Do Trump and Musk Have a Point?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 вер 2024
- Trump and Musk have claimed that Europe has no freedom of speech. Are they correct though? In this video we will compare the official text and evaluate how the different systems in the US and Europe work.
Support the Channel:
💁♂️ Patreon: / eumadesimple
☕ Buy me a Coffee: www.buymeacoff...
📷 UA-cam: / theeumadesimple
Social Media:
📷 / eu_made_simple
𝕏: / eu_made_simple
📹 / eumadesimple
👥 Discord: / discord
Other Languages:
🇬🇧 English: / @eumadesimple
🇩🇪 German: / @euleichtgemacht
🇫🇷 French: / @luesimplifiee
🇮🇹 Italian: / @ueinmodosemplice
🇬🇷 Greek: / @ee_apla
🇵🇹 Portuguese: / @auesimplificada
Sources:
constitution.c....
fra.europa.eu/....
www.washington...
freedomhouse.o...
www.politico.e...
For the people from the US.
I see a lot of comments how politicians decide what judges say/rule.
That's not how it works in (most of) the EU.
Our politicians are separate from our judicial system. (Like it should be)
Our (Supreme) judges don't get appointed by a politician to do his/her bidding.
Our judges go to school to learn the law and then interpret the law to come to an decision. And if you don't like the decision you go to a higher court.
So in the EU we have a separation between the government and the judicialpower. This is to ensure the government can't just do whatever they want.
Idk if they will ever understand :/
As you are saying, separation of powers is literally one of the core requirements of a full democracy, and apparently the political system in the USA does not fullfil this, which in turn opens the question why do many Americans talk about their country as it was a synonym to democracy?
@@mikeadox I'm not sure whether it's a requirement for a full democracy, but it is a requirement for good rule of law, alongside the requirements that the state has the highest power, but power of the government is limited by constitutions and freedoms of civilians. In addition, civilians must be protected by misuse of power by the state
@@robinie4015 Yeah, you got some points. The separation of powers is nonetheless very important to guarantee the rights of the individual over the state. Of course there are also are obligations that every citizen should comply to, and even if these are disregarded, everyone should have the chance to get a fair trial, which again is only possible when a proper separation of Judicial, Legislative and Executive is given.
Perhaps your comment is just worded very poorly, but otherwise what you said is blatantly not true.
Politicians are the ones that pass laws, and the point of judges is to make rulings based on the law, so politicians do decide what judges say and rule, basically everywhere in the world.
In the USA, the legislative, executive, and judicial branches are very much kept separate, it's one of their most important founding principles, so politicians are indeed separate from the judicial system. And in broad strokes, they are also separate in roughly the same way that they are separate in most EU countries.
In Europe the supreme judges are also appointed by politicians, with varying other differences relative to the US system (like perhaps instead of the president, in some countries they are appointed by parlament, or senate, or in some by all 3).
And I think it goes without saying that US judges do also need to go to law school before they can get the job, as well as ruling based on the law. At most there are somewhat smaller differences in english common law (what the USA uses) where if the law truly is vague/unclear, judges may choose to consider how other judges in the past have ruled in simmilar situations.
Multiple tiers of higher and lower courts do also exist in the USA, and they also function broadly the same as in Europe.
My freedom ends where your freedom starts. 🙂
That too is a part of the American constitution (or at least what one of the founding fathers intended, i dont remember)
A journalists who has to answer to an editor, does he have free speech?
@@gawkthimm6030 He has free speech because he can say whatever he likes. It's just that without the editor's permission his voice won't reach very far.
@gawkthimm6030 Free speech is a protection from the GOVERNMENT not a private employer.
And why would private employer be higher than government that run the country?@Budget_Prepper
Lying is easy and take seconds, proving something is false is hard, it can takes hours or days, so when something is proven false or a sourse is lying systematecly that information should be removed or flaged as such.
When there is no credibility and reputation, romoving, silencing, etc is percieved as censorship undermining credibility and trust even more.
Thats not the way to go.
The whole idea behind the democratic system is to let people decide for themselves. There is no basis for a democracy if you hold this stance.
Who decides its false? In US information officials swore was false was true but contrary to their political interests. Hunter Biden Laptop- russian disinformation as per former intelligence officials. Now NYT and Wash post say is true. Would have impacted election agaist their preferred canidate.
Censorship of NY Post was election interference.
Brandolini's law
Truth is relative these days, some can prove that there are only 2 genders others can prove that there are more than one, who is right? Well, the side that has the capacity to remove, supress or indicate in some form what is truthful or not in their eyes.
Why not leave public discourse alone and let people think for themselves or is it that legislators are so scared of it's own people that can think for themselves and can find information on their own? or do they think they KNOW better than us and we are too stupid to understand what is truthful and what is false?
It's a shame really that any shape or form of control has any positive feedback from people, how can you not see that any control over what you say WILL lead to further totalitarism and control over YOU?
From what I understand, all EU countries have "Freedom of Expression" which is slightly different from "Freedom of Speech".
Freedom of expression guarantees all manner of speech and criticism, under the condition that it not be hateful or discriminatory. You're free to express yourself whether that's through expressing your political opinions, identity, national pride, sexuality, and so forth, but you're not free to express and promote hate and discrimination.
