Summary
The German government accused Elon Musk of trying to influence its February 2024 general election by endorsing the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party.
It acknowledged Musk’s right to express his opinion but dismissed its potential impact, calling his remarks “the greatest nonsense.”
Musk described the AfD as Germany’s “last spark of hope” in an opinion piece for Die Welt, sparking backlash and the resignation of a senior editor.
Musk has also faced accusations of trying to sway the 2024 U.S. election in Donald Trump’s favor.
So just block anybody who supports a candidate you don’t want them to?
Or block someone who has a disproportionate platform to communicate his views?
I suppose the Fairness Doctrine tried to handle that but was thrown out. Perhaps time to bring it back? That way everybody gets equal air/message time?
Question for me is, why is it important to ‘protect’ a foreigner to meddle with a country where he does not belong? And why does this person want to meddle with foreign elections? I would argue that a country has every right to assess, evaluate and take action whenever it decides that person has an influence on its election process. He (Musk) is no citizen of Germany and therefore should not be allowed to interfere. Expressing an opinion is fine until that person has a platform where this opinion starts to sway and influence that election. In that case I refer to my statement above about the Fairness Doctrine.
Fair warning: I do appreciate a discussion on this but if it will involve words like 'woke and the likes then I cease to be interested in that discussion
I mean - how do you craft a fair law that can be applied to everybody by people in office you don’t trust (e.g. the “other party”) that would make this work? Without going “full dictator” to make it happen?
The “fairness doctrine” is antithetical to freedom of speech. It only was acceptable because it only applied to “broadcast medium” (radio and TV waves) which are a shared and limited resource.
I am growing more and more concerned about how little liberals seem to care about freedom of speech to be honest. Every time some billionaire idiot says something stupid people want draconian speech laws to restrict it without ever considering how laws like that backfire.
Freedom of Speech is an American thing. Other countries have restrictions on speech. Personally, I like them.
It’s already illegal in the US to say untrue things about a person. Whether criminal or civil, I don’t know, but it’d probably be illegal to say something like “Elon Musk is a pedophile”, unless that were probably true.
Freedom of speech doesn’t need to be absolute, clearly, for people to be able to speak the truth and their opinions.
It is a civil violation, not a crime. And it’s only untrue if you claim it to be truth rather than opinion.
You can claim that you believe Musk is a pedophile all you like.
Article 10
Everyone has the right to freedom of expression and to receive and impart information. This right also covers the freedom of the press. Freedom of expression is one of the essential foundations of a democratic society. The media require particular protection because they play a key role in defending freedom of expression. Article 10 protects, among others, the right to criticise, to make assumptions or value judgments and the right to have opinions.
Such protection is not restricted to “true” statements; it applies in particular to political speech and debate on questions of public interest. Freedom of expression plays a key role in elections. Artistic expression is also protected by Article 10.
Yeah, it’s called Freedom of Expression on my country, too
And it’s the same idea as the American “freedom of speech”.
Other countries such as China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, etc.
Speech restrictions are dangerous and should be very narrow in scope. Once you open the can of worms of limiting political speech you no longer have freedom of expression. You are allowed to say what the state allows you to say.
Yes, just like you’re allowed to touch what the law allows you to touch.
Just because something falls out of someone’s mouth doesn’t mean it should be protected by law.
Fine - craft me a law that would do what you want without being easily abused by the far right to persecute you. And without being a flagrant violation of civil rights.
I’ll be waiting a long time - nobody I’ve ever asked for details has ever given even an attempt at an answer. It’s all just childish “somebody should do something” whining.
So if I read you right we can just about do nothing with what we face. We can all see what is happening and any action to remedy it is worrying and potentially a dictatorship, a decline in freedom of speech even.
Sometimes you can clearly see what is happening and normal counter behavior is not working. The ‘other’ side is not adhering to your standards of democracy and is in fact using your standards against you. This sounds like the playbook from the right: they can do and say shit all day long as they are not held to the same standards as liberals are. Liberals need to be pitch perfect or else they face internal backlash. Conservatives on the other hand can literally shit in the halls of the capitol and face no consequences. And that is the least of our problems, they also use democracy to eliminate it, to turn lives of others in a dystopian hellhole and they will not only succeed, they are cheered on by a large portion of society.
But whatever, this is what America wants. There was an election and they won, end of story. I can’t even get mad anymore, if this is what the people want then by all means, this is what they get. Who am I to say people voted wrong? It is a free country where you get to pick you representatives, even if it means these same representatives will use that gained power to erode the same system they used to get elected.
