Nostr Web Client

I try to stay out of politics. My fight is for Bitcoin. One can't fight all the fights. Although if we win the Culture, everyone will win and the basis of it is:

Freedom is for everyone.

Freedom of speech is for everyone.

Bitcoin Freedom Money is for everyone.

Freedom of choice is for everyone.

Now to answer your question.

1. No one forced the people to celebrate publicly the murder of Charlie Kurk. They themselves expressed their thoughts. This is Freedom of speech. (right or wrong is a moral qustion but what I here would say is that "All lives matter.")

2. The people who are creating lists are exposing publicly the people who celebrate the murder. This is also Freedom of speech. (they probably do it becuase they think its immoral to celebrate it)

3. I haven't heard of someone being harmed because of the lists but ANY physical harm from both sides would be a Crime.

4. The murder is a Crime and must be punished a such. I say it again. All lives matter.

5. The act of murder has its root cause. People need to find the root cause. It may be a Culture dacay. On both sides. We need to follow good principles. The Constitution is an example.

the simplest example of a good principle

"Don't do to others that, what you don't want others to do to you."

Praying for Charlie Kurk's wife and children.

GLACA 3mo ago

So US government labeling what this people did as Hate Speech/ celebrating death of Charlie/ and promising to target, prosecute and punish this sort of language online is over reaching in your opinion and should not be accepted as norm?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

BitcoinIsFuture 3mo ago

No, there is no such thing like "hate speech".

Society needs Freedom of speech.

Bad speech, or rought speech or hate speech is just bad manners which I also have from time to time.

BitcoinIsFuture 3mo ago

To be more precise:

There is no such Crime like "hate speech". Making it a Crime is acting against Freedom of speech which is very wrong.

GLACA 3mo ago

So you oppose labeling speech as “hate,” because you understand how easily that leads to censorship by those in power.

But then you support labeling Bitcoin transactions as “spam,” even when they follow consensus and pay fees, simply because of their content?

It’s the same core issue:

Who gets to decide what’s acceptable in open systems?

In society, it’s supposed to be collective human judgment — not state-enforced definitions.

In Bitcoin, it’s the fee market — not a handful of devs or filtered relay policies.

Open systems self-regulate.

If we start pre-filtering based on fear, optics, or personal values, we’re not protecting freedom — we’re rebuilding the very control structures we claim to resist.

BitcoinIsFuture 3mo ago

But you see that hate speech leads to horrific results.

I am not saying that people should endorse hate speech. Hate speech is not part of any Culture.

Good speech needs to be endorsed.

Same with spam. Spam will lead to terrible results. We can't 100% ban it or stop it but lets not endorse it and lets not make it an easy entry.

GLACA 3mo ago

You don’t see the essence of it?

Who decides what’s “freedom” and what’s “hate”?

Governments and media.

They don’t want society to self-regulate they want control.

They reward, they punish, they define the boundaries of speech.

Now ask yourself:

Who gets to decide what is and isn’t spam on Bitcoin?

Knots want that role.

They want to be the gatekeepers.

But they forget something fundamental:

Bitcoin already has a trustless, self-regulating system: fees and consensus.

That is the law.

That is the beauty.

So when you import the logic of the broken world :the logic of filtering, judging, controlling into the most neutral protocol ever invented…

You don’t protect Bitcoin.

You turn it into something else.

Something dangerously close to the very thing it was built to escape.