But that's what it's like in Denmark. Don't know what it's like on the entire EU level…
"Hate" can get very vague
@@Qnexus7do you have an example? I cant think of any way how it can be vague
@@Qnexus7 We have a lot of experience here, like WW1 WW2, The balkan wars etc. The US is still learning.
@@katerina13aar the line between offensive and hate is really blur and the fact that you guys don't even consider such things is worrying. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
People can agree about the same set of facts and disagree on how to interpret them. There is a larger point of view behind Musk's or Trump's statements, having to do with speaking truth to power, the nature of communities and the way things should be organized.
One of the reasons why Im trying to leave the US. There's no such thing as accountability here
@@cd7848 ok ivan. Is there any back in your homeland Russia
@@cd7848 or maybe you are wumao or little pink
Aight redcoat byyyeeeeeee
cya
@@belisarius2776dumb
Oh so the EU isn’t allowed to meddle in American affairs. *but when Russia does it it’s okay?*
Seems that way.
And when america meddles in a affairs of a private dutch company (by summoning the dutch PM to Washington), its fine as well.
In practice, the dominant US news media corporations seem to be much less critical of their government relative to their European counterparts. Major US media declined to publish Snowden files, free speech or not. In contrast, they were published by a large UK media.
Likewise, one may argue that the US embedded journalists is a good example of the above. It took almost a decade for US major media to critisise that practice and more general, the US Afghanistan and Iraq adventure. I recall Chomsky complaining he had to read European newspapers to be actually informed about Middle East war [but no peace].
Finally , the two party US system is another factor contributing to the conformist approach of US based journalism.
@@gatopardoantico5657 Chomsky said that US is better in terms of freedom of speech than Europe
Conformism in media has nothing to do with free speech. News corporations get special access to limited and early information by sucking up to the government. If they published the Snowden files, they would lose lucrative special access, and would lose out to their rivals. If they restricted free speech nothing would change. If you want better journalism, kick the mainstream media out of bed with the government.
The two parties are two sides of the same coin.
Not that it's much better in Europe, though, as in my present country, a party kinda hijacked the government thanks to some bizarre turn of events with the coalition schemes. This party was not the most voted, but at the moment holds most of the ministry seats. Some unconstitutional stuff is going on and this party is having to break with a lot of their populist promises to cater to international interests inside here, which as usual hurt the weaker links, who sadly are too ignorant and self-serving to realise all they have been promised were just extremist delusions and scapegoatism. Now, the head of the coalition (the actually most voted party, and which is by the way not that much better than the erratic element) is letting things go as awry as it's happening since they can just put all the blame on the extreme one and pretend they tried to avoid all that.
What about Cologne? All the cover ups before that? I bet many have no clue what I’m even talking about. European media for you.
@@TheBoobanyou mean the New years Eve terrorization of women by North African males? That got a lot of attention here in the Netherlands.
I’m an American in Belgium, and I’m glad to be here.
Afgezien van Brussel is het hier miljoenen keren beter dan in Amerika inderdaad.
I lived in USA and Europe. It all depends on your pace of life if you enjoy fast pace life and the ability to make large amount of money fast and buy land and assets the USA is better but if you want a more slow life, more cultural or traditional environment, higher quality, than Belgium is better but need to be willing to live in rent or work much harder to make money to buy assets. It all depends on aspirations. If you prefer having a welfare safety net to protect you but cost you more of your income than Europe is better but if you prefer to make a lot of money and create your own safety net for yourself the USA is better. It all depends on what you want from life but you can live very good life anywhere if you are smart of course.
I'm an american in america and I am glad to be here
@@BigBoss-sm9xj that’s great for you
@@wiacco ja ik weet het ook
TL;DR: Europeans are allowed to express any opinion we fucking want, but we're also protected from shit that isn't an opinion, just like how we are allowed to go wherever we should reasonably allowed to go, while being protected from complete strangers breaking into our homes.
The way i see it is the US has an idealised version of free speech whereas the EU has a realistic version of free speech. In the US one's freedom of speech should not be restricted, regardless of the harm it may cause. In the EU your right to freedom of speech may not always supersede someone elses right to privacy and safety etc. The EU version is superior imo. Whatever you think of it though, the US wont win the argument while Trump and Musk are it's two most vocal supporters, because yikes😬 Can't imagine two larger hypocrites to take such a stance.
No, what do we have as actual free speech you have censored speech
Right, because the """right to be forgotten""" is definitely a real and good thing, and not just used by unscrupulous individuals to avoid public scrutiny...
@@spartanx9293dumb
@@spartanx9293you have no health care
This is true, but only if you look at it from an USA vs Europe POV.
Europe isn't a country. Europe is a continent. It's 10x the cultural diversity of USA, has different laws and legal systems in place and 1 countrys system isn't equal to another.
Like just compare Hungry to Germany. This comparison suddenly makes little sense.
I'm not saying European nations have no problem (every nation has) but at the end of the day, the fundamentals of this debate are flawed.
It Hungary, not Hungry... that's when you want to eat badly :D Also, I can send the police officer to hell (from Hungary) but you can't on Germany... There are differences, which is more better in Germany, but there are differences also, which are better here
@@EFazy no I was talking about food and Germany tbh... But no for real, that's exactly my point. There is no culture or country without problems, and Europe has a lot of problems cause it isn't 1 nation, so if you pile 10 different nations together and point at every problem each one has, of course you would look at Europe as a horrible place, when in reality it isn't really any worse than America maybe even better in some places. (That is probably up for personal preference or interpretation thou).
