Actual Police State

An example being German WW2 soldiers who genocided Jews under orders, if they had any moral basis greater than government they would have refused but it was what their government at the time wanted them to do and so they didn't see anything wrong with it.

I think that is a gross simplification - given the way Nazi Germany was run there was often huge repercussions for refusing orders like that on personally moral basis hence the Gestapo and SS, etc.
 
Gone downhill in here, someone made a new account to troll the thread before getting banned and now Vanillaface has stopped posting, I'm sure he was just about to justify his controversial positions.
 
I have to offer my support to many of vanillaface's posts, often I can be in complete agreement with them, they may be controversial, but that does not make them any the less interesting.

I am sure he speaks publicly what many dare only mention in tight supportive circles or in private, quite a breath of fresh air at times... I doubt he'd go down well at some university debates, but that may be considered a good thing given the secular nature that these institutions seem to have adopted ;)
 
Does the medium of communication determine whether or not speech is public? If so, as some people are arguing, does that affect libel? If, as some people are arguing, all speech online is private even when it's publically available then that should affect how applicable libel laws are online. Libellous speech in private is different to libellous speech in public.
 
Back
Top Bottom