A lot of the traffic this website gets consists of ignorant teens who are hell bent on becoming a mouth-piece for their given ideology. This is to be expected as most of these kids are still learning about the world, and tagging along with a group agenda is easy to do and guarantees a steady traffic of new people. This is an insightful post from a stranger to you, informing these kinds of kids on a very important concept that seems to be swept under the rug. The free expression of ideas, or freedom of speech.

No matter what democracy you find yourself in, the linchpin that holds the governmental system together is the concept that instead of fighting out your differences you talk about them. This open forum where everyone is allowed to speak their mind regardless of how radical it may be to others is what keeps the system together. It doesn't matter if you're advocating for gay marriage or discussing why you think another race is inferior. The freedom to express ideas must be upheld in order to keep aggression at bay. There are clear exceptions to this that you all are aware of. The most commonly discussed is saying things that put peoples lives at risk such as yelling fire at a movie theater or threatening to do harm to someone. This is not to be intertwined with ideologies you disagree with however. If you think the neo-nazi party in the USA is absolutely criminal you can by all means think that. The moment you want to pass legislation to impede them from peaceful assembly is the moment you cross a line. It doesn't matter how atrocious you think a given view is, the moment you regulate their speech is your first step towards a more controlled society. It's no coincidence that most totalitarian rules begin with restrictions to freedom of speech, and end that way as well.

Hate-speech is a hot topic of the 21st century, and depending on your geographical location, may be illegal in most cases. The moment you enter the internet however, what is viewed at 'illegal' becomes a grey area. A general rule of thumb for you all is in most cases, no matter what some stranger says, there's really not much you can do other than see if what they're saying violates whatever rules your means of communication is controlled by. Thus, you could make the claim that the internet is one of the freest forms of free speech, as the bad can easily get as much stage time as the good. This is very crucial for my target audience to understand. Some people can be very cruel and rude towards you, and too be quite honest there's not much you can do about it. This means that if you're a sensitive person who can't handle such dialect you should by all means stay off the internet. If you're some socially awkward teen reaching out to the internet as a means of social bonding and comradery be warned: The internet was not intended this way. There are those of you who wish to police this out of some form of 'morale obligation', but attempting to shut down those with different views is rooted in ignorance, and contempt. For what right do you have to deny others the expression of their beliefs? Let them spout off their prejudice and hate-speech, they have every right to. In the end this is a 'cost' you pay by having access to arguably one of humanities greatest creations. Total freedom is a double edged sword.

The dollars website that I'm using to convey this on is littered with teenagers of all shapes and sizes. Many of you come here for a deeper understanding of intercommunications between people that you cannot get in your everyday life, and to those people remember this:
Give others the same platform to express their ideas that was given to you.

Let whatever happens in this thread pertain to the discussion of free speech, and its concepts.

So here's a problem with that. If there's a party agenda that is a threat, and you can't talk to them cause they don't listen, and you can't pass legislation cause it's 'crossing a line' and you can't take personal action on your own, what good is that freedom of speech?

>>2
While concepts such as hate-speech can lead to acts of prejudice and violence, my point was that merely the use of such concepts should not be grounds for policing. It's very true that most radical groups have dangerous agendas, but the reality is if they're not doing literal harm, or threatening to do literal harm they're in the clear. So we have this purgatory where these groups with dangerous agendas talk their talk, but never take action openly. Because at that point your right to free speech will be suspended for the protection of whatever group you're trying to oppress.

I think you may be confused on what the purpose of freedom of speech is. The purpose of free speech is not to get to conclusions, but to assure every view can be spoken. It's not a right we're given, but an absolute must for democracy to work. To answer your question "what good is that freedom of speech?" the 'good' is that they're able to talk about their ideology. Suppressing ones ideology is not a move towards a safer country, but instead is a move towards hostile action. When an ideology (especially a radical one) is suppressed it's left to fester. The one medium they had to voice their views was stripped from them and they have nothing left to do but get angry and upset. Our current system where these groups are at least able to voice their opinions is what's keeping them from doing vast amounts of harm.

I encourage everyone reading this to ask questions or voice concerns you have like Kisuke here. The less we talk about things such as this the more ignorant we become. I'm not claiming to be an expert nor am I saying your quarrel is without reason Kisuke. As much as you may think an ideology is dangerous. limiting their platform to speak is not a step in the right direction. It's quite the opposite.