Elon Musk is frustrated because he feels as the only one who can limit the speech
I think that was what Breton felt too when he put out that threat unauthorised.
Musk owns a private company.
The only way his censorship on eX-Twitter is illegitimate is if it colludes with or is complying with government/officials.
That he may be hypocritical is a separate, private problem.
EU jails people for expressing their free speech, not musk, Try again loser
Well, Google is doing its best too, what with all the comments disappearing on UA-cam.
@@unduloid and Facebook Meta and most of the mainstream media
I feel better protected under a government that weighs rights against one another instead of blindly prioritizing one.
Balance is important.
Then you do not know what rights are. National security is not a right, it is a phrase used to justify repression.
So you say there is no right to privacy? Checks out.
In our language we have two words that may be considered freedom
Свобода [Svoboda] - freedom with accountability for one's words and actions
Свободия [Svobodiya] - freedom to say and do whatever you do without consequense or responsibility no matter the weight of the action or statement
And from what I can see, the US sure as heck leans towards the latter at least when it comes to speach
Does it ? Considering the fact that not everyone is able to say what they wanna say and the double standarts are real.
What exactly is the accountability you talk about ? Not being able to insult somebody because their fragile ego will be broken and they will be crying crocodile tears ?
To that I say grow the f*ck up.
So this hate speech they talk about is just an excuse to censor everyone they dont like. If my speech is trully so hateful I will never be able to garner a following, I will never be able to rise to power and so bad stuff and before you try to bring the mustache man as you weak example please consider that there are several factors that will nullify immidiatly that kind of argument when it comes to somebody like him rising to power today
Bulgarian I see
In Polish we have “Wolna Amerykanka” which loosely would be translated to mean a free-for-all and a freedom to do whatever you want without consequences.
Good. F* speech control.
When a site acts in Europe, it has to follow European law, that's not messing with Americans, if they want to continue, just do so, only not in the european market
It was all in Musk's statement. Not allowing disinformation ≠ censorship. These two shouldn't get mixed up but they sadly do quite often
Who decides what is and isn't disinfo?
do you trust politicians to decide what is disinfo ???? hope not , and that is what some people in the EU leadership wants
@@veronicajensen7690 idiot
@@aabbccdd4710 The deciding majority of the independent organizations.
@@aabbccdd4710 Disinformation is when you are stating a fake narrative with no proof or source. Simple: It’s when you tell something that is not true
Lmao ... that thumbnail ...
Musk looks baffled with what Trump is doing to that speech bubble.
Who defines hate speech?
Council of Europe: ‘According to the Committee of Ministers, hate speech is understood as all types of expression that incite, promote, spread or justify violence, hatred or discrimination against a person or group of persons, or that denigrates them, by reason of their real or attributed personal characteristics or status such as race, colour, language, religion, nationality, national or ethnic origin, age, disability, sex, gender identity and sexual orientation.’
@@yanivandesompele3413this isn't a solid definition. It can be easily manipulated to imprison some disliked politicians.
Society.
@@yanivandesompele3413 Way too vague
The judges. They also define murder, assault, fraud on a daily basis. And If they screw up, you can go higher up the court system.
In the USA, the FCC prohibits 68 swear words to be told on mainstrem TV channels. The FCC is a federal agency created by the Congress. This is an example where the USA restrict freedom of speech where it is not restricted in Europe.
Exactly in the EU we can say any word in the media without being bleeped out.
People might want your head for it, but you're free to use the words, as long as you don't intentionally try to insult a group of people just for the sake of insulting.
The US has to bleep people left and right. And sites like this one remove comments for whatever they deem wrong.
But still people think you're more free in the US. (Because their leader and teacher tells them)
And some of those "swear words" are so lame that wouldn't even been considered actual swear words in Europe.
I have two questions.
What are those swear words?
What swear words aren't banned?
The problem lies that "misinformation" can be anything any politician wants.
when people are gettin jailed in uk for SEEING THE RIOTS
YES any ANY bit of censorship is not good
politicians dont act in good faith
Agree
That's why political and judicial powers have to be separate in European countries. (Politicians don't get a say)
@@kianlakchi7182 its the politicians who have all the say and the judiciary punishes those who don't listen.
@@Qnexus7 You must be living in a corrupt country then in Belgium politicians lose judicial cases all the time.
simple answer: NO.
Simple answer to your comment: lol.
Yes actually
I recently heared this from a great antropologist friend:
"It's like 9/11 and the patriotic laws of surveillance of the population. Without that trauma, no one would have accepted those policies. That's why so many people believe in conspiracies. But the reality is sadder"
As another person that studies anthropology: when a few people convince nations to go on a genocide spree so hellish and enormous it reverberates in history for the centuries to come it gives you a lot to think about how far does your right to speech go until it has gone too far... As cavalier as they like to portray themselves when dealing with these things I can only hope Americans will never have to ponder what we have had to ponder
Freedom of speech in the US? TV shows: bleep, bleep, bleep, bleep
@@nispen the government has nothing to do with that. Once again, the fascist censorship loving soymilk drinkers reveal they can't understand the basic concept of Free speech exists to protect people from the government, not private entities (tv shows)
Only on major networks where they worry about children viewership. In the US, we don’t socially tolerate swearing as much as Europe, which is ironic considering that we have the more liberal speech laws
Swearing is for emotionally weak person who can't control their anger(In my opinion)@@aidanaldrich7795
The real question is: do we want in the EU the same shitsow as in the USA?
