The trial of Anders Behring Breivik

[a completely inoffensive name]

You're killing me. So the law doesn't effect you. So some people don't find it convincingly bad. So some people complain about the fire deal. SO WHAT?

What is your argument here?

Are you really just objecting to bragging, and not arguing about whether imposing heavy fines on people for "denigrating religion" is terrible?

I am saying attempts to quantify freedom is a load of garbage. RVG made a dumb blanket statement of "hurr durr, we americans are freer than you euros". And all you are doing is defending it by saying "look at what a terrible law they have!". Because the US doesn't have it's fair share of dumb laws.

Bragging and other obnoxiousness breeds stagnation, humility breeds constructive discourse.

I wish our culture would accept bragging and start hating on people who self-deprecate instead.

Our American culture seems to be perfectly fine with bragging about itself. It's obnoxious enough. Maybe you are sick of your negative nancy professors, but they are not the culture at large.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

What is your argument here?

You don't find it convincing? Well some people might.

I am saying attempts to quantify freedom is a load of garbage. RVG made a dumb blanket statement of "hurr durr, we americans are freer than you euros". And all you are doing is defending it by saying "look at what a terrible law they have!". Because the US doesn't have it's fair share of dumb laws.

Imagine being fined thousands of dollars for what you just said.

Bragging and other obnoxiousness breeds stagnation, humility breeds constructive discourse.

Our American culture seems to be perfectly fine with bragging about itself. It's obnoxious enough. Maybe you are sick of your negative nancy professors, but they are not the culture at large.

Yeah this is really what it's all about.

If someone brags just leave it. They exaggerate? So what. I'm glad many Americans brag, I wish the rest of them would not make a fuss about it. I don't get the mentality at all. If it's something you'd object to regardless of their tone then object to it. I mean, I can imagine objecting to rvg by saying "don't kid yourself, our laws are unquestionably better, but our social environment is far too toxic towards serious debate about this stuff, you won't get fined for saying it but you will get fired". But it's not inherently offensive to brag.

We shouldn't reflexively reward people who say that they suck and criticize people who claim quality. It's a form of radical leveling, egalitarianism gone wild.

We would be scratching away at dirt farms to this day if we were humble rather than agonistic. Bragging does the opposite of breed stagnation, it incites other people to make a counter argument. Humility and "well we each have our own fair share etc" is the true conversation killer.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Humility is the most important virtue we should all strive for. The more capable you are, the more important that becomes. It amazes me that we've got such a strong christian background in this country and people can't even appreciate modesty.

Ah, I'm judging now. Shouldn't do that either.

It's not the most important virtue. Generally it's just a precondition for virtue--you need the realization of your own defects to correct them and so on. That's the problem with praising people for going about being humble about something specific. If they admit, say, that they are ignorant about X, it's bad that their ignorant and it's bad if they aren't going to learn about it (assuming X is something worthwhile).

[a completely inoffensive name]

Imagine being fined thousands of dollars for what you just said.

Yeah that's bad. About as bad as being deported to Guantanamo Bay like GC suggested. About as bad as being an 85 year old grandma who has to be physically groped because her metal hip set off the detector.

We got problems, they got problems. We both need to work on improving ourselves, not measuring what little carrots we still have.

If someone brags just leave it. They exaggerate? So what. I'm glad many Americans brag, I wish the rest of them would not make a fuss about it. I don't get the mentality at all. If it's something you'd object to regardless of their tone then object to it. I mean, I can imagine objecting to rvg by saying "don't kid yourself, our laws are unquestionably better, but our social environment is far too toxic towards serious debate about this stuff, you won't get fined for saying it but you will get fired". But it's not inherently offensive to brag.

We shouldn't reflexively reward people who say that they suck and criticize people who claim quality. It's a form of radical leveling, egalitarianism gone wild.

We would be scratching away at dirt farms to this day if we were humble rather than agonistic. Bragging does the opposite of breed stagnation, it incites other people to make a counter argument. Humility and "well we each have our own fair share etc" is the true conversation killer.

