You're essentially correct: you can discuss child pornography, and even talk about maybe getting some cp, which is not illegal.... but it's possession of cp which is illegal and carries with it punishment (a mandatory sentence, if memory serves?) Selling I think is also illegal, so jail sentence = possession of cp sentence + selling of cp sentence.
It's a free speech story since the question is, are the Nazi objects part of history, or hate speech which needs to be controlled? Are the objects themselves glorification of Nazi-ism and their philosiphy?
You're right, the mere thought of child porn drives people into psychotic rages -- justifiably. That's just my point. If people are out there are so gung-ho on protecting free speech and making sure that MP3's are free to whomever wants them and so gung-ho at chastising the French for attacking a US company for doing something they consider illegal, then why not defend all types of "free speech"?
Child porn is a good example because it's illegal almost everywhere, but there are some countries which might not have laws outlawing it. I maintain that those same people beating their chests over free-speech would shut up damn quick if they were defending something they find so psychotic as child porn.
Either say you have no limits to free speech and exchange of any goods, which basically means that you believe in anarchy, or say that you accept some limits depending on the laws of your individual country, which basically says that what the French special-interest groups did was perfectly OK.
I'm kind of surprised that people are so outraged that Yahoo has decided to bow to pressure from several anti-hate pressure groups in France to not allow Nazi items on auction.
This is no different than businesses bowing to pressure from pressure groups in this country -- for example, companies with racially insensitive executives getting pressured by groups headed by the Reverend Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton. Yahoo saw potential lost business, and no doubt a potentially expensive lawsuit and acted accordingly -- and correctly, in my opinion.
Exactly what are these groups doing that is so outlandish in exerting pressure on Yahoo? This is no different than what happens in this country when a particular interest group puts pressure on a company. But rather than cheering the anti-war activists for getting a major win against big bad ol' corporate Yahoo and getting them to act somewhat in a moral manner, instead we cry and whine that "every last little thing should be out there on the internet, all the time, whenever we want, even if it's something I find morally repugnant like Nazi memerobilia".
Selling Nazi stuff is exploiting war and human tragedy for personal wealth is IMO morally wrong, and personally I'm happy there are people fighting against this -- legally.
I just openly wonder if so many of the/. readers would feel so strongly about the issue if the objects in question were, say, child pornography instead of Nazi memerobilia.
Jon, I agree that corporations flood our senses with what to eat, what to wear, what stupid-ass gizmo we can't live without, what car to drive, what entertainment to watch. Corporations pollute in many ways.
Corporations also by their very nature are not held accoutable for their actions. Bill Gates is never going to get arrested for what he's done with Microsoft -- all that's going to happen is that he's going to have to split up the corporation and have to make marginally less money than before.
When people start to hold individuals inside of corporations and goverment accountable for their actions, then we'll be getting somewhere in breaking the iron triangle, as John McCain calls it.
But when we don't even hold the president accountable for his infidelities in the White House, how can we expect people to hold individuals accountable for their actions hidden by the corporate banner?
Corporatism is really just another form of tribalism. My tribe has a neat logo! My tribe gives me a job! My tribe feeds me! My tribe gives me self-worth! Corporations foster this tribalism through an all-out assault on the senses -- TVs, print, advertising -- and the Internet.
I don't think making a 'tribe of individuals' is the answer. Making a tribe of individuals just makes you into a marketing segment that corporations need to 'reach'. But individuals exposing the hypocrisy of corporations -- that's where the answer lies I think.
Hyping our own individuality is not the answer. Highlighting the fact that "corporations" are really the actions of individuals is a better solution.
Slashdot Mirror
It's a free speech story since the question is, are the Nazi objects part of history, or hate speech which needs to be controlled? Are the objects themselves glorification of Nazi-ism and their philosiphy?
- Chuck the Bond King
Child porn is a good example because it's illegal almost everywhere, but there are some countries which might not have laws outlawing it. I maintain that those same people beating their chests over free-speech would shut up damn quick if they were defending something they find so psychotic as child porn.
Either say you have no limits to free speech and exchange of any goods, which basically means that you believe in anarchy, or say that you accept some limits depending on the laws of your individual country, which basically says that what the French special-interest groups did was perfectly OK.
- Chuck the Bond King
This is no different than businesses bowing to pressure from pressure groups in this country -- for example, companies with racially insensitive executives getting pressured by groups headed by the Reverend Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton. Yahoo saw potential lost business, and no doubt a potentially expensive lawsuit and acted accordingly -- and correctly, in my opinion.
Exactly what are these groups doing that is so outlandish in exerting pressure on Yahoo? This is no different than what happens in this country when a particular interest group puts pressure on a company. But rather than cheering the anti-war activists for getting a major win against big bad ol' corporate Yahoo and getting them to act somewhat in a moral manner, instead we cry and whine that "every last little thing should be out there on the internet, all the time, whenever we want, even if it's something I find morally repugnant like Nazi memerobilia".
Selling Nazi stuff is exploiting war and human tragedy for personal wealth is IMO morally wrong, and personally I'm happy there are people fighting against this -- legally.
I just openly wonder if so many of the /. readers would feel so strongly about the issue if the objects in question were, say, child pornography instead of Nazi memerobilia.
- Chuck the Bond King
Corporations also by their very nature are not held accoutable for their actions. Bill Gates is never going to get arrested for what he's done with Microsoft -- all that's going to happen is that he's going to have to split up the corporation and have to make marginally less money than before.
When people start to hold individuals inside of corporations and goverment accountable for their actions, then we'll be getting somewhere in breaking the iron triangle, as John McCain calls it.
But when we don't even hold the president accountable for his infidelities in the White House, how can we expect people to hold individuals accountable for their actions hidden by the corporate banner?
Corporatism is really just another form of tribalism. My tribe has a neat logo! My tribe gives me a job! My tribe feeds me! My tribe gives me self-worth! Corporations foster this tribalism through an all-out assault on the senses -- TVs, print, advertising -- and the Internet.
I don't think making a 'tribe of individuals' is the answer. Making a tribe of individuals just makes you into a marketing segment that corporations need to 'reach'. But individuals exposing the hypocrisy of corporations -- that's where the answer lies I think.
Hyping our own individuality is not the answer. Highlighting the fact that "corporations" are really the actions of individuals is a better solution.
- Chuck the Bond King