HELL NO! 😅
The EU is the same shitsow as the USA.
you spelled shitSHOW wrong and it isn´t even wrong, holy shit this is a win win typo
@@Zaluskowsky typo? What typo? They shitreap what they shitsow 😏
We also want the EU to mind their own fucking business and stay out of our politics we don’t want your censorship here
I don't know, I'd like some US level wages and taxes here for once. I'd totally welcome that.
Tldr for the title question: No.
Can you make a film about the two new groups in the eu parliament that goes a little more in depth and who they are and what they want with the eu? The ones I mean are Patriots for Europe and Europe of Sovereign Nations.
this is coming in 2 weeks or so :)
@@EUMadeSimple Ok. So good. 👍🏻
Fund the election campaign of the candidate who will pass laws that are more advantageous for your companies and to recive something back? That's called legalized corruption. When I was a kid i thought that lobbying was illegal... I was wrong.
Me too, right?!
As a european , i can say that free speach is here. Other problems are here not the fact that you can not talk bullshit about aur politicians and expressing one self
Pull twitter out of the EU: problem solved
Yes, please.
As a European, I hope they would. While they're at it they can ban Facebook and Tiktok too
Then ban all journalism, problem solved, EU hegemony will not be broken from any legal sources everybody happy (satirical text)
@@radeksilar543it's not about journalism, becuase press should deliver accurate informations, and why not, even opinions. Misinformation is not about journalism, it's a political strategy
@@eliascabbio7598 Who's the judge to decide what is accurate and what is not? On top of my mind I can recall many cases where information deemed false was actually true.
“If liberty means anything at all, it means telling people what they don’t want to hear” - George Orwell
Restricting the ability to abuse technology to mass manufacture lies? The nerve! (Sarcasm)
cry
However it can and should never be the government that decides what is truth and what isnt. This has let to many gruesome events in the past. If anything it should be independent journalists.
@@Karim94222 It also shouldn't be independent journalists. As scientists that decried the idea that anything but "miasma" is the cause of disease have proven in the past: nobody can be trusted to be the judge of truth.
@@Karim94222very nice
Apart from the fact that the platform was literally used to spread misinformation that caused a riot
Fuck musk and
Fuck shitter
@@Karim94222 Indeed. Many people seem not grasp why freedom of speech is so important. It is because noone can be given the power to decide what can and cannot be said.
We used to worry mainly about governments not being allowed to have that power. But now big tech has it. And they have become as powerful as governments.
So how do we solve this ? How do we stop big tech from manipulating the masses without giving governments the power to control the public debate ?
I'd say by doing the opposite of what is happening now. Instead of demanding big-tech to sensor, forbid them from doing so.
Musk "fire in the theater!"
Also Musk "free speech!"
This is fucking awful coming from people who support actual dictatorships.
to whom are you referring to with that comment?
@@gunnarneumann8321 trump and elon musk of course
don't tell me russia has free speech when they arrest people for holding white papers
No. Next question.
THANK YOU EUMS IN ADVANCE!
You should have shown where the EU ranks on freedom of speech and expression indexes. (Hint: much better than the US)
Free speech isn’t just about what the government allows you to say but also how media companies are regulated for example or how social or career related punishment are regulated, whether a company can fire you based on what you said for example.
I'm so glad to be a European.
Me too , Breton is a sucker , MEGA
@@dejabu24breton is a sucker but im kind of glad he poked a bit the americans.
😂
@@Qnexus7 i won’t disagree with the last part of your comment , I would like that they have the same energy on building the european defense
The European Union is not Europe.
I am an EU person and I would accept an US citizenship anyday for freedom of speech and gun rights.
You tell an EU cop to go fys and you go to jail. You tell an US cop the same and they can't even answer back. 😂
The "morals" part of article ten seems concerning, especially in censoring minorities that have been described in the past as being "immoral" in nature.
What they say "They don't allow free speech"
What they mean "They don't allow hate speech"
With each right comes a responsability. With each faillur to uphold said responsability comes acontability. This is the fondation of all societies.
My approach to freedom of speech/expression is that one’s rights end where another’s begin.
"these rights need to be carefully balanced...."
This is why one unelected commissar feels entitled to tell the largest platforms what he likes and doesn't like in terms of speech.
And he sprinkles in some vague Soprano style threats in order to get his way.
My prejudice up front: there is no such thing as rights, just agreements. Thus I think the framers of the constitution did fine without the Bill Of Rights, and the Bill Of Rights was a finally problematic add on. I and my wife have traveled and worked in Europe and never felt unfree, within reason, just like in our US. The presence of law and custom is automatically an abridgement of freedom.
As an American I can confirm
Europe is better than my country
I love the EU. Much smarter than the gringos!
Yeah because you are obviously white.
More tyrannical
The 'Rulers choose what free speech is' argument often forgets that Europe has a more representative system than the US, if these 'rulers' are, for europeans, putting unfair regulations, opposition parties will gain traction and leadership.
The game is not rigged, it just seems they don't play it.
