NZGames.com Forums
Register FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

Go Back   NZGames.com Forums > General > Open Discussion > Politics
User Name
Password

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 1st April 2019, 12:34     #1
Ab
A mariachi ogre snorkel
 
Labour plans review of hate speech legislation

Surpriiiiiiiiiiise

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/chr...sque-shootings

Quote:
Little said he had asked the Justice Ministry to look at relevant aspects of the Human Rights Act, the Harmful Digital Communications Act, and sections of the Crimes Act to see what laws needed to be changed or added.

"I certainly think that the laws dealing with what we call 'hate speech', and human rights law, are woefully inadequate," Little said.

"Since the events of March 15, we are more conscious of the impact of what we are seeing and we need to do better."

Justice Minister Andrew Little says the laws dealing with hate speech and human rights law, are "woefully inadequate".

The tolerance for what had been considered acceptable had been too high, he said. Ethnic minorities needed to not only be accepted, but embraced and welcomed.

"It's timely to make sure that for those who would want to hurt others - even through words - that we can curtail that."
No. No. A thousand times no. Fuck you in the fucking ear. You fucking fuckers.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2019, 13:11     #2
Nich
 
Quote:
A group of three Christchurch Girls' High School students reported seeing a woman wearing a hijab blocked from getting onto a bus. After reviewing CCTV footage of the incident, Red Bus concluded the complaint was justified and described the driver's actions as "completely inappropriate".

Maybe the bus driver was offended by the woman's cultural appropriation. Which this time last year was the correct thing to be offended by. Maaan, that bus driver is soooo 2018.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2019, 13:20     #3
Nich
 
also,
Quote:
"We maintain that a discussion about our current hate speech laws is overdue, and that urgent action is required in relation to the recording of hate crimes."

This is promising. A discussion is exactly what's needed, so let's watch to see if this can be done the right way. I think Labour is showing good leadership after the tragedy (now is not the time to go full Sam Harris / Maajid Nawaz on Islam, but to show some compassion and solidarity), and I am open to the idea that a modification to "hate speech / free speech" laws will not just be a knee-jerk swing of the pendulum.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2019, 13:48     #4
Lightspeed
 
Obviously the "sticks & stones" theory is the prevailing wisdom at NZG, so we're always going to struggle with this kind of action.

However despite our robustness, not everyone is so resilient and may be impacted by online speech. Especially if the speech is coming from non-genuine individuals, agencies or organisations able and willing to use psychosocial techniques to stimulate reactions that would have otherwise never occurred.

My guess is politics being what it is we'll end up with a "don't say naughty things on the Internet" law rather than a "you must be a real person to throw shade on the Internet" law.

Maybe if we're really lucky Labour will botch the law and accidentally make online advertising illegal in NZ. I'd bend over and take almost anything if that happened.
__________________
Stay shook. No sook.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2019, 16:36     #5
DrTiTus
HENCE WHY FOREVER ALONE
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightspeed
However despite our robustness, not everyone is so resilient and may be impacted by online speech.
Social media is not compulsory. Hell, I would say it should be discouraged. People who WANT to have open discussion should do so, those who don't want to see things they are offended by, shouldn't make the conscious decision to go tracking it down. Or stick to Club Penguin.
__________________
Finger rolling rhythm, ride the horse one hand...
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2019, 16:44     #6
Lightspeed
 
Being social IS compulsory for most humans. And social media is now how we do that. To suggest people don't HAVE to engage socially in that manner reduces humans to a set of rational conscious decisions. Which is not what we observe when we study humans. Much of our behaviour is a matter of compulsion that occurs outside of consciousness, the story we construct about our behaviour being secondary.
__________________
Stay shook. No sook.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2019, 17:28     #7
Nich
 
"To suppress free speech is a double wrong. It violates the rights of the hearer as well as those of the speaker." - Frederick Douglass

Hitchens' Dictionary anecdote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHwvT4Xl5Uo

Christopher Hitchens on Free Speech
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z2uzEM0ugY


Often I feel there is no need for context to link to Hitchens. But these are quite apt for NZ's current situation. It is a road many societies have been down previously.


We are compelled to be social, and also compelled to so on social media. And I agree that the addiction to these platforms means most people really don't have a choice in the matter. They are a slave to social media, but they are also high-functioning addicts making up a large chunk of the population being slowly conditioned with dopamine and cortisol.

