing—that [through repetition or systematization] infringes upon the personality, the dignity, or the physical or psychical integrity of a person; also, behavior that endangers the employment of said person or degrades the climate of the workplace."

So practically anything. No one is safe. lmfao

Grow up and stop being whiny little bitches. That's all I have to say about people who support these laughable nanny state laws.

SadMadoka said:
Thank you for calling the Assisted Suicide Hotline.

Or as we like to call it, ASH...named after what you'll be in due course. ^‿^

If you could take a brief survey after this call to rate our service, it would be much appreciated. ;)

This call may be monitored for seppuku assurance. Please wait while we transfer you to our next available agent.

Now...what seems to be the problem?

What are ya, scared?

I bet you couldn't blow your brains out if your life depended on it.

Or maybe you're already too braindead to figure out how to get things done.

Here's a tip: cliffs exist for a reason.

Guns? Rope? Pills? None o' that pussy shit.

All you need to do is move those legs. Might as well get some exercise on your final voyage.

Heck, if you've got a cell phone, you can start your journey now. I'll be right here with you, every step of the way. <3

Wait...you live in Florida? Oh dear...may Satan have mercy on your accursed soul.

Okay, okay...how about the ocean? You can take a "swim"...say hi to the sharks for me.

Whatever, though...I really don't care. It's your funeral.

I hope they cover the head. You know...so they don't have to look at your bitch-ass cunt face.

I wasn't going to attend...but maybe I will so I can bang your mom afterwards.

Oh...she's dead? Drat... Erm, on a totally unrelated note...do you have a sister? Perhaps I am gravely mistaken.

[Real talk: my mom and sister actually are dead. Dark humor can be therapeutic!]

You seem to need some inspiration, so let me tell you about a hero of our modern age: yours truly.

I mean, I'm so much better than you it's mind-boggling.

I am truth. I am destiny! I am JUSTICE!!!

I'm such a rockstar. And you? Not even a footnote in my autobiography.

I didn't catch your name, by the way...because I didn't ask for it.

A nobody like you is hardly worth the hassle of remembering.

So anyway...how has your day been? Scratch that. I meant my day. And I'll tell you.

First I woke up...and everything fell into place...all the joys that come with being the best. It's a me thing. You wouldn't get it.

But where are my manners? Back to you...

The one who's such a pathetic weakling that they literally called a phone number for the sole purpose of getting help offing themselves.

Just curious...why are you so offended by life? You do realize suffering is part of the deal, yes? Either revel in the chaos or fizzle out.

It's the law of nature, baby! The weak shall be food for the strong.

Now I'm hungry. I think I'll go for some pizza after we're done. I would share a slice, but...you know...

Are you seriously still here? You're really bad at this.

Oh well...it's to be expected. After all, if you're a failure at life, it stands to reason that you would be a failure at death.

I'll let you in on a little secret: your purpose in life is to serve me. No wonder you're so unhappy.

All those wasted years, and what have I gotten out of it? Dip-diddly-squat. Good job, ya bum.

But I'll tell you what... This is your last chance at redemption. Either be my bitch...or get the hell out of my world.

So what'll it be, chickadee? We don't have all night...I need to assist other callers.

Did I provide satisfactory service?

On a scale of fun to win, how would you rank my awesomeness?

...Sir? Hello? Hey, I think it worked this time. A round of beers, on the house!

Right now, I have shot a bullet in my head. It had been too long since I wanted to do so, and some day I needed to.

At the East train station Armoury, the Uberti 22 Long Rifle with wooden stock is the only one one can buy without a licence: 2400 francs + 40 francs the box of 50 CCI Stinger 5/5mm.

I brought back the heavy, long and cold object home. I hid it in a drawer of my desk. The next day I took it out: it was the cow-boy colt I was dreaming about since my childhood in Marseille. Killing oneself, this is joining a precise moment of one's childhood.

I opened the barrel and placed the small golden suppository in the only free hole (the five others are blocked off). Clak! I armed the hammer and lied down on the bamboo bed. I placed the extremity of the cannon just overhead of my right temple, a little tilted on the top of the head (not in the mouth, it feigns fellatio...). And I pulled the trigger. The armourer had warned me: "Beware, it is very sensible..." "Not as much as me!"

