×

We use cookies to help make LingQ better. By visiting the site, you agree to our cookie policy.


image

Steve's Cafe, Freedom of Expression

Freedom of Expression

Hi, there, this is Steve Kaufmann and welcome to Steve's Café. This is where I want to have discussions about history, about politics, about things of that nature because I like getting together with people and discussing. Now, many of you know me from Lingo Steve where I talk about language learning, which is another great passion, but here I want to have exchanges with people. I don't write out my talks beforehand so they're a little bit rambling and sometimes disjointed, but today I want to talk about freedom of expression and I want Steve's Café to be a place where people are free to express their views. I would hope that people express their views in a polite, sensible, reasonable way and, of course, that immediately introduces the sort of what are the limits to freedom of expression.

Undoubtedly, there are some. I think if people are lying, if people are inciting people to hate, to violence, then those kinds of views should be discouraged. How, to what extent? I think we have to have some laws. There are laws on liable if you falsely accuse someone of something. You can't shout fire in a crowded cinema. So there are reasonable limits, but I think we have reached a point now where freedom of expression is under threat from a number of quarters.

We have seen this in the presidential primaries, for example, in the United States, which I have been following. On the one hand you've got Donald Trump, who has basically denied access to some of his rallies to certain members of the press. I think this is unacceptable for someone who aspires to be President of the United States. He dismissed the press as disgusting when they criticize him. He says he's going to change the liable laws so he can sue people who have negative comments about him. He won't appear on certain television programs because he doesn't like the moderator. To me, this is essentially an attempt to bully and limit the freedom of expression of people who don't agree with him.

By the same token, we have these organized demonstrators at Donald Trump's rallies and their whole purpose is to shut down Donald Trump and I disagree with that. In fact, if anything, I feel the behavior of those demonstrators is worse than the behavior of Donald Trump. The difference being, however, that Donald Trump aspires to become President of the United States, whereas the demonstrators are just looking to cause trouble.

We've seen this limit to freedom of speech in our universities where there are certain views and you're not allowed to defend that position. I happen to be, I would say, moderately liberal on abortion. The issue of same sex marriage for me is a done deal, it's finished. Ten years ago I might have felt this was a strange concept, at this point I think it's normal. However, I think people who have different views should be allowed to express and defend those views. The whole idea that something has been decided forever and ever and therefore you're not allowed to express your opposition to it to me is against freedom of expression.

Similarly, in Canada I am not a fan of multiculturalism at all. I think that immigrants who come to Canada should assimilate to the mainstream culture, otherwise we won't have a country in Canada in another few generations and, of course, the majority of immigrants do regardless of where they come from. What can I use as an example? We have a Minister of Defense in Canada who is a Sikh and wears his turban. I am absolutely comfortable with that. He's a Canadian. He fought for Canada in Afghanistan. He's buying into the mainstream culture. If I go to watch a hockey game in Vancouver there are lots of people there who are of Indian origin, Chinese origin and they've bought into at least some aspects of the mainstream culture. This is a good thing.

Unfortunately, in Canada it has become sort of a symbol of your progressive thinking that you would encourage people to stay in their own cultural enclave or that the government should spend money promoting the culture of origin of these people and that the more diverse the culture is, the better. I don't believe that. However, those people are perfectly entitled to express their views.

I happen to believe that people will maintain their culture of origin quite comfortably on their own for one generation or two and it's not the role of government to deliberately foster that. Nor, in my view, should the government force people to assimilate; in other words, freedom of expression. Whatever you like to do go ahead and do it, but don't hold out this sort of diversity as being morally superior to assimilate. People do what they want to do. However, in Canada very often if you express that view you are labeled a racist, a bigot and stuff like that, so there's a tremendous effort to throttle the freedom of expression of certain views.

Similarly, with the immigration we have in Canada. We have 300,000 annual immigrants and some people think it should be more and some people think it should be less. Three-hundred thousand is considered arbitrary, that's good. If you argue for more you're allowed to do that, but if you argue for fewer immigrants for a variety of reasons, for example, the fact that we have so many immigrants from a small number of countries that the opportunity for the immigrants to integrate is reduced so maybe we'd be better off to have 200,000 instead of 300,000. You can't express that view, you are considered a bigot.

That's only one example of how the expression of call it what's perceived as less progressive views in the minds of those who see themselves as progressive, unpopular views for some people. These should not be allowed to be spoken to those people and I think, to some extent, the rise of the Trump phenomenon is a reaction against the so-called political correctness of our society which says that these views are acceptable and these are not acceptable. My feeling is we should be free to express our views. Now, one has to be responsible.

I should say freedom of expression also includes the idea that there's a free market of ideas. So if you're in a country where the government controls 80-90% of the media, directly or indirectly like in Russia, then while a very small portion of the media can express whatever views they want, the 80-90% of the media controlled by the government is basically used to demonize those people who oppose the sort of mainstream line that's pounded into people through government-controlled media.