Europe has free speech, I can speak whatever I want always. But I can not spreed hate. Hate is not protected and that is GREAT !
The problem starts when your opinion is labeled as hate by the current rulers. For example, saying "Imigration is bad for our country." is now incitement for hate in the UK and you can be jailed for years for this. Stupid people like you are the reason we always end up in authorian dictatures.
@@arnoldnemeth8578 nope
Yeah, that's the typical stance of closet totalitarians...
If X does not want Europeans to meddle in their affairs they sholdn't be available in Europe. This feels like those tourists thinking they can't be arrested because they are from another country
Can we stop pretending that the guy constantly platforming literal Nazis cares about free speech
Well, the platforming isn't really the bad part. It's the retweeting and aplification of their messages while tacitly or outright expressing agreement along the way
@@sethivaltas619 the platforming is already a bad part by itself.
Oh, he cares about free speech a lot, because without it he couldn't spread misinformation.
The guy who *complied with 90% of government censorship requests?* And who mass-banned opposition members during elections in Turkey and India?
The idea that Elon stood up for free speech is horseshit front to back.
😂😂 are you being deliberately obtuse, or just trying to be ironic ?
as an EU citizen, I don't want things to change to be more like the US. I don't want people to be able to just say harmful or blatant lies without accountability like in the US. I'm baffled that a presidential candidate can go on social media and tv and just say that people are ABORTING babies AFTER birth as if it's a thing and duping people that are either lacking education or are not well informed etc. That's not how you make society, that's how you divide and spread hate and resentment within the population.
To be fair it's already pretty bad in some EU countries, UK got tricked with politicians and the brexit, which was supposed to bring in billions and prosperity and what not and we know the result.. there are many other examples but it's at least somewhat in check.. unlike the unhinged version you got in the US with that "free speech".
Yes it's outlawed in germany to say you're a nazi and you love the third reich, or in france to say the shoah didn't exist or say this/that population are inferior/killers whatever
Freedom without accountability is anarchy, no thank you. We can debate anything you want within the confine of the law and respect.
As a non EU European citizen (Icelandic), I despise the current political state of the united states of America and how a large portion of a certain orange politicians plan is just hate-mongering and spreading extreme slander about the other candidates, barely saying anything about their actual plans or ideals.
@@shonklebonkle324 I feel you man, I moved to norway because I know the nordic countries know what respect and society means and we can disagree without hating each others
And how exactly do you kniw that their abortion claim is false??
@@stielimusterman3066 because aborting a baby after birth is called a murder, period. There isn't a state in the US or in the freaking world where abortion after birth is a thing.. gosh you must be trolling or you need to check in an asylum at this point
It's people like you that put the nazis in power.
Freedom of speech, or for that matter, freedom of anything should go hand in hand with common sense and neither should take a step forward without the other alongside it. While the US,. much like most of Europe, values all manner of freedoms, practical appliance of common sense in the US is notoriously lackluster. And when it comes to Trump or Musk, their kind is only going to preach such freedoms when it's convenient to them and forsake them when it's not, as it has been made evident countless of times.
''common sense'' is notoriously explained as ''that which I believe is true''. Don't know if you realize, but that which you concider common sense is totally different than what people in any other part of the world or place in time consider ''common sense''.
There is no more common sense, as people these days can't agree on basic things anymore. One should define any system of value thats to be consodered as "common sense".
@@wowjack8944it can be, but it doesn't have to be. So your attempt to correct is flawed.
Also he didn't say different opinions wasn't okay, he simply said there is a difference in how you deliver them.
@@chrislambaa7586 I never said it has to be.
@@wowjack8944 indirectly, yes you did. But I accept that wasn't your intention.
Hot topic but I reckon the US is drowning in their fist amendment.
Both of these have advantages and disadvantages so I am entirely neutral.
Saying something is going to happen is obviously not be the same as saying it should happen
In the Netherlands we have "vrijheid van meningsuiting" which literally means "Freedom to express opinion". Stating that the holocaust didn't happen is not an expression of ones opinion. It's just a false expression. Hate speech is in almost all cases not a matter of opinion either as it is based on false prejudices. You can have an opinion about an individual, but you can't have a generalised opinion about a group
Well said my northern neighbour (Belgian)
exactly. There is no need to be cruel or lie to express an opinion.
I agree, though I'd add the nuance that stating "I believe the holocaust didn't happen" or "this is why I think the holocaust didn't happen" should be perfectly valid expressions of opinion (wrong as they may be) since it isn't a statement of fact.
After all people are allowed to be wrong in their opinions, and if not then nobody is allowed to speak ever.
@hungrymusicwolf yes we should be allowed to be wrong.
But there is also a line where disinformation is.
Exactly where that line goes should be up to the courts.
In the world we love in, with so many outlets of information, i also believe it's important we stuck to the truth and not intentionally lie to derail the discourse.
@@chrislambaa7586 That line was never up to the courts to decide but the governments. That's the issue. Courts only judge if the line the governments set is was crossed.
I do not trust governments with setting that line.
Great video. I wonder if this is the reason America seems so polarized. People and the media can say almost anything. If this is the case, freedom of speech I guess can be a gift and a curse
Two guys talking on Twitter.....there is no business there for EU politicians.
Musk is the last person on the face of the earth who has the right to bitch about lack of free speech
Hate speech is a crime in most European countries so they do. Its a crime when you incite with words against minority groups here in Finland. You can say the same thing about Finns and its allowed.
