- Portals
- The Current Year
- ED in the News
- Admins
- Help ED Rebuild
- Archive
- ED Bookmarklet
- Donate Bitcoin
Contact an admin on Discord or EDF if you want an account. Also fuck bots.
Freedom of speech
Honorary Ed Lolington
Freedom of speech
is part of a series on
Internet Law.
[With Liberty and Drama for All]
- Detective
- E-lawyers
- Internet court
- Internet guilty
- Internet jail
- Internet lawsuit
- Internet license
- Internet military
- Internet money
- Internet police
- Internet settlement
- Internet trial
- Internet Vigilante Group
- Legal action
Laws
Internet Crimes
Internet Defenses
Other Topics
Case Law
We are all qualified attorneys at lol and every word of these articles is sound legal advice.
Missing something? You can help by adding moar!
At least 100 years ago, people did not have or know the concept of free speech and were only allowed to speak in 5-word sentences. Then they discovered how much fun it was to cry "Fire!" in a crowded room and watch normies stampede to the exit. Death and lulz ensued, and freedom of speech was born.
“Freedom of Speech” means you can say whatever you want whenever you want to whomever you want. It is invoked in flame wars to act like a retard under the guise of protecting "basic civil liberties."
The First Amendment (for retards)
On the internet, the First Amendment is 101% likely to be invoked completely fucking wrongly by a brainlet who hasn't taken the time to actually read the motherfucker. So we're going to do the due diligence of actually informing you of what it means in words you can understand. By the way, you're welcome.
The Right to Speak Your Damn Mind
Once upon a time, our Americunt forefathers took a break from slaughtering injuns and making their slaves pick cotton to declare that all land-owning white men who were allowed to vote had certain unalienable rights. The Bill of Rights, the foundation of the United States constitution, established these rights. The very first one offered them the freedom to say whatever the hell they wanted to say, no matter how stupid or offensive it was, and THE GOVERNMENT would have no power to intervene. Non-government organizations, on the other hand, still had the power to force people to GTFO. Just read the fucking thing:
—The First Amendment |
The First Amendment protects us all from evil by guaranteeing our right to:
- Anything on 4chan
- Freedom of Assembly
- Create & share amusing racial epithets!
- Freedom of the Press
- Freedom of Religion
- Petition the Government for redress of our grievances
- Political dissent and mod sass
In addition, the First Amendment also prohibited a particular religion from being forced upon us by the State, which is a bit different from how Americans view it today, but whatever. The long and short of it is that being allowed to speak your mind is a good thing, because it allows healthy dialogue between two individuals, and even between individuals and the state. This allows awareness of certain topics or problems in any community to spread, and be talked about openly, and for those in charge to address it properly. At least that's the idea in theory...
The First Amendment's also gave "freedom of the press", originally referring to the right to "publish" one's political thoughts and beliefs. Printed pamphlets, posters, flyers, newspaper columns and even letters sent to those newsletters were able to be published with whatever insane bullshit people wanted on them. Whether you're a 9/11 conspiracy theorist, a KKK member, or a Zionist, you had the basic right to spread the word. These days we have the internet for this purpose, and we have outlets like imageboards, forums, even Jewtube comments (which of course the commenters are world renowned for their intelligent and high quality opinions).
Limitations to Free Speech
HOWEVER... it should be noted that Freedom of speech and expression isn't a UNO Reverse card. While you are TECHNICALLY free to say whatever you want without consequence from the state, there are common limitations or boundaries to freedom of speech recognized by a court of lol that DO open you up to a number of consequences, while not specifically violating this right. Common limitations can constitute any of the following: (click on them to learn more)
- Libel or slander
- Obscenity
- Pornography
- Sedition or treason
- Incitement
- Fighting words
- Classified information
- Copyright
- Trade secrets
- Non-disclosure agreements
- Privacy
- Dignity
- Public Security
- Perjury
Is this simple enough for you nuggets to understand? Good, carrying on...