You are arguing against a position I never made. I countered RVG's claim because I think it is a wrong statement not because I am trying to pretend everyone is equal. Merely that our typical standards of judgement are really dumb.

You seem to have confused what bragging and confidence is. Confidence brings about counter arguments, bragging is just Football Jock chest thumping.

Remember: "America, love it or leave it!" Yeah, it's arrogance taken to its extreme where people will reject the American-ness of someone if they disagree with its policies.

I reject the "we each have our own fair share" argument and I will agree that that does kill many conversations. But I also reject rampant patriotism because that is just as toxic to the health of a country than egalitarian gone wild. History proves both cases.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Yeah that's bad. About as bad as being deported to Guantanamo Bay like GC suggested.

Criticism rejected--people are starving to death in africa.

About as bad as being an 85 year old grandma who has to be physically groped because her metal hip set off the detector.

Criticism rejected--women are stoned to death in iran. Isn't this pointless?

We got problems, they got problems. We both need to work on improving ourselves, not measuring what little carrots we still have.


You are arguing against a position I never made. I countered RVG's claim because I think it is a wrong statement not because I am trying to pretend everyone is equal. Merely that our typical standards of judgement are really dumb.

No you aren't. He's right that the hate speech laws are terrible, and the exaggeration to "you have no free speech" is completely unremarkable. You're objection is to what you say it is here:

You seem to have confused what bragging and confidence is. Confidence brings about counter arguments, bragging is just Football Jock chest thumping.

Remember: "America, love it or leave it!" Yeah, it's arrogance taken to its extreme where people will reject the American-ness of someone if they disagree with its policies.

I reject the "we each have our own fair share" argument and I will agree that that does kill many conversations. But I also reject rampant patriotism because that is just as toxic to the health of a country than egalitarian gone wild. History proves both cases.

What on earth is wrong with football jock chest thumping? And that's not the definition of confidence anyway.


We vastly overrate humility (probably because of our religious background) and are far too averse to bragging in our culture. People will attack someone for saying the simple truth about themselves or for exaggerating. It leads directly to the hamfisted "log in your own eye" kind of thinking. Neither hypocrisy nor bragging are the sins they are made out to be.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Criticism rejected--people are starving to death in africa.
Criticism rejected--women are stoned to death in iran. Isn't this pointless?

Yeah, thanks for proving my point. Simply pulling out things that are bad about a country is a dumb way of making a point. Hence, why I opposed RVG's statement.

No you aren't. He's right that the hate speech laws are terrible, and the exaggeration to "you have no free speech" is completely unremarkable.

Did you even read what RVG said.

At least he got this part right.

Referring to Breivik's statement about there being no free speech. Only when called on it did he say, "Well there are some stupid hate speech laws I don't like."
Oh what a wonderful argument. Yep, that means Europe definitely is the monster that our massacring sociopath (Breivik) claims it is.

What on earth is wrong with football jock chest thumping? And that's not the definition of confidence anyway.

When the country is treated as a football game with get dysfunctional policies, dysfunctional politicians, dysfunctional country. Root for your team R or D and don't give them an inch, otherwise we might have to use our system of governance properly and make compromises.

We vastly overrate humility (probably because of our religious background) and are far too averse to bragging in our culture. People will attack someone for saying the simple truth about themselves or for exaggerating. It leads directly to the hamfisted "log in your own eye" kind of thinking. Neither hypocrisy nor bragging are the sins they are made out to be.

And of course history proves you right. When countries experience extreme nationalism marvelous things happen. From the US empire being drained from two wars to the constructive decades of the early 20th century in Europe.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

When the country is treated as a football game with get dysfunctional policies, dysfunctional politicians, dysfunctional country. Root for your team R or D and don't give them an inch, otherwise we might have to use our system of governance properly and make compromises.

I meant literally, what's wrong with chest thumping by an athlete?

And of course history proves you right. When countries experience extreme nationalism marvelous things happen. From the US empire being drained from two wars to the constructive decades of the early 20th century in Europe.

