about us
  news from other sites
 Libertarian Theory
  Austrian School
  Business Cycles
  Gold Standard
  Private education
  Greenhouse effects
  Abortion, Euthanasia, Suicide
  Alcohol, Tobacco and Drugs
  Cryogen suspension
  Food and Medicine /Right to choose your own
  Health Care
 International Relations
  Development Help
  Europe and EU /Uniting Europe without the Union
  Secession Right
  War on Terrorism
  Gun Rights
  Human Rights /Emancipation
  Property Rights
  Self Defence
  Speech Freedom
  Values and Norms
 Rights, Justice
  Punishment and restitution
  War on Drugs
  Social security
  Internet Freedom
  Privacy and Encryption
 Repression and Police State
  Database State
Today: Sun, May 29 2016  -  Last modified: April, 26 2007
08 January 2015
Porn, again
by John Kersey
 sub-topic» Censoring

So, if the government wishes to preach to us on the immorality of certain sexual practices, it needs firstly to make that case convincingly in the public forum rather than seeking simply to suppress it via the dead hand of legislation. In practice, it cannot make that case. A law that is directly contrary to public mores is both unjust and, ultimately, unenforceable. There is no doubt that the community of those who wish to participate in, and watch others participate in, BDSM and related activities is large. It is not unreasonable to think that its members today include individuals who can be found in prominent positions in politics and elsewhere in public life – for it certainly has done in the past. It should not be thought that those who are rightly expected to guard the nation’s morals are exempt; far from it. It is, indeed, time for our society to grow up about sex; to recognize that there is no merit in treating consenting adults as if they were naughty children. Only if we first do this, can we then stand a chance of forming some degree of a shared sexual morality that rests upon informed consent and not upon mere coercion.

15 May 2014
The Sun Has Got His Hat On - Cultural Marxism Has Its Goose-Step On
by Sean Gabb
 sub-topic» Censoring

But let us not be too gloomy about this case. An old man has been kicked out of his job, and we should feel sympathy for that. On the other hand, if we have all been loaded with chains in England, we still claim the right to rattle them in protest.

More to the point, no one has yet found a way to keep us from laughing at the scum who rule us. Still more to the point, the famous British sense of humor has not been entirely stilled—and humor and totalitarianism have never been compatible.

24 December 2013
Reddit has banned climate change deniers, and ripped its own reputation to shreds
by Brendan O'Neill
 sub-topic» Censoring

Not content with having purged from its own site the wicked people who deny climate change, Reddit now wants newspapers to do likewise. One of its moderators says that if Reddit can prevent its pages being used as “a microphone for the anti-scientific”, then “is it too much to ask for newspapers to police their own editorial pages as proficiently?” So let’s remove so-called climate change deniers from all forums and finally deny them the oxygen of publicity.

30 October 2013
Los Angeles Times endorses censorship with ban on letters from climate skeptics
by J. Scott Armstrong
 sub-topic» Censoring

Fortunately, with many mass media outlets attempting to influence people by using censorship, citizens are able turn to alternative sources of information and argument on the Internet to inform their decisions. And many have. The polls provide evidence that the alarmist case is so weak that even with widespread censorship, citizens are not persuaded.

29 October 2013
Hands Off Glenn Greenwald!
by Justin Raimondo
 sub-topic» Censoring

This case is particularly important because it exists at the nexus of the Snowden revelations, Obama’s war on journalism, and the grievous state of civil liberties in this country. We either fight back now, or else let this country slip into the abyss of despotism: we can’t afford to let them get away with this.

12 September 2013
Response by the Libertarian Alliance to the Proposed Royal Charter to Regulate the Press (2013)
by The Libertarian Alliance
 sub-topic» Censoring

We are told the current proposals are justified by the scandals revealed in the Leveson Inquiry – telephone hacking, leaking of confidential information by the police and so forth. However, all the abuses revealed were already crimes. Without any change in the law, there have been prosecutions, and people have been sent to prison. Rather than a new law, capable of achieving far more than we are assured is needed, we simply need the existing laws to be properly enforced. At least since the 1980s, the custom has emerged of responding to every scandal or misfortune with new laws. This is a bad custom that has led us far towards a police state. Where freedom of the press is concerned, the time has surely come to stop and consider how the undoubted abuses of certain newspapers can be corrected without a Royal Charter that will, sooner or later, become the warrant for a general scheme of press censorship.