On the Internets
Anywhere there are stupid attention whores who have no idea what they are talking about, there will surely be an appeal to the First Amendment for protection. Unlike real life, every single website on the internet has an owner who wields total power over everything passing through said site, therefore making the Internet a collection of despotic nation-states, each ruled by its own “tyrant” (READ: PRIVATE COMPANIES CAN DO WHAT THEY WANT). Although most webhosts would argue that it's a good idea to practice free speech out of principle, and that the actual legal wording of the most recent revision of the USC should be used as a template. However, those webhosts don't own facebook, twitter, reddit or 4chan, which are platforms notorious for spurious bouts of censorship.
If you're getting ready to cite the First Amendment to protest your "brutal oppression" by that faggot moderator at whatever website he banned you from, or because a thirteen-year-old banned you from his Call of Duty lobby, ask yourself the following important questions first:
- Is my oppressor a United States law-making body?
- Is my oppressor trying to form a law?
- Is my oppressor a United States law-making body trying to form a law?
- Is my understanding of the First Amendment solid?
If the answer to any of these questions is no, then you should probably shut the fuck up and follow the rules you agreed to when you joined. Nowhere in the Bill of Rights or United States Constitution does it allow you to post your retarded bullshit nobody wants to hear.
Get it? Got it? Good.
Arguments Against Freedom of Speech
Common Arguments
Count Dankula made a pretty good video on the top ten most overused arguments against freedom of speech. Our article will focus on some more niche ones, but this is definitely worth a watch:
Flag Burning
Flag burning is totally allowed under freedom of speech, it's called symbolic speech. You wanna know who burns the most flags? Boy scouts. The BSA publication "Our Flag" states, "When the national flag is worn beyond repair,
burn it thoroughly and completely on a modest, but blazing fire". So you end up looking like a brainlet to any true 'MURRICAN patriot who isn't completely braindead.
Burning the flag of any major western country nowadays is considered safe speech by the cucked administrative powers that be, and nobody cares about safe speech. Besides, Antifa burn them for free when they aren't already busy burning dumpsters. If you really want to piss off normalfags with flag burning, burn an LGBT flag or the national flag of Israel. Better yet, buy a shitload of copies of the Quran and burn that instead, then watch the lulz ensue as you claim it's a protected, symbolic, artistic form of expression. Remember, the name of the game is to GET LULZ OR DIE TRYING! In the current year, that means pissing off the people who want to RESTRICT the extent of your speech. (see below)
That one fucking retarded XKCD comic about free speech
Why is it so retarded? Where to begin? Firstly, this XKCD comic keeps getting dragged up like a forced meme in literally any argument about freeze peach wherever someone has an unpopular opinion or gets b&. The argument being made is robust enough: "An individual might invoke the First Amendment of the US Constitution, which guarantees, among other things, free speech to any entity or person subject to the legal jurisdiction of the US. It expressly specifies that "Congress shall make no law [...] abridging the freedom of speech or of the press.". As the persons preventing your speech from being heard are not under the banner of congress and are instead private individuals, they can do what they want and they don't have to offer you a platform."
Well there you go, it's a private company doing what it wants so they're allowed to do it... right?
Practicing censorship isn't illegal for companies hosting public platforms like Twitter, the problem comes when their rules are being enforced arbitrarily. When rules from big tech platforms that would otherwise get someone from Group A banned, where someone from Group B enjoys freedom from that same rule-break, then that platform is acting as a publisher editorializing opinions that it approves en masse, as opposed to existing as a platform protected by the first amendment. With Twitter as the case in point, they have allowed ISIS terrorists and Q members to own accounts and radicalize others on the platform, while handing out bans at random to literal nobodies who weren't that big a deal to begin with. You'd think that silicon valley tech companies would work tirelessly to combat the spread of AIDS on their websites, but not only do they not care, they actively collude with each other to carry it on.
Do you want a shortcut anon? Just use ED:XKCD-FS
Who hates it?
Cuckservatives
Moar info: Conservatives.