If social media is just algorithms conditioning and amplifying of our base fears (of others, of not fitting in), then surely social media can just as easily condition us to be more resilient to insults, more moderate in our religious doctrine, or less antagonistic against minorities? Would we still have free speech if our psyche is manufactured?

This kind of pivot would be a win-win for humanity. Hate speech would be quickly identified, countered, and dispatched. Our addiction also makes us more mentally robust against adversity. However, it would reveal that Facebook and Twitter bestowed these traits to us, and can just as easily take them away.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2019, 17:42     #8
Lightspeed
 
I like the idea, but I think it's a matter of entropy. There are far fewer "wholesome" states than there are "toxic" states in humans. We CAN do as you suggest, but it's not just a matter of doing something different, it's doing something more sophisticated.

We didn't always need sewage systems. A ditch at the back of the village was enough. Sure, people got sick, but people could stay well with care. Moving forward, as people lived in bigger and bigger communities, it became harder and harder to avoid shit. No reasonable amount of care could protect you. The solution was the sewage system, to carry away and render harmless the inevitable toxins we produce.

Social media needs a sewage system.

Unfortunately it's in the interests of some in power to perpetuate or even worsen the current situation. And they've got an easy hook to stop us from making a change: free speech. Another white American male invention.
__________________
Stay shook. No sook.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2019, 17:55     #9
Ab
A mariachi ogre snorkel
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightspeed
free speech. Another white American male invention.
Republican Rome, Revolutionary France: "hold my wine"
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2019, 18:24     #10
Lightspeed
 
Pretty sure the free speech we all enjoy is the US version.
__________________
Stay shook. No sook.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2019, 18:51     #11
Ab
A mariachi ogre snorkel
 
Yeah but it's of a European Enlightenment flavour. All that rights of the individual stuff in the foundation US documents is straight out of Locke.
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2019, 20:16     #12
CCS
Stunt Pants
 
So now we're all anti-white American male inventions?
__________________
I just want to understand this, sir. Every time a rug is micturated upon in this fair city, I have to compensate the owner?
  Reply With Quote
Old 1st April 2019, 22:48     #13
DrTiTus
HENCE WHY FOREVER ALONE
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightspeed
And social media is now how we do that. To suggest people don't HAVE to engage socially in that manner reduces humans to a set of rational conscious decisions.
But there is not a single "social medium" that we all see the entirety of (for instance, if we were all forced to use a single talkback radio station). Let people choose which platform (if there is a market for a regulated platform/safe space, let them choose that one), and who they follow/friend/network with.

I have to go out of my way to find things I really disagree with, and I've never had to do anything more than close the tab. I've unfollowed people who turn out to be spewers of bullshit, or just inconsistent in their paranoid rantings. I don't expect them to be banned because *I* disagree with them, just that their audience will organically diminish if they continue being idiots.

I think it's better to let the haters hate very openly, so at least they out themselves if they're attention seeking psychopaths, or other people in the online community have a chance to let them know that their view is wacky if they're just ignorant or horrible.

(I think I mostly agree with Nich, after actually reading his post)
__________________
Finger rolling rhythm, ride the horse one hand...
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd April 2019, 03:08     #14
crocos
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nich
Maybe the bus driver was offended by the woman's cultural appropriation. Which this time last year was the correct thing to be offended by. Maaan, that bus driver is soooo 2018.
It's not cultural appropriation if it's, you know, your culture.
__________________
Ξ √ Ω L U T ↑ ☼ N

وكل يوم كنت تعيش في العبودية
  Reply With Quote
Old 2nd April 2019, 11:03     #15
Nich
 
Well yes, and also yes if this stranded woman took Ardern's "they are us" speech too literally. I'm just saying it's possible this woman has never worn a hijab in her life, but looked around and saw that it was the correct thing to do in this time or mourning. The bus driver might think this gesture has a lot of other connotations that the woman appears to be ignoring.

That said, I am proud of what Ardern has done, she has extended an olive branch while almost all other countries (except Canada, but they're a bit politically touched in the head at the moment) are fed up with the chaos Islam brings to their streets.

Now, Ardern has shown that we can denounce someone who murders Muslims in broad daylight with zero remorse. Not only that, but the majority of the western world admire her actions. When the next terrorist attack happens and the perpetrators scream "Allāhu akbar", it will be the turn of the Muslim community to stand up and say "These terrorists are not us. They are wrong to kill in the name of Islam."
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



© Copyright NZGames.com 1996-2023
Site paid for by members (love you guys)