"Demanding that Google or Twitter suppress ideas specified by the state is the hallmark of tyrants." (Source). La France de l'élite 1.0, celle qui nous gouverne en mode papier-crayon (photo ci-contre), et qui voudrait bien faire taire le 2.0, c'est-à-dire les e-interventions de "la base" sur le Net. La base, entendez : le meilleur comme le ... pire. Or qu'est-ce qui est le plus dangereux ? Les discours incitant à la haine, ou la censure très 1.0 ("l'info c'est le pouvoir et je garde les deux") que notre gouvernement 1.0 gaulois veut imposer à Twitter et autres Google ? Le meilleur article que j'aie lu sur le sujet vient de la presse anglaise (si, si) :
"France's censorship demands to Twitter are more dangerous than 'hate speech'. Few ideas have done as much damage throughout history as empowering the government to criminalize opinions it dislikes. French minister Najat Vallaud-Belkacem is demanding that Twitter aid the government in criminalizing hateful tweets."
==> Read here.
"Nothing has been more destructive or dangerous throughout history - nothing - than the power of the state to suppress and criminalize opinions it dislikes. I regard calls for suppression of ideas as far more menacing than - and at least just as hateful as - bigoted Twitter hashtags and online homophobic jokes.
Ultimately, the only way to determine what is and is not "hate speech" is majority belief - in other words, mob rule. Right now, minister Vallaud-Belkacem and Farago are happy to criminalize "hate speech" because majorities - at least European ones - happen to agree with their views on gay people and women's equality. But just a couple decades ago, majorities believed exactly the opposite: that it was "hateful" and destructive to say positive things about homosexuality or women's equality. And it's certainly possible that, tomorrow, majorities will again believe this, or believe something equally bad or worse.
In other words, it's very possible that at some point in the future, majorities will come to hate rather than like the personal beliefs of minister Vallaud-Belkacem and Farago. And when that happens, when those majorities go to criminalize the views which minister Vallaud-Belkacem and Farago hold rather than condemn, they'll have no basis whatsoever for objecting, other than to say: "oh no, it's only fair to criminalize the ideas I hate, not the ones I like."(Source).
Articles
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire