Re: Freedom of Speech (was Re: HateWatch Press Release)

["schizoid" <schizoid@pacific.net.sg>]

[: hacktivism :]

Parsifal,
I find it ironical that on the one hand, you advocate the (absolute) freedom
of speech - and by implication, your support for a diversity of views (which
I fully support as well) - but on the other hand, your insistence on the
freedom of speech on the internet is beginning to sound as is USofA has just
annexed the whole of the internet, and we all have to live our cyber lives
by the US constitution, regardless.  Anyway, I'm sure you're aware that
there is a sizable net population outside of the USofA and we (myself,
included) bring with us a different perspective, which we do not wish to be
subsumed under a hegemonic prescription, like the First Ammendment or the US
constitution.  Anyway, I see the First Ammendment as contingent to the
specific history and politics of the United States, rather than a total and
universalistic principle.  I do not wish to carry this any further, so
Parsifal, you can have your last say and we can leave the bandwidth to other
more useful (but equally important) things.

Lawrence


----- Original Message -----
From: Parsifal <noosph@noosph.org>
To: <hacktivism@tao.ca>
Sent: Monday, September 06, 1999 6:58 PM
Subject: Re: Freedom of Speech (was Re: HateWatch Press Release)


[: hacktivism :]

You wrote on 6/09/99 2:43 from schizoid schizoid@pacific.net.sg

<snip>

> But is
>that so?  Is this emphasis on "freedom of speech" purely an academic
>exercise?

Is the US constitution first amendment purely an academic statement ?








[: hacktivism :]
[: for unsubscribe instructions or list info consult the list FAQ :]
[: http://hacktivism.tao.ca/ :]