Patriotism has often been a very positive force in history. Who is talking about extreme nationalism?

Yeah, thanks for proving my point. Simply pulling out things that are bad about a country is a dumb way of making a point. Hence, why I opposed RVG's statement.

Did you even read what RVG said.
Referring to Breivik's statement about there being no free speech. Only when called on it did he say, "Well there are some stupid hate speech laws I don't like."
Oh what a wonderful argument. Yep, that means Europe definitely is the monster that our massacring sociopath (Breivik) claims it is.

This is just your aversion biasing you. Europe's hate speech is very worth criticizing. An exaggeration is not worth mentioning, let alone equating with extreme nationalism and "dysfunctional everything".

"...no freedom of speech" --breivek
"at least he got that right"--rvg
*talk about Europe's hate speech laws*

Why would it be more complicated than that.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I meant literally, what's wrong with chest thumping by an athlete?

Oh. Well, nothing really if the athlete did something awesome. I don't really like that NFL touchdown celebration penalty because the creativity of the players makes me laugh.

Patriotism has often been a very positive force in history. Who is talking about extreme nationalism?

Idk, who is talking about extreme egalitarianism?

This is just your aversion biasing you. Europe's hate speech is very worth criticizing. An exaggeration is not worth mentioning, let alone equating with extreme nationalism and "dysfunctional everything".

"...no freedom of speech" --breivek
"at least he got that right"--rvg
*talk about Europe's hate speech laws*

Why would it be more complicated than that.

Because how do you go from a vague statement about no free speech to discussing details until the discussion has already been mucked up such as Europeans that respond with their own vague counter statements "Have you ever been to Europe?".

The way a question or statement is presented is one of the biggest factors in how constructive a discussion about an important subject can be. I can go through the backroom and find examples, most of them probably Vuk's. Coming from a state of bragging only serves to hinder what could be.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Idk, who is talking about extreme egalitarianism?

Me, because I want to talk about why chest-thumping or bragging would be seen as so intolerable that it has to be attacked and hypocrisy has to be suggested. I think the Christian concept of humility and pride is backwards and that the conception is still too pervasive in our society. It should not be seen as sinful to claim superiority, even when the claim is exaggerated or silly. It should be seen as shameful to cheerfully claim inferiority or mediocrity.

And this comes up in country debates all the time too. Liberals need to ditch their aversion to expressions of patriotism, and quit with the retarded "yeah, I'm going to sew a Canada tag on my backpack when I go to Europe" type stuff. Remember, patriotism is not nationalism. Pride is not arrogance. A realistic view of a flaw is supposed to be a spur for change not an ornament to show how enlightened and humble you are.

[Fragony]

We Dutch have many good qualities, subtlety isn't one of them. That is good I say, the mood is much better here. Immigrants have gotten used to our bluntness. Scandinavian countries are still thought-police states that imprint to worship multiculture. Bit like us in the eighties. Same mistakes, especially Sweden is absolutely stubborn in it's wishfull thinking. But there is a difference, we got Geert Wilders who sometimes almost crosses the line of what's acceptable, Scandinavia got Breivik who went on a rampage

[rvg]

Did you even read what RVG said. Referring to Breivik's statement about there being no free speech. Only when called on it did he say, "Well there are some stupid hate speech laws I don't like."

That's very significant actually. It basically amount to suppression of dissent, and it's a big problem. If you personally have no problem with it, that's okay. Doesn't mean that I can't have a problem with it or bring it up.

Yep, that means Europe definitely is the monster that our massacring sociopath (Breivik) claims it is.

This is your extrapolation, not mine. Let's stick to stuff that I actually typed, shall we?

When the country is treated as a football game with get dysfunctional policies, dysfunctional politicians, dysfunctional country. Root for your team R or D and don't give them an inch, otherwise we might have to use our system of governance properly and make compromises.