Maybe when finns become a minority they too will fall under such protections.
@@Pietzu10 It‘s a pretty sharp sword and a vast majority typically doesn’t require the same level of protection as minorities.
How ironic, if it can be used against majority. Sounds to me like more like hypocrisy based on numbers than justice. Maybe Im interpreting it wrong, please correct me if Im wrong.
Calling censorship hate speech is like the Russians called the war a special operation.🙃
I am a Pole and I know how censorship works, because it ruled in my country for 50 years
False.
If they say that they are stoopid narcissists, then they have a point!
European freedom of expression sounds beautiful and balanced, but it is full of ill-defined ambiguous terms that, albeit sounding fair, give too much room from intepretation. That leaves dangerous uncertainty on what is "legal to say" and can be exploited to prosecute you by malicious persons in position of power.
The difference is that european justices aren't relying on politicians for their positions but are bound to the law. Also is there the right for a fair trial which is guaranteed by the ICCPR and requires the right to appeal to a higher tribunal.
@@gelbphoenix It does no matter, if it is defined by the law. Uncertain abstract laws (including EU laws) can be used as a weapon to supress oppposition or different aproaches. Only fair trial not strictly bounded to law can be right. The flaws can easily disrupt it.
@@radeksilar543 Orban in Hungary and the PIS party in Poland tried to mess with the court system. EU started with actions and they were not able to fullfill their autorian dreams. Remember, we allways have one level above the national level, the EU court system that looks into the EU contracts and laws. Nations have signed the contracts and laws, so they are bound to it.
Can be... can be... can be... I haven't seen any such exploits in practice. Critics of freedom of expression have theories, but little in the way of practical examples. Here's the thing: I've lived in a dictatorship. I'm Eastern European. And definitions don't do s**t to protect you of anything at the end of the day. Where there is ill will, no piece of paper with neat definitions will protect you. On paper, we had all sorts of rights under communism, in practice we had sweet FA. So, instead of looking for definitions, look at practice. That's what really matters. What is legal to say is criticism of the government, what is illegal to say is making up things with the intent to harm others or distorting/ignoring/cherrypicking truths. You don't have a right to lie.
Americans have a bad habit of trying to push things to their absolute limit, like edgy teenagers. We don't do that. There is a thing called common sense. I could go and hold a speech in the middle of the street, I have that legal right, but common sense says it's a horrible idea, so I'm not going to do it. I can burn my country's flag, but common sense says that's a disgusting thing to do and everyone would be angry with me. Musk and Trump can organize their society however they see fit, we'll do the same here with our own. I don't take orders from them or from their buddy, putin.
Well, it's worked pretty well until now, so why change it?
I am in the EU. I have an opinion... Let's see if I can post it freely:
No. He they don't have a point.
See? I have freedom of speech.
to answer the headline question: *NO* , neither Trump nor Musk have a point. unless you subscribe to their motives and concept of 'free speech' and what they want to achieve with it.
these two have different goals in mind, but both take the US version of 'free speech' and take it to the level of billionaires who are either in politics, meddle in politics or have certain objectives in mind; like accumulating money and power.
the current US version of 'free speech' is not exactly written in stone and the US constitution would be open to another interpretation. in fact, it was interpreted quite different up until the 1970s. our current version goes back just roughly 50yrs. however, to use it for power, political goals etc you need to have money to begin with - to afford lawyers who help keep you free from possible repercussions if you say something which might get you in trouble.
thankfully, no other country I can think of follows the same concept of 'free speech' as the US today and all western liberal democracies have come up with something better - at least for the average citizen. the interests of billionaire chancers and tricksters to influence the political agenda and manipulate public opinions is not something the world cares about greatly. we already have to deal with press barons and media moguls who use their assets to undue influence public opinions and 'assassinate' political figures they don't like. the gutter press did this for 100yrs already.
TL;DR the EU has freedom of speech but not freedom from consequences. For specifically political parody/free speech relating to politics it depends on your individual government
Elon: Europe has no free speech!
Europe: speaks
Elon: MIND YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS
In us censorship is outsourced to companies and other entities.
I don't like how EU is mostly portrayed as better or more balanced. Let's talk about EU's problems
Only reasonable way to "challenge misinformation" is to provide accurate information. No political authority should ever have the power to decide what is truth in regards to general public.
Riiight… because that worked in 1930s’ Germany, and all the Trump cultist had seen that they were in a cult after shown a true information… Right?
And yet there's the US...
Democracy is weak if it is not allowed to defend itself. Misinformation is a tool of opponents of democracy. Of course it makes sense to restrict "freedom of speech" regarding misinformation for political purposes. Freedom of opinion is not restricted by this, because a lie is speech but not an opinion.
The social networks are legally and officially products of private companies. But de facto they are public spaces. Consequently, it makes sense for the state to create the opportunity to exercise police control over these public spaces, as it does and must do with other public spaces - that is the task of a state, to maintain law and order.
To be completely honest here, in germany you can't call an obese politician "fat" because that is hate speech and will get you arrested
Yeah.., No. Simply saying that you'll get arrested when calling someone fat isn't always the case. It strongly depends on the context.
