Total Freedom of Speech is Bad

"I do not agree with a word that you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

but will say I can see why she was banned form using the Underground.

While I cant say I wouldn't cooperate with stalinists in certain circumstances. The Authoritarian Left does annoy me.

It should. Your friends are assholes.

Freedom of speech shouldnt a pick and choose kind of thing. It was created for those with the unpopular opinion not for those who all shared the same ideas. Do i think she should be saying those things? no of course not. But would i send her to jail for it? Now thats something i could never do. "Freedom is merely privalige extended, unless enjoyed by one and all"

Freedom of speech is the foundation of a free society. To limit speech in this way destroys the British claim to being a free society. While I do not share the woman's sentiments towards race (actually I find them quite revolting), I will nevertheless defend her right to shout her moronic beliefs from the rooftops because she has the right to.

I used to post on Soviet-Empire for a while (before they banned me for being a 'bourgeois sympathizer', lulz), and they were quite fond of saying "freedom of speech for all except those who are pro-capitalist." So I asked them to tell me exactly where the line is drawn between "healthy socialist debate" and "capitalist propaganda". Unsurprisingly they all gave me a different answer, which naturally I cited as proof of how broken their stupid logic was. The ban followed swiftly. Heh.

Lucky. I have not had the fortune to have been subject to one yet. I should just troll something near and dear to his heart until he erupts.

This women has probably hasn't got laid in a while. Prison will change that for her.

Am I like the only communist for freedom of speech?

While her opinions may be detestable, the actions of the British courts only serves to undermine any guarantee of free speech for the British people. To quote The American President, "You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours."

We communist who like freedom of speech must stick together and fend off the authoritarianism left.

My rant will be kept short; I would sacrifice nothing for my ideals (there is nothing in my ideology against limiting freedom of speech so I don't think my ideals are being cast aside there). I take it as a compliment when you call me a true red. Total equality relies upon educating people to the right (or more accurately left) way of thinking. The ends do justify the means. If there is any force holding civilisatoin and humanity back it's Republicans and neo-cons. And finally you must not look at far-right people and say, "yes but what can we do about it" you must say "we can do something about it."

Oh, grow up.

I can't wait until Kali reads this.

That's really disgusting you know? The ends don't justify the means, and thinking that it does is what leads to wars and genocides and lots of things that only psychopaths think is a justified course of action. I also like how you basically advocate brainwashing children to think in a left leaning manner. Also a disgusting way to think.

Leon Trotksy was an asshole, but he once shrewdly said "The ends may justify the means - but the ends in turn must be justified." Your ends, sir, are unjustifiable.

"Rawrghhh fuck fuck annngry fuck fuck"

I like maquiavelism, and I use it all the time, but in my private/personal life, not politics or society as a whole.

(Give me a break, I've had a hard day and I won't bother in writing good English)

"Limiting Free Speech" and "True Equality": That's your average authoritarian red folks.
The perfect blend of brute and mystic, of oppression and slavery. Shackle a man to his neighbors and cut out his tongue when he complains. Disgusting.

Rhetorical fluff with no actual point; just base insult bordering on abusive behaviour which is entirely unnecessary and serves only one purpose: namely, to attack the person behind the idea and to engender feelings of self-loathing and doubt in the opposition. An act, I hasten to add, no decent human being would tolerate.

I could point out you spelt decency wrong in the last sentence but then I'd lower myself to your level.

I must ask you do some self examination. For example: you clearly believe that you have every right to smash everything standing in the path of your idealised system. The fact of the matter is that we do not exist in a state of sole liberalism and in exchange for being granted the many privileges of Social Order we must accept our corresponding responsibilities. In this situation the women exercised a privilege in a manner that was entirely unnecessary to convey the valued activity which the privilege exists to facilitate. Furthermore her exercise of such activity was done in a manner which at the very least violated others personal freedom from abuse, a security which it is the responsibility of the state to provided for those who are in the reciprocating contract of the state. To ensure the protection of such freedom the state must place restrictions, of the lightest nature, on the privilege of speech.

If there is truly any force which retards the ability of humanity to move on it is one which fundamentally places the self-gratification of present-hedonistic thought before the ideologies of future-positive and even future-negative thinking. Every advance in human thought and ability has been to ensure the development of humanity and it has only stopped because of the general acceptance that the individual is the most import aspect to be appeased, at the expense of the common.

Yo bro: get of you angsty ass and smell the roses. The only reason you can say this is because of freedom of speech. Having it your way, you should of been banned as soon as you said something of what most of the members considered "right". Since it doesn't seem like it happened looks like you're a hypocrite for sitting comfortably, knowing that no real negative reaction could be directed at you.

While I will say that I disagree with the neo-conservative elements, it would be fair to say that, as the conservative element (i.e. those who oppose change and favor older forms of political thought), the neo-conservatives represent those who previously affected change and thus brought society to this point. Though most here disagree with their policy, it is a little over the top to consider them to be "holding back civilization".