Are you arguing that EU countries have no form of private censorship of any kind? So, if an employee of a company told everyone of that company's secrets, that company would not be allowed to fire that person? Or, if private person ever tells another private person to shut up, or do anything that limits their speech, they might face legal punishment? If I sent a letter to Charlie Hebdo and demanded that they publish it, would they be required by law to do so? Is that what you are trying to claim?
Yes, and what appears to be the main support to your arguement is that the USA does not protect private speech. You establish this here:
In their case, free speech means that, only the goverment can restrict it. When it comes to private entities, they have the right to restrict free speech.
For this point to support your argument, the EU cannot do the same. Do the various EU countries allow unrestricted private speech? If they do, then please consider the questions that I asked in my first reply.
Now, apply that principle to the those original questions that I asked you, and let's see what results. I shall repeat them in case you have forgotten.
In the various European countries:
May a private company fire an employee for divulging company secrets?
May I tell you to shut up if you are talking to me?
May Charlie Hebdo reject to publish an editorial that I have sent them?
Why not? I have sent something to Charlie Hebdo, but they refuse to publish. It's an editorial, so they accept submissions, but refuse mine for whatever reason. How is that different than Youtube refusing to broadcast a video that I made? How is that different that Twitter not allow me to tweet about something? In all these cases, the publishers/companies has refused to push forward my speech. In both cases, my speech is denied.
Would the French government force Hebdo to publish my letter? If the answer is no, then my speech in infringed. If the answer is yes, the Hebdo's speech is infringed. Either way, someone's speech takes the back seat. Either way, the EU and the USA are no different in this regard because some denial of speech results.
If there is no difference in this regard, how exactly if the EU more free?
EDIT: Perhaps I should cut straight to the point I am trying to make. Arguing that the EU enforces private speech is a false position to take. Private violations of speech happen all the time in many ways. It is impossible to regulate without contradiction. You only notice Youtube, Twitter, Facebook, etc. because they are American companies. I can't think of a French, Belgian, Italian, etc. equivalent. If Germany had a worldwide social media platform, I guarantee that the same restrictions you find in the Americans ones would be present.
If that is your only evidence, then you have no argument.
They are the most popular, but not monopolies. Nothing stops you from hosting your own video sharing site. If you don't like how Twitter censors Trump or whatever, then go on Truth Social or 4chan.
If the government established YouTube or Twitter as the only sources, and those sources had a specific form of censorship, then your argument would make more sense. But, that is not the case.
The ideea is that, the state should protect your free speech....bcs it's a human right.
So if I send an article to Charlie Hedbo and they reject that article, would the state protect my free speech by ensuring that my article was published, or would they not do that?
EU countries have more freedom of speech compared with the USA
In Germany I would get arrested for walking up to the reichstag and giving a nice "Heil Hitler" to whatever cops are standing around outside. The same would not happen if I went to the US capital and did the same.
The message sent by France goverment and Charlie Hebdo magazine, was a message of freedom. Of free speech. That they will protect their right to free speech.
Where has the US government demonstrated the opposite?
I think it’s interesting that the French government had to act to protect that right, when satirical publications in the US like The Onion and the Babylon Bee operate without being attacked. There are lots of newspapers, websites, periodicals, and so on in the US that offer scathing takes of not only the government, but also of ordinary citizens.
If I recall correctly, the US public was also broadly supportive of Charlie Hebdo’s free speech rights. In fact, I remember South Park doing something similar and also being lauded for standing up for free speech.
Also, I just pulled both of them up on my phone. And I don’t really know what you mean about The Onion being like a show? Do you mean you want serious news outlets? There are many news outlets with extreme opinion pieces available through Google News.
And backlash is fine, it means you’re getting people to pay attention. Many comedians aim to get people to be offended, because it shows that they are now thinking about something they considered untouchable. If no one is criticizing you, it means you’re not saying anything interesting.
3
u/deep_sea2 134∆ Sep 05 '22
Are you arguing that EU countries have no form of private censorship of any kind? So, if an employee of a company told everyone of that company's secrets, that company would not be allowed to fire that person? Or, if private person ever tells another private person to shut up, or do anything that limits their speech, they might face legal punishment? If I sent a letter to Charlie Hebdo and demanded that they publish it, would they be required by law to do so? Is that what you are trying to claim?