Freedom of speech protects the expression of beliefs and ideas, and there is a legal line between that and inciting riot.
Punish when the line is crossed, but protect the expression of ideas and beliefs up to that line.
Risk intolerance is behind the fear of letting people close to the line, but that's where we talk about slippery slopes - your risk tolerance is not the same as others, and if you start moving the bar down it happens for everybody (even the most righteous causes) not just the people you hate today.
> if {party people} do not come around in next few years, I fear for America
It's interesting that I've heard that in years past but from my friends on the right talking about Democrats and violent protests. I'm not justifying the actions in the Capitol (I condemn them frequently), but listening to people aligned with either part I do find it interesting that this feels like a [downward] spiral. The question is how to break out of it and reset.
> It's interesting that I've heard that in years past but from my friends on the right talking about Democrats and violent protests.
The issue with this is one is rooted in reality and one is not. The biggest danger to US citizens right now is due to right wing violence, not left wing.
https://www.businessinsider.com/right-wing-extremists-kill-3...
False dichotomy. You are hyper-focused on the american partisan culture war, that you've lost sight of the bigger picture. I'm guessing you consume a lot of content from the news & entertainment companies, as they do tend to convey this as well.
Let's take your 'right-wing extremists have killed 117 people since 2010' point that was presented in the article. Where does that 117 rank in terms of causes of death since 2010?
What exactly do you mean by “do not come around”. Come around to what? That suppression of free speech is a good thing? I’m an independent, and I think Trump has a serious amount of responsibility for what happened here. But the suppression of free speech offends me on every level, regardless of who the target of the suppression is. We either have free speech or we don’t.
When polls show nearly half of Republicans support the Capitol Insurgents, there are LOTS of things that Republicans need to come around to.
Come "back" around to the belief that the court is the final arbiter of disputes in our country, NOT whoever sends the most maniacs in a frenzied mob.
Come around to the belief that yes, they did in fact lose the 2020 presidential election fairly, as stated by every state and county election official, including the GOP's.
Come around to the belief that the US "peaceful transition of power" during presidential elections was in fact a good thing, not a centuries-old tradition to be thrown away in a futile attempt to install a game show host as dictator-for-life.
Source: https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2021/01/07/nearly-h...
Perhaps one of the best things Americans could do is throw away demonstrably false dichotomies like this. You have defamation laws, you have copyright & IP law, contract law etc.
Freedom of expression is a right that is balanced against other types of rights and freedoms. No doubt the USA puts more weight on freedom of expression over other rights, but it's by no means the only setting that confers a functioning democracy.
It's entirely valid to discuss where the balance should sit. Indeed it's the _only_ way to discuss it rationally.
Now isn’t the time to say “well that didn’t work” and roll back a right that is pretty core to the country itself.
A building does not a government make. Whatever people harmed, windows broken, our government is not any worse off functionally than it was the day before. Yet this will be used to pass harmful laws, and like 9/11 it will do infinitely more damage to Democracy than whatever the original attackers did.
Well, there were the little matters of the American Revolutionary War and the American Civil War. And a few others of varying scope in this incomplete list:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rebellions_in_the_Unit...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newburgh_Conspiracy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks%E2%80%93Baxter_War
(This isn't to disagree with you; or to downplay the seriousness or support the events of the sixth.)
Edit: List formatting
All three branches of the government are whole (and save the executive, functioning, but the executive wasn't functioning before the coup either) and business is moving on. That doesn't mean we shouldn't respond with physical security, press charges appropriately or react - but calling it a coup attempt is something that not even the NYTimes supports: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/07/world/americas/what-is-a-...
I see you understood the word “coup” but the “failed…attempt” surrounding that word.
Attempted murder doesn’t stop being a serious offense because no one died, and attempted coup doesn’t become a minor event because only a handful of people died and the attempt to improperly seize power by force failed.
I agree though, it doesn't seem like a coup since they got in and then had no plan for what to do once there. It was just unfocused anger.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exce...
Do we actually need to guarantee universal Freedom of Speech to have a democracy?
Free speech= democracy isn't a very nuanced view.
Just because it’s not absolute doesn’t mean it’s not true.
I think this is the US specific part :p.
The rest I all agree with
> Do we actually need [FoS]?
It probably depends on how much you trust the government to be "self-regulated" in prioritizing the liberty of the people over time. Democracy is not the natural state of things by any means.
In a real democracy, the majority could decide to lock you up simply because they didn't like you.
In a rights-driven system, everything is ultimately decided by the courts, which are run by elites.
Confusingly, Bill-of-Rights "Freedom is Speech" is really a right rather than a freedom. You can brazenly violate the live-and-let-live principle and still be safe.
Do we actually need to guarantee universal Freedom of Speech to have a democracy?
Whether Germany can be ranked as a democracy is debated: the extreme left and right believe it is a US protectorate, QAnon believes it is run by lizard people/Jews/Freemasons/5G chips... If you go by a freedom of press index, human development index, democracy index, it usually ranks below the Scandinavian countries but in a decent place.
The usual paradox of tolerance applies: if you don't censor some speech, you might be the one who will have zero free speech.
That sounds like something someone in an abusive relationship might say. "Yeah, he burned my wardrobe but I didn't like those clothes anyway". Please seek help.