Now, the media in the West is not always right. Individual journalists may have their axe to grind, certain publications, radio or TV channels have their political perspective, but the idea is that you have a free market and the greater the variety of opinions, the greater the freedom to express these opinions, the greater the freedom of a means to express these without being cowed into saying you shouldn't say this, you shouldn't say that, the healthier for society. Ultimately, the way we defeat fascism and other totalitarian or intolerant ideologies is by making sure that we maintain this freedom of expression so that even unpopular ideas are free to be expressed.

I rambled on a bit longer, but I want to set the stage for Steve's Café and freedom of expression. As long as you're not being fowl-mouthed or personal invective, so forth and so forth, you're absolutely welcome. It's the best guarantee we have for a number of other freedoms. Thanks for listening, bye for now.

Freedom of Expression Freie Meinungsäußerung Libertad de expresión آزادی بیان Liberté d'expression Libertà di espressione 表現の自由 표현의 자유 Wolność wypowiedzi Liberdade de expressão Свобода слова İfade Özgürlüğü 言论自由 言論自由

Hi, there, this is Steve Kaufmann and welcome to Steve’s Café. This is where I want to have discussions about history, about politics, about things of that nature because I like getting together with people and discussing. Now, many of you know me from Lingo Steve where I talk about language learning, which is another great passion, but here I want to have exchanges with people. اکنون، بسیاری از شما من را از لینگو استیو می شناسید، جایی که من در مورد یادگیری زبان صحبت می کنم، که یکی دیگر از اشتیاق بزرگ است، اما اینجا می خواهم با مردم تبادل نظر داشته باشم. I don’t write out my talks beforehand so they’re a little bit rambling and sometimes disjointed, but today I want to talk about freedom of expression and I want Steve’s Café to be a place where people are free to express their views. من صحبت‌هایم را از قبل نمی‌نویسم، بنابراین آنها کمی گیج‌کننده و گاهی اوقات از هم گسیخته هستند، اما امروز می‌خواهم درباره آزادی بیان صحبت کنم و می‌خواهم کافه استیو مکانی باشد که مردم در آن آزادانه نظرات خود را بیان کنند. 私は事前に話を書きませんので、それらは少しとりとめのない、時にはばらばらになっていますが、今日は表現の自由について話したいと思います。そして、人々の意見を自由に表現できる場所にスティーブズカフェが欲しいです。 I would hope that people express their views in a polite, sensible, reasonable way and, of course, that immediately introduces the sort of what are the limits to freedom of expression.

Undoubtedly, there are some. 間違いなく、いくつかあります。 I think if people are lying, if people are inciting people to hate, to violence, then those kinds of views should be discouraged. 私は人々が嘘をついているならば、もし人々が憎しみや暴力に煽る人を扇動しているのであれば、そのような意見は落胆すべきだと思います。 How, to what extent? どのように、どの程度まで? I think we have to have some laws. There are laws on liable if you falsely accuse someone of something. Il existe des lois sur la responsabilité si vous accusez quelqu'un à tort de quelque chose. あなたが何かを間違って非難すると、責任に関する法律があります。 You can’t shout fire in a crowded cinema. あなたは混雑した映画館で火を叫ぶことはできません。 So there are reasonable limits, but I think we have reached a point now where freedom of expression is under threat from a number of quarters. 合理的な制限がありますが、表現の自由が数々の拠点から脅かされているところに達したと思います。

We have seen this in the presidential primaries, for example, in the United States, which I have been following. Viděli jsme to například v prezidentských primárkách ve Spojených státech, které jsem sledoval. 私はこれを、例えば私が従っている米国の大統領選の予備選挙で見ました。 On the one hand you’ve got Donald Trump, who has basically denied access to some of his rallies to certain members of the press. Na jedné straně máte Donalda Trumpa, který v podstatě odepřel přístup k některým ze svých shromáždění určitým zástupcům tisku. 一方では、ドナルド・トランプ氏がいる。ドナルド・トランプ氏は、基本的に、報道陣の特定の議員への集会へのアクセスを拒否している。 I think this is unacceptable for someone who aspires to be President of the United States. He dismissed the press as disgusting when they criticize him. Odmítl tisk jako nechutný, když ho kritizoval. Il a qualifié la presse de dégoûtante lorsqu'elle le critique. 彼は、彼らが彼を批判するとき、うんざりするように報道を退けた。 He says he’s going to change the liable laws so he can sue people who have negative comments about him. Říká, že změní zákony o odpovědnosti, aby mohl žalovat lidi, kteří o něm mají negativní komentáře. He won’t appear on certain television programs because he doesn’t like the moderator. V některých televizních pořadech se neobjeví, protože se mu nelíbí moderátor. 彼はモデレーターが好きではないため、特定のテレビ番組には出演しません。 To me, this is essentially an attempt to bully and limit the freedom of expression of people who don’t agree with him. Pro mě je to v podstatě pokus o šikanu a omezení svobody projevu lidí, kteří s ním nesouhlasí.

By the same token, we have these organized demonstrators at Donald Trump’s rallies and their whole purpose is to shut down Donald Trump and I disagree with that. In fact, if anything, I feel the behavior of those demonstrators is worse than the behavior of Donald Trump. The difference being, however, that Donald Trump aspires to become President of the United States, whereas the demonstrators are just looking to cause trouble.