I don’t blame conservatives to be honest, I blame the rest for allowing this to happen and who are repulsed and get morally conflicted when counter measures are suggested if things start to go south. In my opinion you do need strong actions to preserve democracy, measures that are sometimes in conflict with the whole idea of democracy. We need to learn that preserving democracy is sometimes an ugly business which requires dirty hands once in a while. But if that is not palatable then we are doomed to lose it because guess what, the other side has no such restrictions or moral conflicts, they will take it away from you.
Ahh - there it is. This is where the leftists and maga overlap. Nihilism and the belief that you need control to make things right because they want to destroy everything!
I could replace “Conservative” with “libs” and “left” with “right” and post this on truth social.
You’re not wrong - you lost. Deal with that. But it doesn’t mean you can’t fight back. But do so with words and convincing people of your virtue rather than jumping to “silence the opposition”.
You want to do something? Run for office. Work for a campaign. Get signatures. Do work rather than whining on lemmy.
So I respond with words yet you condemn me as being the same as how others are actively destroying democracy. I look for answers but you cannot help yourself in mixing it all together as one, it’s all the same. Nihilist my left foot…
To be honest, you are just here to antagonize, not to discuss, or so it seems.
For the record, I am not American so no running for office nor should I if I were eligible as I have no answers nor solutions.
Well, back to my insignificant corner I go, this leaves you the space to project your version of ‘what is right’.
It’s you who condemn you - I’m just pointing out the obvious. Your style of argument is the same. Do you not know any maga? They sound a lot like you. You’re both very concerned - to the point of near paranoia - that they are trying to destroy your way of life. They are evil and must be stopped at “all costs.” And we should limit their speech as dangerous. Because if we don’t, they will.
You may not have maga where you are - you may have their local equivalent. All I know is that this hyper-partisanship needs to end.
“One of the penalties of refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.”
This is tiresome, you are not here to discuss and exchange ideas but you are here to antagonize and ridicule. For some odd reason you think you are above me. It’s odd. You will deny, of course, and perhaps I am not 100% right but I have to do with what you give me and that is the attitude of an obnoxious child trying to rectify others by the power of imaginary higher morals. Let’s not beat around the bush here: you are behaving like an confused asshole.
As long as you keep using that tired trick of “both sides are the same” we will progress nowhere in this thread other then you polishing your imagined sense of superiority.
So no sensible attempt, however good or bad it may be, from my side anymore. You are just here to waste my time.
And to put a cherry on your arrogant cake you close with some meaningless quote.
Here, I will close with a BS quote as well:
“Those who profess anyone can enter politics will end up being ruled by the incompetent”.
And that’s it, I’m done with you.
Meh, so long.
I’ll make it really simple: YES.
if they’re a political extreme who preaches intolerance, they must be ruthlessly crushed, driven out and silenced, by any means necessary.
Neat. Which governing authority do you trust judging who is a “political extreme” - and keep in mind people like Trump can be in power.
Governing authority, as in government body? Absolutely none.
There must be absolute separation from the judiciary, who are responsible for upholding the law.
Who passes laws?
Not anybody. The richest man in the world, who has been taking blatant steps to sway global elections, and his propaganda machine.
So if elon drops to being the 2nd richest man in the world, then he’s all good to continue ?
So you’re going to pass a law that says what - “the richest man in the world can’t talk shit?”
The top 1% must legally STFU? Deal!
Maybe they’ll be rushing to get rid of enough money to put them into a lower tax bracket if they want to keep yapping, lol
That referendum would succeeded SO FAST.
No, just nazis.
Pithy but stupid.
What is stupid in banning nazis sweetheart? Have you considered what would have happened if nazis and nazi propaganda was banned in 1930’?
Look kid - there is no global “mommy and daddy” who can be trusted to do exactly what you want unless you are personally a dictator.
So when you say “oh, just ban Nazis” you have no idea what that involves.
Just answer me this one question - if you give Donald Trump the law “nazis can be banned” how do you think he is going to implement that law? Because there are very good odds that ABC News will be defined as a Nazi propaganda organization.
Are you a little bit slow, sweetie?
And to answer your question: the entire MAGA, most of the republicans and Trump are nazis.
And so are you if you share their views.
Can’t answer the question. None of you tankies can.
You are an idiot.
X is a person now? OK…
Interestingly that’s a point I had not yet made - that blocking “X” because of what the CEO says in his personal time is also problematic. You’re going to potentially harm a lot more people than him.