First, the explosion is not heard. And the black is a pale blue. I killed myself to kill in my head the idea to kill myself that was dancing there.

A key! It is "her" with "him." They are coming back from the square of Absences where there is a big red toboggan. My son finds me in the room: he is disguised as Zorro today. He lifts a little the black wolf to see better. He still has his plastic sword in his hands. My son is gravely staring at me with his hazel eyes. His beautiful face of an emperor child has the same expression he had when he went out the operation room after he was removed the amygdala. It will clear his throat even more.

Zorro stays still, he does not cry. He only says: Mum. No one will never know if he is calling his mother or if this it me whom he calls Mum as it sometimes happened to him when I was caring about him like a mother.

Here she is! The Saint, the one who has suffered so much. I remember that recently, she was saying: "I don't know if you are doing well or bad." Now, she knows.

The pillow is not pretty to see. It is a wine-filled sponge. My brain has exploded to the shelves of my library. All the top of the skull was blown in a cranial carnage. I keep talking to myself while knowing that I am dead.

It is so easy to kill oneself. Thinking that I have waited thirty seven years to get rid of my existence! This is like a knight who has enough of fighting: he takes off his dented armour, and it collapses in a good noise of useless scrap metal.

Je suis mort, Marc-Édouard Nabe.

Meusnier said:
On the complaints chapter, jumping to the next line after every single phrase is also quite tiring.

Restricting freedom of speech does not mean that you deny that their "minds and bodies belong to them" (sic). I have no idea how that relates to anything.

You said it yourself, there are limits to free speech like defamation, but it does not restrict to this alone of course, and defamation only shows the need to put some limits to what people can say in public.

Rest assured, I do not plan to put cameras in people's houses to see what they think.

And seeing the disgusting rise of conspiracy theorists born out of social media, it is now clear that the restriction of free speech needs to be expanded vigorously. Enough of people who abuse of the stupidity of self-styled dissidents and Sunday afternoon libertarians.

Besides, you live in the U.S.A., a country where the r*** concept of slurs exists (yes, I used the previous word on purpose, and this is probably the first time that I use this word on MAL...) and saying the XYZ-word can make you lose your job and at this very moment, all the so-called liberals will all cry like one man: "Do stupid things, earn stupid prizes!" You think that you have the freedom of speech, but you only have the government of opinion so feared by Stendhal and that effectively came to Europe for our greatest dismay, and on top of this, mob justice is the new warrant of what is acceptable to say or not. As an American told Rebatet, "What people in Europe don't understand is that democracy, you need to deserve it," and likewise, we do not deserve free speech any more.

"Violence and kidnapping"? No, simple bans from some platforms, that is all.

I am not a communist for believing that the crime of opinion exists.

Yes, I need to send them to reeducation camps if school failed at teaching them basic statistics.

Impressive reading comprehension,

I meant that you should not fight to have Faurisson say that the Holocaust did not happen and Meyssan say that the CIA organised the 9/11 attacks. It seems that you got misled by your judgment on my so-called elitism.

The apocryphal phrase attributed to Voltaire: "I do not share your ideas, but I am a ready to give my life so that you can express them!" loses all meaning when groups of people advocate for your extermination.

It is true that social media are completely independent of the worldwide anti-vaccine movements, the delusions of certain people with pizza restaurants and the delirium of others about "rigged" elections who think that it is of good taste to march on the Parliament.

Thank you for the nice comedic moment. The United States of America (ha ha) value human rights now?

They do not even value human life: 50,000 civilian deaths in Afghanistan only...

https://apnews.com/article/middle-east-business-afghanistan-43d8f53b35e80ec18c130cd683e1a38f

Remember about the promises of victory with "minimal casualties"?

American only value the life of American soldiers, have you listened to the last speeches of Biden on Afghanistan? This old fellow thinks that he is the envoy of God and has a divine mission.

The West should stop using words like "human rights" that they neither value in other countries or in their own ones.

I am not really impressed by those accusations of elitism, since a peasant can be well-read (as Courier was), I do not believe that education is reserved to a social elite (which is often simply forcing itself to consume "culture" as they consume cancer medicine), quite the contrary.

If your opinion is only shaped by mainstream media, its value is nil.

I would simply dismantle Twitter and all such websites.

If you had read Nietzsche more carefully, you would have remembered that the strong must be protected against the weak, for the lion cannot win against the swarm of flies. Here, I have genuinely tried to argue with Flat Earthers, and it was impossible in the end for such people simply dismiss anything that goes against their opinions. The Covid anti-believers, those who think that Moon Landing did not happen or that Sarkozy planned terrorist attacks to be re-elected should be considered like lunatics and silenced for good (not killed, let me fuel a little their paranoia). Have a look at basically any video on 9/11 to see that the enormous majority believes that it was an inside job (the Pentagon videos are the best for that). How do you plan to fight against that? There is no time arguing with people who will never listen. Something must be done to replace the cult of the Supreme Being, also known as the cult of the Dollar, by the cult of the Truth!

Perhaps you can, but most people cannot leave their job that easily. For example, in Japan, it is not a good idea to leave your job a few months after you get recruited, or you might have a lot of issues finding a job again.

This is correct, there are possibilities of recourse, but they are typically long-winded and can take a lot of time.

Capitalism is life-affirming now? I had never heard about this joke before. If you spend 8 hours by day sat on a desk counting piles of deaths or piles of money, you are not living.

Yes, I sadly do.

Not really, it is quite hard to condemn someone for moral harassment, and people are presumed innocent in France.

By the way, I am not sure that it was clear, but partner means married person or person engaged in a civil partnership, not just a romantic partner.

I hope that you noticed that I am not supporting this law in particular by the way.

That was really funny.

But what I said does not apply to "literature" (hum!).

Now, if you want to read something actually amusing, have a look at the following:

SmugSatoko said:
A crucial element of having a mind is expressing your thoughts, ie speech.

When you threaten someone's freedom for their speech, you are depriving them of that.

Bottom line: people should be left alone as long as they have not violated the rights of others. (Of course, what constitutes rights has been debated for millennia...but in my opinion, speech rarely violates anyone's rights.)

What limits should those be? Ah, the question of the ages...

Okay...but can I do it? Please show me how. For science. Yeah, that's it. hehe

Does it really bother you that much that so many are irrational? Don't act like this is a recent development.

You can't stop conspiracy theories from propagating. They have always been there; they merely appear more prominent now thanks to rapid modern communication.

Since no one possesses perfect knowledge, we resort to speculation. It's part of being human.

Scientists may utilize more honest methodologies...but you can't blame the common man for wondering out loud.

Just because something is a conspiracy theory does not necessarily mean it is harmful or even untrue. Many turned out to be true.

Free speech primarily concerns the government and what is criminal.

You can always get in trouble in the civil sphere for speech without it being a crime per se. This is nothing new.

You said you wanted to make the spreading of conspiracy theories a crime.

What about Google and other search engines? They disseminate data, and conspiracy theories are not exempt from their digital proliferation.

If there is no victim, there is no crime.

And what if they don't want to learn "basic" statistics? (Whatever those happen to be.)

I thought you were a scientist, not a politician. Looking for a career change?

Hey, you're the one who made such a cryptic statement.

I'm not a mind reader...but maybe I can become one with your special cameras! Show me the way, O sensei~

You don't get to decide what I fight for. Sorry, sensei.

Plenty of people are savages and think the way you alluded to. There's no getting around that. Trying to silence them won't make such people disappear. We just need to be prepared to defend against future threats.

This is what we call low-hanging fruit. A predictable response...just bring up war to distract from the fact that the entire history of the US has been a battle for ever-greater human rights.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_the_United_States

Many US citizens oppose some (or all) wars. The US government and military does not represent the totality of the American people.

It's all relative. The US respects the rights of its citizens far more than most other nations in history.

The point is, we greatly value freedom of speech in my country and will not tolerate those who attempt to steal it away from us.

What you said is, "You are not allowed to speak [...]"