This isn't a football game. Nor are we talking about a rival or an enemy. It's pointing out to a friend that they have a problem, even if they don't know it yet. It's a two way street, and people here criticize America quite often. I do not have a problem with that, but in turn reserve a right to do the same. It's not done out of retaliation but rather out of genuine concern. Freedom of speech is easy to dismiss while you still have it, once it's gone, that's when you realize just how important it is.

And of course history proves you right. When countries experience extreme nationalism marvelous things happen. From the US empire being drained from two wars to the constructive decades of the early 20th century in Europe.

Extreme nationalism? This is absolutely ridiculous, you're just throwing around epithets with nothing to back them up.

[Viking]

Scandinavian countries are still thought-police states

On the contrary, the Norwegian public sphere is highly pluralistic and Breivik is just part of the full spectrum.

[Fragony]

On the contrary, the Norwegian public sphere is highly pluralistic and Breivik is just part of the full spectrum.

Sure but I kinda doubt you don't understand what I'm talking about, political correctness is what caused these deaths. In the most complicated way.

[Viking]

Hardly. Apart from an obsession with the term "cultural marxist" and the violence, Breivik brought little new to the table. Even labour politicians have tried to boost popularity by playing on strings of the "Islam problem".

[rvg]

I don't know about yelling fire in a movie theatre, but I assure you guys that you'll find out just how "free" your speach really is(n't) if you go make a bad joke in airport. You know which one I'm talking about.

Bomb Voyage... Seriously though, how is this a problem? If you go and pretend to rob a bank, you'll get cops called on you. If you flat out tell a TSA worker that you have a bomb, why shouldn't they take you seriously? They're doing their job (and probably hating it), and here you come along and make their job more difficult. TSA has many problems, but holding people to their word isn't one of them. You wouldn't get smart with a cop, why be any different at the airport? A bad joke may delay a flight, and at that point if the authorities do nothing, the irate passengers just might take the matter into their own hands.

Heck, if you're really unlucky you'll get sent to Gitmo. I hear they have so much freedom there that they're practically dying from it.

Oh please, just give me evidence of one person being sent to Gitmo for an airport joke. Just one.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Bomb Voyage... Seriously though, how is this a problem? If you go and pretend to rob a bank, you'll get cops called on you. If you flat out tell a TSA worker that you have a bomb, why shouldn't they take you seriously? They're doing their job (and probably hating it), and here you come along and make their job more difficult. TSA has many problems, but holding people to their word isn't one of them. You wouldn't get smart with a cop, why be any different at the airport? A bad joke may delay a flight, and at that point if the authorities do nothing, the irate passengers just might take the matter into their own hands.

Not if you're intending to visit LA: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/01...t_deportation/

[rvg]

Not if you're intending to visit LA: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/01...t_deportation/

So, what's the problem?

[Tellos Athenaios]

Quick, gather round: here's a case of a SEP field in action people!

[rvg]

Funny thing about Gitmo is that you don't really know who's there, or why, or for how long. That's kind of the point.

But you're right, you'd have to be a total idiot to yell bomb in an airport and you probably wouldn't go to Gitmo--but you would land on a no-fly list and your entire life would be turned upside down. Is that fair? Maybe. Either way, it goes to show that your speech isn't really free. Truly free speech would require a nation full of people who were capable of not taking things personally, and that's something we don't have anyway.

It's not about taking things personally. People may act on emotions, governments do not (with the exception of despotic regimes like North Korea). As for your life being ruined if you put a show at an airport: nobody is required to deal with you. The society at large owes you nothing. That does not jeopardize your freedom in any way. Suppose you end up on a no-fly list, there are other ways of getting to your destination. If you want to fly, don't do stupid things at the airport. If you insist on that course of action, that's okay, but nobody is obligated to accommodate you.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Either way, it goes to show that your speech isn't really free. Truly free speech would require a nation full of people who were capable of not taking things personally, and that's something we don't have anyway.

In that case ruly free speech would require people incapable of being offended or reacting negatively to anything that anyone said, then. And to have true free will would require omnipotence. And I suppose we couldn't have free speech without free will.