@@Andre-lp5yh germany literally made a law that forces small businesses to make their websites "behindertenfreundlich" e.g. making it possible for people with only one hand, a reading disability or blindness to use the site, sadly though, that interferes with the law that forces small businesses to make their website "genderneutral" because the "Nutzer*innen" is already not "barrierefreundlich" or barrierfriendly enough for the other law, causing a lot of small businesses to struggle a lot in the upcoming year.
this is one of the many examples of german left wing politics removing the ability for the average joe to do anything.
In other words; the EU is more sensible and the US is more reckless. I choose the EU over the US in all aspects. Good for me I already live there. Sure, I'd visit the US as a tourist, but never in my life would I even consider living a single second as a US citizen. Yeesh.
To make it short: No. ...I'm in Europe and we can say whatever the fuck we want and we will not be canceled for anything or similar bs. This is an exclusively USA thing Americans invented for themselves. Sure, there are some imitators over here but it's a nano fraction of the people. Cheers!
Free speech is not a freedom to post desinformation and other sh1t.
Who is deciding what is disinformation? The last time I checked a lot of the things that were historically labeled as disinformation actually turned out to be actual information.
If people like you were in charge in the middle ages, we would still think the earth is flat and the sun orbits it...
@@stielimusterman3066 I agree with you. People people like him with label. Anything the government didn't want you to hear his misinformation.
Freedom comes with responsibilities
2:26
You got freedom of speech 😝
Freedom after speech is a completely different question
Idi Amin moment 😂
No freedom after speech. Only before. 😛
One thing people complaining about "cancel culture" ignore... conveniently... is that free speech is a 2-way street. Let's assume you say X, and people will react to you saying X and you might not like the public reaction. When that happens, no one is cancelling you, you're not a victim, you're a perpetrator who wanted to get away with it. It's criticism and some snowflakes need to learn to deal with it. If you can't take the heat of public debate, stay of out the oven. And I've been on the receiving end of a lot of criticism several times. A lot of people ganging up on me to criticise what I was saying. I'm not a victim and they didn't cancel me, I said my piece, they said theirs.
@@octavianpopescu4776
Nice strawman, but that is not what this is about.
This is about consequences from the autorities, also known as reprisals, like censorship.
@@stielimusterman3066 There is no censorship in the West. Real censorship was what we had in Eastern Europe before 1989. Russia has censorship.
They don't have a point, they're just salty that they're pointed out as stupid liars
Obviously there are and must be limits to free speech.
For example, we are too lenient with people that use other people's suffering as a tool to support their own pseudo-ideological views.
Besides, even if is to be enforced as a legal matter, it is primarily a social design. Every society must strongly uphold a balance within the lines of empathy and self/mutual respect making anything that disrupts that societal cohesion unnaceptable.
If you censor speech "only on some cases" then you than have freedom of speech at all, it's like saying that you don't discriminate, except when the person is jew
The issue lies with who defines hate speech. You haven't mentioned how many bureaucrats in Brussels want to censor mainstream political opinion on topics around migration, LGBTQ, Islam etc and are going to label everything they disagree with as "hate speech".
I see so much hate towards Islam and LGBTQ comunity on internet that I dont believe in censorship.
Freedom of expression includes hate too! Or not?
No it doesn't, not against a particular person or group at least
This question would be so irrelevant if all people were not d*cks.
We have freedom of opinions/ expression, meaning that you're allowed to articulate anything you want as long as you don't wish anyone harm or death. It also means that you're not allowed to deny facts or make conspiricies like the holocaust never happened. We should be happy that we have a democracy being able to defend itself from "Schwurblern" and Propagandists. Meanwhile the USA has freedom of speech, meaning you can literally say and post anything you want, and we currently see how that is going...
It is going as much shit as in Europe.
@@tomorrowneverdies567nah,romania and poland are still doing fine
@@aaabbb-zc7sx Romania yes. But why Poland? Many non-european people living in Poland nowadays.
@@tomorrowneverdies567 Not really, as far as I can see there are still consequences for people who step too far.
@@systoliker6118 too far from what? Who decides what is too far? The 60% of the electorate who still go to vote for the parties? Of which 40% are people who will regret their vote within the next 10 years, and the other 10% are the members of the secret organization?
Two billonaires that buy or make a social media platform to spit their "truth" and "weird" values that were loosing money on those businesses, one of them got more experience bankrupting things.
Aaand??
@@stielimusterman3066They got the poor billonaires problems they maybe share hair Transplantist and "wisdom"
As an European I agree with Musk. Free speech should be free. If you think someone is spreading misinformation, then you should be free to prove them wrong, not to ban them. As an Eastern European, it feels like only Western Europeans get to decide what is categorized as hate speech or misinformation.
That's not what Musk said.
Musk is trying to show how people should be "free" to spread disinformation.
That is an idiocy.
I agree
Sorry but no.
If you say "the holocaust never happened" you are spreading misinformation fully aware of the fact that it is misinformation.
Knowingly lying is lying. Nothing else. Attacking people with lies and harming them with lies is punishable for thousands of years and is nothing new. And Eastern Europe has a long history of doing this and has to this day far stricter laws on this than any of your "Western European" nations.
That's not a very intelligent take, I'm afraid. We shouldn't rely on proving negatives, the remnant spread of misinformation and false "education" is a real threat to society. If you are Eastern European, you should know best. Or, it might be too late.. We do have free speech, but we should not allow people to be assholes and abuse these speech protections.