I find it ironic that you fail to see how elitist it is to only allow particularly literate people to speak.

Perhaps I shouldn't have taken these words at face value? Do you (or don't you) want to prevent anyone who has not read X number of books from speaking at all? I could assume from your next statement that it could be only in the context of specific websites...but history shows that assumptions can be deadly.

Books and media are not the only things that can shape opinions. There is such a thing as life experience.

How?

And how would wiping out certain sites avert the catastrophe of poorly read individuals stating their opinions online?

What must be done exactly? How will this plan of yours defeat all these unsubstantiated beliefs?

I do think education is important...but it can only go so far.

What, then, is your favored course of action in this eventhood of an overbearing boss?

Whoa now. Take a closer look. I was clearly insinuating that capitalism is not life-affirming.

SadMeusnier. We've got matching initials now. :P

It does seem like the type of thing that would oft be difficult to prove, let alone pursue in court.

I can be a drama queen at times, so don't take my ramblings too personally.

That is the general assumption, but I like to be thorough, hence occasional generalizations.

Whatever that means... Maybe you meant you support unrestricted free speech in works of fiction?

That was just disturbing...but whatever floats your boat.

Meusnier said:
As the place of most sonnets written today is on the walls of a cabaret, the place of most people using social media is at the pub.

Free speech rarely violates anyone's rights? What about the right to live? How is that rare when it comes to the pandemic for example. Anyone propagating lies is de facto responsible for threatening the lives of others.

Defamation, conspiracy theories, apology of the ethnic cleansing of a group of people, etc...

I have no idea to what "the question of the ages" refer to.

Irrationality per se is not an issue.

They have become much more prominent and have a direct and clear impact on the lives of people as the pandemic showed clearly. People who thought that Moon Landing was a fake were mostly a fringe group of unemployed lunatics, and such a belief did not change much the daily life of people. Due to internet, it has become perhaps not become the belief of the majority (mmh... I would be curious to know how many people believe in the famous "Pentagon missile"...), but still a belief widely shared by many people at all levels of society. Therefore, one needs to address this issue. Saying that you cannot do anything about that is not only giving up on the idea of truth, but on the trivial one of reality.

But the government reflects the opinion of the populace, so that makes very little difference. If you are allowed to say something but will lose your job if you say it, your free speech is as restricted as if there were a law against it.

A crime? I have never said that...

A misdemeanour if you insist. And only on some online platforms, they are free to complain about anything at the coffee break. They should become harmless again, like the screams of drunkards that woke me up at 2am this morning and prompted me to finally reply to this thread. Then the police came and made even more noise due to their siren when they left. Great job mates.

Correct, but the issue is not really to make this data available. Indeed, it is important to have access to it only to understand its danger.

They would not have the choice. But this is only because school failed to teach them so. This is what I was trying to say with this exaggeration.

Certainly not. This discussion is purely theoretical, and I can only laugh at the numerous scientists who tried switching to politics as if studying reality helped with the apprenticeship of deception.

You took the worst interpretation.

But please, go ahead defending millionaires who built their empires on false premises.

This is correct that it will not make such people disappear, but it will prevent them from proliferating. No one wants a civil war.

The majority of US citizens supported the last wars, and George W. Bush was re-elected.

This is correct, only American citizens matter when it comes to human rights.

Oh, a partial quote, a very ingenuous journalistic method. There was a clause in this statement, clause saying that those who have no idea about a given topic should stay silent. I fail to see how this is controversial.

Democracy has deluded people into thinking that all words were at the same level of mediocrity.

China banned Twitter, right? I wonder how that would be so difficult.

I feel some irony in this question. If they do it on 4chan or other obscure websites that most people have never heard of, this is quite irrelevant.

One should wonder why education is not able to provide the intellectual tools not to fall prey to such mindsets. But to me, education is the only thing that can help in the long run. Why is it that self-styled sceptics choose to have faith in very improbable things?

But then why have you changed your username?...

Certainly not! This is too easy to frame your ideas in a fictional work and hide behind your books. On this specific point of suicide, I would not blame an author for writing eulogies of suicide, but please do not tell me about the atrocious Babylon.