That's just not what free means. Although I agree that we should often be more worried about social restrictions than about legal ones, you can't really argue that social restrictions are inherently bad. You're placing too much value on "true freedom". Saying we don't have "truly free" something is not by itself a cause for concern.

I think this conversation is far too abstract and all we have to do is look at the specifics of what we're talking about here.

Avoiding the sentiments that come into play when we have the words "free" "truly free" "free speech" etc floating around in our heads, we are comparing someone getting fined thousands of dollars for "denigrating a religion" to someone causing a panic for no reason.

[HoreTore]

This thread has derailed hard.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

This thread has derailed hard.

If we can't derail a thread, we don't have freedom of speech.

[Montmorency]

If we can't derail a thread, we don't have freedom of speech.

Private property.

[rvg]

Are you familiar with all the ways you can land on a no-fly list? I was on one during active military service because of something my step-father did in the '70s. It was very hard to get off it.

The difficulty associated with getting off the list is irrelevant for the purposes of this discussion. As for you ending up on it, I presume it was a mistake and has since been rectified. Sadly, mistakes occur under any system. As long as there are humans making decisions, mistakes will be made. It is inevitable.

[Fragony]

This thread has derailed hard.

Nope, it's firmly on rails, you just don't like where it's heading. You simply cannot disregard genuine concerns. The great burden is a wreckball, the house you want to sell will not be bought, as nobody wants to buy it. Building an extra one won't help, people will still buy somewhere else. It's a maelstrom of destroying capital and all it leaves are ghettos

[HoreTore]

Nope, it's firmly on rails, you just don't like where it's heading. You simply cannot disregard genuine concerns. The great burden is a wreckball, the house you want to sell will not be bought, as nobody wants to buy it. Building an extra one won't help, people will still buy somewhere else. It's a maelstrom of destroying capital and all it leaves are ghettos

Nonsense. I haven't even read page 7 beyond the first three posts. Right-wing paranoid accusations fail again.

It may be an interesting discussion, but perhaps it is better explored in its own thread? There are plenty of new things in the trial people might want to discuss, and this would be the place to do it...

[Fragony]

Nonsense. I haven't even read page 7 beyond the first three posts. Right-wing paranoid accusations fail again.

It may be an interesting discussion, but perhaps it is better explored in its own thread? There are plenty of new things in the trial people might want to discuss, and this would be the place to do it...

It isn't that much of a thought experiment that importing people who can't read or write is not good for the economy. Solid numbers, the great burden costs us 8.000.000.000 a year.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Do you consider a law-tradition dating back to the viking age as "leftist"...?

The concept is present in Anglo-Saxon Law in exactly the same way, we call it Mens Rea, the the "Guilty mind".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea

I don't know how the issue is dealt with in Roman Law, you would need to ask a Frenchman.

In any case, Breivik clearly has a Guilty Mind, so I think the question is moot - the man is clearly sane and rational, declaring him otherwise actually sets a disturbing precedent about who is and is not sane.

[HoreTore]

It isn't that much of a thought experiment that importing people who can't read or write is not good for the economy. Solid numbers, the great burden costs us 8.000.000.000 a year.

...And that has what relevance to a discussion of free speech differences between the US and Europe?

The concept is present in Anglo-Saxon Law in exactly the same way, we call it Mens Rea, the the "Guilty mind".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea

I don't know how the issue is dealt with in Roman Law, you would need to ask a Frenchman.

In any case, Breivik clearly has a Guilty Mind, so I think the question is moot - the man is clearly sane and rational, declaring him otherwise actually sets a disturbing precedent about who is and is not sane.

And needless to say, it's handled differently in Norwegian law, hence the need for a trial to determine it.

[Fragony]

...And that has what relevance to a discussion of free speech differences between the US and Europe?

Nothing and everything. It's simple, multiculture is a faillure. Lefties don't like that because things aren't supposed to be like that, and instead of allowing any doubt they unite in silence over very real problems and mentally block the world.

You are wrong get over it.