That leaves the burden of proof always on the second party
if they hate Europe so much why are they allied with it? and forgive me if this claim is wrong to some extent.
Here is the problem: Who gets to decide what is "hate speech" or not? This isn't clear and can be and is used to supress people. "You can't be anything except nazi" approach and "You can't be a nazi" approach are essentially the same, both approaches criminalises opinions. If we want to differantiate ourselves from nazis, we shouldn't criminalise opinions. US does exactly this, nobody can be jailed in US for their opinion. You can hate everything in US, freedom to hate is a human right. No institution should have a right to control what people hate.
It is clear tho.
Like it is so clear that it is written down and defined. Just read up on it you have access to google.
just because you never bothered learnign sth does not mean taht the information does not exist.
And letting everyone hate whatever they want leads to radicalization. Which can lead to the loss of said freedoms. Absolute freedom is horrible because humans are horrible by nature
@@AlphaHorstno it's not clear, that's why it can be used to imprison political opponents. In Turkey, it's used to imprison dissidents.
THIS THIS THIS
Technically you can be whoever you want to be, you’re just not allowed to do certain things typically associated with certain extreme groups.
Love the vid. Especially this topic is a difficult one but it shows this in a different daylight.
The main problem is this so-called hate speech. Which sometimes forces you to proclaim someone else's beliefs and takes away your right to proclaim your beliefs. For example, if you do not believe that a man can be a woman, that is why you still want to address a biological man who identifies as a woman in accordance with your beliefs. They want to prosecute you for hate speech even if it does not stem from hatred but from your beliefs. However, they impose an inquisition that can persecute you in court and punish you for not submitting to indoctrination to the beliefs of that man who identifies as a woman.
In fact: You can say that if it does not attack a single person or a group. You can express your beliefs but can't directly or indirectly incite public disorder or violence. You can express your beliefs even if they are scientifically false. No government will prosecute you for that but also remember that Freedom of Speech protects you from Government and never from the society.
While they also make laws undemocratically, by systematically deceiving the most gullible part of the electorates.
Then stfu and don't post such comments online.
Nobody is going to go after you in the EU.
Is there even a case where someone was convicted for this statement by an official court or are we talking about the ‘Twitter court’ here?
@hansmayer7652 in Germany, if I'm right, you can have a case in court if you use a different pronunce than how the person identifies. For me this is teror when they force you to proklamate someone else believes and forbidden you proklamate yours
Can’t even interview an ex president.
In europe, families don't shred to pieces because of politics. For example, if a son tells his republican father he's a Democrat 😏
Freedom of hate speech is precious and sacrosanct to conservatives. Does the EU not understand this?
Low iq people who can't handle criticism and can't make an argument to save themselves can only hope in silencing the opposition. That's their only way of dealing with the slightest adversity
Lol
Do you know EU laws about free speech? How they works?
If you're for free speech you're for freedom of speech for precisely the views you despise. -Noam Chomsky
I am from Austria and i completely agree with Musk. If we have exceptions for "hate speech", then the question becomes what constitutes hate speech. Meaning the people who diced what is hate speech and what isn't have essentially total control over our right to freedom of expression. What is even worse is, in most countries and even the EU itself, it is most often unelected bureaucrats that decide what constitutes as hat speech and incitement and what doesn't. This means that, even though we technically have freedom of expression, this really doesn't matter. Either we have absolut freedom of speech or we don't have any at all.
You are wrong, in (most) EU countries the judicial and political powers are seperate and to get a new law through it needs to be voted on by politicians from multiple parties. Moreover, 'freedom of expression'-laws are usually a part of the constitution and extremely hard to change.
Another Austrian here. I think the real problem is not freedom of speech, but the intention to spread misinformation under the guise of “freedom”. I think it's good that, unlike in America, there are more rules in the EU and you can't just destroy other people's lives through hate speech and spreading false information, as is the case in America.
That wasn’t an incitement of violence, he just stated what he thought was a fact, this speech should be protected in my opinion, the government cannot act as it wants while other’s have to stay silent. You clearly don’t like freedom if you think otherwise
the breton guys
he went rogue
the EU said they as a commissoin didnt permit him to write it
No. You have to answer for your words as well as your actions.
Opponents are free but hurting others as there two is not!
Rare USA win
Ah yeah. Musk and Trump, famously known free speech absolutists who haven't censored anyone. /s
More freedome of information and less protection off privacy
You missed the point. When Musk and Trump said the EU doesn't have free speech, they meant it in context of the EU meddling in their definition of free speech. I'm sure they know that the EU has some degree of free speech.
I don't understand where you missed the part that the EU overstepped their boundaries.
and u got the point that Musk overstepped EUs bounderies?
sorry this time you are systematically wrong. The real difference is in the justice system boundaries. In America everything is possible. if you diminish a group ore a gender or a skin color in speach, they or one member of the group can sew you, and if you loose you will pay a lot of money . In Europe it is a little bit different, the sums of money are significantly less. There for the roules of speache have to be guidet by law.
With reference ACC
How dare the EU, they don't want him to spread misinformation. They are so mean. 😂😂😂
Sarcasm over.
Musk doesn't need censoring. The EU does. Because the EU doesn't like the truth or discussion.
The EU wants to keep their monopoly of spreading misinformation.