I think we could stop any discussion right here, because you just proved my point re:Anglo-American “free speech”.
[quote=“Israel_B, post:4, topic:101559, full:true”][quote=“LutherBlisset, post:3, topic:101559”]
And “dogoodniks” is just another term to insult political opponents.
But as I used it, factually correct: someone who thinks they are doing a good thing but in fact has done nothing to solve the problem they claim to solve.
So the -niks ending isn’t used to imply an inherent perogativ meaning? Please. What kind of free speech would you like, exactly? The one where everyone screams at each other so they don’t need to listen to other ideas?
Last time I looked, most people weren’t pretending antisemitism, and racism in general, weren’t existing in countries which have outlawed the denial of the industrialised slaughter in concentration camps during the Nazi reign.
And FTR, as far as I am aware, Japan isn’t the best example to bring up for free speech in regard not only to law, but especially to societal and political taboos. That is a different issue, but I guess you might be very aware of the Korean-Japanese and Chinese-Japanese relations in regard to, again, talking freely about issues of the second world war.
Free speech looks very different in different places, but humanism does not. And “sensitivities” is just the word which not at all should be used when someone claims that the murders didn’t happen. This isn’t even just insulting.