Generally speaking, Conservatives consider themselves to be the sole arbiters of the Constitution. They consider our founding document to be divinely inspired and intended to be taken and read literally. They also unilaterally oppose any form of extrapolation from, or alternate application of, the principles set forth therein and consider these efforts to be little more than an illegal, extra-constitutional excess. Conservatives say the First Amendment does not apply when: You are speaking out against a Republican President. Expressing displeasure with a US war in general, or the conduct of the United States Military in particular. Offering an opinion which favorably portrays Arabs, Palestinians or nearly anyone who is unfortunate enough to exist above our oil. In fact Conservatives were recently able to codify many of these objections into law! (See the Patriot act).
Liberals
Moar info: Liberals.
Liberals don't have as much of a problem with mangling any part of our founding document, provided said mangling adds value to their hollow, atheistic, inconsistent existence.
Socialists
Socialists, much like Democrats, believe free speech gets in the way of their utopian drivel. They argue that free speech in the sense used in bourgeois capitalist 'democracies' means the right to undermine social justice and erode the social solidarity of the working class.
Fake News
Moar info: Fake News.
The Americunt government continues to to weasel it's way around the First Amendment in order to regulate the flow of information from the media, even colluding with biased media outlets themselves for profit. Is this some sort of conspiracy theory? Reptilians? The Illuminati? No, it's something far simpler: press passes. A press pass is a document that shows an individual is permitted to enter an area that they would not otherwise be allowed to visit, checked on by defacto government-funded hall monitors. It allows reporters to attend Press Secretary briefings and other press activities at the White House. So, while the mainstream media supports the government by being significant corporate interests that help fund those politicians' campaigns for office, individual reporters are kept in check via press passes. If a reporter asks the Press Secretary or a politician a tough question that puts them on the spot or is "out of bounds", they will have their pass for those events revoked. Usually this will be the beginning of the end of that reporters career since all major media outlets are owned by a handful of conglomerate corporations, and they will likely become an hero like Epstein.
Take for example the war in Iraq. Everyone howls for the blood of the Neo-Cons and W for entering a war under false pretenses. Bull-fucking-shit! The Republican Party may be nasty enough to do it, but they couldn't generate a single braincell if their lives depended on it. The true culprit is the cucked media, and being hosed with things like press passes makes reporters frightened of their careers and futures, preventing them from confronting our overlords with difficult questions.
Social Justice Warriors
Moar info: SJWs.
As a subset of liberals (to an even more ridiculous extreme), they want to demonstrate at all costs how wahmen, LGBTQ communities, and PoC are still suffering from a system that they believe only benefits white heterosexual men, and the only way to achieve equality is by enforcing a set of illogical rules whose sole goal is to have all of the privileges and rights that modern society provides without performing any of its duties. In short: silence anyone who has seen through their immature tactics and preposterous demands by shielding themselves against valid criticisms, portraying themselves as victims of unwanted bullying while doing the same thing themselves. They will classify any dissenting comments as death threats, racist, sexist, transphobic statements, or rape attempts. They will also demand the inalienable right to say whatever the fuck they want (no matter how absurd, idiotic, or foolish it may seem), but they will refuse to recognize the same right to anyone who dares to criticize them. They will also conveniently ignore those same rights to any person who dares to criticize them
Jews
Moar info: Jews.
Unique to the Jew is an uncanny ability to combine Arab xenophobia of the Conservatives with the Liberal's sensitivity towards offending other types of minorities, easily making Jews the ultimate First Amendment hypocrites. Should any goyim have the gall to post a joke at their fragile expense, they will immediately cry antisemitism and try to ruin your life.
Arabs
Moar info: Arabs.
Much like the Niggers, Arabs also take a very narrow view of the freedom the First Amendment guarantees. While generally supportive of their own right to assemble, speak freely and the freedom to choose Islam as their religion, Arabs can become violent (and even spontaneously combust!) when other groups attempt to assert the same rights for themselves.
Scientology
Moar info: Project Chanology.
The Church of $cientology, under the leadership of LRH proposed very early on to infiltrate sections of government under Operation Snow White, and they did with quite some success. However Anonymous used their free speech with Project Chanology to prove to the world they're nothing more than a sleazy, money hoarding cult brainwashing and destroying millions of lives around the world while cashing in on free money. The SCIENTLOLOGISTS didn't like this however, and decided to try and shut these raids down by claiming that these brave anons were their SPs, and the irl trolling of their "church" was hate speech.
