Archonix 
"[@DarkObsidian":](/images/2396053#comment_9340933
)
At a fundamental level, yes, freedom of expression means the freedom to be an absolute cunt.
Set aside, for a moment, the argument about whether or not derpi has the right to limit speech. That's a distraction from the main argument, and something that should be considered only after the argument has been understood.
Restricting freedom of expression based on the idea of_*offence_* is a wide open excuse to restrict any speech you can think of, because someone will always be offended by any single thing you might say. That's how blasphemy laws came to exist: criticism of the prevailing big man in the sky was "offensive" to a bunch of establishment players, so they banned anything that made fun of their beardy-goony cloud-sitting lightning factory, or anything that even skirted close to disagreement with the dogma that surrounded that totem.
I get that people will be offended by a lot of things that I, and anyone else, might say, but that's not a justification to restrict that speech, because ultimately, offence against the prevailing order is how we moved from the dictatorship of god-kings and priests, to the enlightened liberty of the democratic ideal. The price for that is the fact that some people will say naughty words. I'll take that price gladly, because the alternative is, in the grand scheme, a return to the days of fat old men sitting on the shoulders of the oppressed masses, declaring their offence at anyone who dared to rise above their station, or challenge their self-appointed right to extract wealth and power from the common people.
That's what freedom of expression boils down to: the right to offend the dictator. The right to tell Hitler to fuck off and die. The right to say "leave me alone, you joyless cunt".
The right to draw offensive, sacrilegious, and yes_*racist_* art, is sacrosanct, because the alternative is ultimately slavery to self-appointed arbiters of morality, who will not stop until everyone is kissing their dirty jackboots and begging for another turn.
^Hyperbole is fun. Give it a try some time.^
e: for the record, this is drunk me. drunk me likes to argue in exteremis. please don't take this as anything other than an exercise in intellectual masturbation. e2: unless you agree, in which case you are of superior intellect, and may subscribe to my newsletter
Retired Ass
At a fundamental level, yes, freedom of expression means the freedom to be an absolute cunt.
Set aside, for a moment, the argument about whether or not derpi has the right to limit speech. That's a distraction from the main argument, and something that should be considered only after the argument has been understood.
Restricting freedom of expression based on the idea of
I get that people will be offended by a lot of things that I, and anyone else, might say, but that's not a justification to restrict that speech, because ultimately, offence against the prevailing order is how we moved from the dictatorship of god-kings and priests, to the enlightened liberty of the democratic ideal. The price for that is the fact that some people will say naughty words. I'll take that price gladly, because the alternative is, in the grand scheme, a return to the days of fat old men sitting on the shoulders of the oppressed masses, declaring their offence at anyone who dared to rise above their station, or challenge their self-appointed right to extract wealth and power from the common people.
That's what freedom of expression boils down to: the right to offend the dictator. The right to tell Hitler to fuck off and die. The right to say "leave me alone, you joyless cunt".
The right to draw offensive, sacrilegious, and yes
^Hyperbole is fun. Give it a try some time.^
e: for the record, this is drunk me. drunk me likes to argue in exteremis. please don't take this as anything other than an exercise in intellectual masturbation. e2: unless you agree, in which case you are of superior intellect, and may subscribe to my newsletter