this post was submitted on 15 Dec 2025
602 points (98.5% liked)

World News

51324 readers
1467 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

House of Commons calls on Keir Starmer to condemn Donald Trump’s ‘interference’ in European politics

The US is engaging in “extreme rightwing tropes” with echoes of the 1930s and threatening “chilling” interference in European democracies, British MPs warned ministers on Thursday.

The House of Commons rounded on Donald Trump’s national security strategy, which stated that Europe was facing “civilisational erasure” and vowed to help the continent “correct its current trajectory and promote patriotic European parties”.

Matt Western, a Labour MP and chair of parliament’s joint committee on the UK government’s national security strategy, said: “The United States consensus that has led the western world since the second world war appears shattered.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

preventing children’s access to porn – whether agreed with or not – has kind of been a presumed given

That's entirely up to the parent.

were being held accountable on social media for hate speech

Free speech answers that, too. Expressing an opinion we disapprove of isn’t an exception to free speech: for that we can express our condemnation.

Your hate speech rhetoric is a conceit built on the falsehood that simply hiding all the publicly visible indications of a problem solves the problem. Evidently, it's not working & is readily exploited to abuse other rights. Censorship doesn't change opinion: people are naturally free to think as they want & no force can compel them to change their mind.

To quote someone else, the open exchange of ideas is valuable & necessary to facilitate minds to willingly change. Not needing to be suspicious of everyone hiding what they really think out of fear is valuable. Censorship powers are very tempting to abuse and the consequences of their abuse are terrible, therefore they should be strictly limited. Believing in free speech can just be understanding this stuff and having a bias against shutting people up as a go-to solution.

none of what has been mentioned is really some indication that UK is on the doorstep of V for Vendetta-like dystopia

Restricting private access to information while raising risk of identity fraud & abusing the rights of protesters with loose definitions of terrorism isn't heading to your cartoonish idea of a dystopia?

Maybe think back to history about oppressive institutions & how we overthrew them. What were those critical ideas underpinning the liberal institutions that replaced them? Oh right: fundamental human rights to liberty such as free speech & freedom of conscience.

in reference to combating Hate Speech and cyber-bullying in Germany, which is a bit different is it not?

Nope

In 2015, a meme posted on Facebook falsely implied that Renate Künast, a prominent German politician, had said that every German should learn Turkish.

Künast asked Meta to delete the false quotes attributed to her.

In a landmark case last year, a German court ruled Meta had to remove all fake quotes attributed to Künast. Meta is appealing.

and

Last year David Bendels, a journalist, published a doctored photograph of Nancy Faeser, Germany’s interior minister, appearing to hold a sign saying Ich hasse die Meinungsfreiheit or “I hate freedom of opinion”. (The original photo, a reference to victims of Nazi atrocities, is shown above.) Such images are a dime a dozen on social media. Yet Ms Faeser seemed determined to prove Mr Bendels right. She filed a criminal complaint, and earlier this month a court handed Mr Bendels a seven-month suspended prison sentence, a hefty fine and an order to apologise.

Finally, hateful words are still words. Has this generation forgotten how to handle words?

Only cowards fear words. You have freedom of speech: use it.

[–] lennybird@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

In your view then, should schooling, vaccinations, trans surgeries, social media access also be entirely up to the parent?

Second to that, the law doesn't prohibit anyone from accessing these things outright; but rather ensuring that children don't get access to these things absent of their parent's approval — just as you indicate is your view here. Put another way, an adult parent could indeed log into pornhub on their behalf, no?

Free speech answers that, too. Expressing an opinion we disapprove of isn’t an exception to free speech: for that we can express our condemnation.

Yeah that's all fine and dandy to free-speech hard-righty absolutists, conveniently enough, but no, that's not my view; nor is it a representative of some V For vendetta authoritarianism to recognize objectively-wrong speech.

Tell me, do you or do you not subscribe to the "punch a nazi" notion of not being tolerant to intolerance?

Restricting private access to information while raising risk of identity fraud & abusing the rights of protesters with loose definitions of terrorism isn’t heading to your cartoonish idea of a dystopia?

As I had originally stated in my response, this would be a step towards that, yes, as I felt it was the most substantive point of your response to me; but not on the "doorstep"—as I had stated—itself. We will circle back to this following the Three High Court ruling in the coming weeks.

Far-right extremists want nothing more than free speech absolutism because it is convenient to their shallow tropes to dupe the masses; hence why far-right extremism is on the rise throughout the globe in the first place. So goes the adage, a lie travels half-way around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes.

To reiterate, the source that you cited is not in reference to those cases, but specifically about hate speech and cyber-bullying — both clear problems that have aided in the rise of far-right extremism across the globe already. Put another way, we've had free speech absolutist social media and internet for decades, and we've only gone further rightward as a result. I'll quote directly the source you cited in which I'm referring:

The application of Germany's decades-old speech laws were strengthened after its darkest chapter, and then was accelerated online after an assassination of a politician, fueled by the internet, sent shockwaves through the country. In 2015, a video of a local politician named Walter Lübcke went viral after he defended then-Chancellor Angela Merkel's progressive immigration policy.

"People with a very right political world view, they started hating him on the internet. They started insulting him. They started to incite people to kill him. And that went on for about four years," Meininghaus said.

This Stochastic terrorism threat is real, and in fact was utilized in Israel just the same when then-candidate Bibi engaged in the same stochastic rhetoric and inspired a radical to assassinate Yitzhak Rabin.

Defamation, Slander, Libel cases are common. Misattribution even under plagiarism is another aspect of commonly regulated speech. I don't have much a problem with false quotes on high-profile figures not classified directly as comedy having some capacity for removal. This is how lies travel faster than truths around the world. Again, hardly a sign that UK is turning fascist.

So, what exactly IS your solution to inhibit the far-right except for moderate or left-wing governments to directly deal with said hate speech? (And no, I don't consider Pro-Palestinian protesters hate speech of course; which is why this Court ruling is so pivotal).

Finally, hateful words are still words. Has this generation forgotten how to handle words?

It is extremely ironic one says this, considering the strict Hate Speech laws of Germany originated from their direct experience with propagating fascism at home in the 1930s, 1940s and learning through pain and suffering inflicted on others as well as themselves. Volksverhetzung was suspended conveniently enough during the Nazi era, and only post-war was it codified into law. So the question may be reversed: Have YOU forgotten the potency of these words, gone unchecked?