Niggers
Moar info: Niggers.
For niggers, the First Amendment exists solely to prevent anyone except niggers from using the term "Nigger", or to prevent anyone other than niggers to poke fun at them for being niggers. While this may appear hypocritical at first, keep in mind that Niggers are little more than a lightly evolved ape-species that is largely illiterate. As a result, their faulty grasp of the Constitution can be traced to the peculiarities of their biology.
Autists
Much like the Niggers, Arabs and the Jews, autists hate it when people use their disability as an insult or a joke, they end up going to extreme cases as bitching and moaning on the internet by saying that autism isn't an insult or a joke, not knowing that their words aren't being heard. Considering that we just hear screeching instead. Truth be told, most autists don't actually have freedom of speech. Because they can't fucking talk.
FAQs
- Virginia:
- So I can rule internets nao? Cuz mootie banned me and stole my first amendment?!
- ED Help Desk:
- LOL! No, Virginia... Here, on the interbutts, the First Amendment is a complex thing!
How to explain it to you... Hummm...
Ok, try this!
Every weekend, we EDiots line our pets up on mom & dad's coffee table and lecture them on our politics.
Now pay attention Virginia, because this is key - That's our coffee table, in our living room!
(BTW, we had our pets stuffed because they were poor listeners.)
Likewise, Moot lectures his pets too! But on his coffee table, just like us!
(Except he stuffs his pets with cock instead.)
Now the Constitution says I have a right to lecture my pets on my table, and it also says he has a right to lecture his pets on his table.
But! I don't have a First Amendment right to lecture his pets on his table.
Nor, does he have a right to talk to my coffee table.
(Like it could hear him anyway.)
The Constitution says we aren't obligated to provide a venue for any of this retard bullshit.
I hope that helps, dear...
- ED Help Desk:
Yes... that's the Constitution, Virginia.
The First Amendment is what made this country great!
Also, cocks!
Long live our First Amendment!
Gallery
-
A free speech advocate. (Typical) -
Petitioning for Redress of Grievances (Also Typical) -
Kramer, doing it right -
Penn, doing it wrong. -
Protected Speech. -
See Also
- The Encyclopædia Dramatica and ED Forums, Last bastions of Freedom of Speech EVAR
- It's Okay To Be White - an A* example of trolling mediacucks with FOS lulz
- 1 for all
- ACLU
- AnonTalk
- STFU
- You vs. ED
- United States
- Co$
- Media
- Freedom
Groups that abuse Freedom of Speech
- America
- Feminists
- White People
- Fundamentalists
- Atheists
- Nazis
- Alt-Right
- Capitalists
- CIA
- Right-Wing in general
- Libertarians
Groups with no Freedom of Speech
External Links
- A Documentary on Media Manipulation - An hour long documentary on media manipulation without normal conspiracy theory bullshit like the NWO and Alex Jones. Very plain and easy to see in simple terms for the average idiot.
| Freedom of speech is part of a series on Language & Communication | |
|---|---|
Languages and Dialects • Grammar, Punctuation, Spelling, Style, and Usage • Rhetorical Strategies • Poetry •
The Politics of Language and Communication • Media • Visual Rhetoric
Click topics to expand |
|
| Freedom of speech is part of a series on serious business |
Serious Concepts
Free Speech • Identity theft • Irony • Internet asshole • Internet Celebrities • Internet disease • Internet drama • Internet humanitarians • Internet Law • Internet lawsuit • Internet lawyer • Internet stalking • Internet tough guy • Internet Vigilante Group • Operation Falcon Punch • Swatting • Vandalism • World Wide Web Consortium People & Organizations
2cash • Alan Turing • Casey Serin • David Hockey • Dear Cis People • Doxbin • Fast Eddie • Grace Saunders • Hallcats Squadron • Jessi Slaughter • Mary Bell • Meek Mill • Kittens • Maja Schmidt • Missy • Niggest Crook Force • Psychopath • Vloggerheads • WEB SHERIFF |
|---|
|
Freedom of speech is part of a series on Visit the Trolls Portal for complete coverage. |