We’ve seen this limit to freedom of speech in our universities where there are certain views and you’re not allowed to defend that position. Viděli jsme toto omezení svobody slova na našich univerzitách, kde existují určité názory a nemáte dovoleno tento postoj obhajovat. I happen to be, I would say, moderately liberal on abortion. Řekl bych, že jsem v otázce potratů mírně liberální. The issue of same sex marriage for me is a done deal, it’s finished. Otázka manželství osob stejného pohlaví je pro mě hotová věc, je hotovo. Ten years ago I might have felt this was a strange concept, at this point I think it’s normal. Před deseti lety jsem mohl mít pocit, že je to zvláštní koncept, v tuto chvíli si myslím, že je to normální. However, I think people who have different views should be allowed to express and defend those views. The whole idea that something has been decided forever and ever and therefore you’re not allowed to express your opposition to it to me is against freedom of expression. Celá myšlenka, že o něčem bylo rozhodnuto navždy a navždy, a proto mi není dovoleno vyjádřit svůj odpor, je proti svobodě projevu.

Similarly, in Canada I am not a fan of multiculturalism at all. Stejně tak v Kanadě nejsem vůbec příznivcem multikulturalismu. I think that immigrants who come to Canada should assimilate to the mainstream culture, otherwise we won’t have a country in Canada in another few generations and, of course, the majority of immigrants do regardless of where they come from. Myslím si, že imigranti, kteří přijdou do Kanady, by se měli asimilovat s mainstreamovou kulturou, jinak v Kanadě za několik generací nebudeme mít žádnou zemi a samozřejmě většina imigrantů ano, bez ohledu na to, odkud pocházejí. What can I use as an example? We have a Minister of Defense in Canada who is a Sikh and wears his turban. V Kanadě máme ministra obrany, který je Sikh a nosí svůj turban. I am absolutely comfortable with that. He’s a Canadian. He fought for Canada in Afghanistan. He’s buying into the mainstream culture. If I go to watch a hockey game in Vancouver there are lots of people there who are of Indian origin, Chinese origin and they’ve bought into at least some aspects of the mainstream culture. Když se půjdu dívat na hokejový zápas ve Vancouveru, je tam spousta lidí, kteří jsou indického původu, čínského původu a zakoupili alespoň některé aspekty mainstreamové kultury. This is a good thing.

Unfortunately, in Canada it has become sort of a symbol of your progressive thinking that you would encourage people to stay in their own cultural enclave or that the government should spend money promoting the culture of origin of these people and that the more diverse the culture is, the better. Bohužel v Kanadě se stalo jakýmsi symbolem vašeho pokrokového myšlení, že byste povzbuzovali lidi, aby zůstali ve své vlastní kulturní enklávě, nebo že by vláda měla utrácet peníze na propagaci kultury původu těchto lidí a že čím je kultura rozmanitější. , ten lepší. I don’t believe that. However, those people are perfectly entitled to express their views. Tito lidé však mají plné právo vyjádřit svůj názor.

I happen to believe that people will maintain their culture of origin quite comfortably on their own for one generation or two and it’s not the role of government to deliberately foster that. Domnívám se, že lidé si svou kulturu původu udrží celkem pohodlně sami po dobu jedné nebo dvou generací a není úlohou vlády to záměrně podporovat. Nor, in my view, should the government force people to assimilate; in other words, freedom of expression. Whatever you like to do go ahead and do it, but don’t hold out this sort of diversity as being morally superior to assimilate. Ať děláte cokoli, jděte do toho a udělejte to, ale nepovažujte tento druh rozmanitosti za morálně lepší než asimilaci. People do what they want to do. However, in Canada very often if you express that view you are labeled a racist, a bigot and stuff like that, so there’s a tremendous effort to throttle the freedom of expression of certain views. V Kanadě však velmi často, když vyjádříte tento názor, jste označeni za rasistu, bigota a podobně, takže existuje obrovské úsilí omezit svobodu projevu určitých názorů.

Similarly, with the immigration we have in Canada. We have 300,000 annual immigrants and some people think it should be more and some people think it should be less. Three-hundred thousand is considered arbitrary, that’s good. If you argue for more you’re allowed to do that, but if you argue for fewer immigrants for a variety of reasons, for example, the fact that we have so many immigrants from a small number of countries that the opportunity for the immigrants to integrate is reduced so maybe we’d be better off to have 200,000 instead of 300,000. Pokud argumentujete pro více, můžete to udělat, ale pokud argumentujete pro méně imigrantů z různých důvodů, například skutečnost, že máme tolik imigrantů z malého počtu zemí, že příležitost pro imigranty integrace je snížena, takže možná by bylo lepší mít 200 000 místo 300 000. You can’t express that view, you are considered a bigot. Tento názor nemůžete vyjádřit, jste považováni za bigota. Sie können diese Ansicht nicht äußern, Sie gelten als Fanatiker.

That’s only one example of how the expression of call it what’s perceived as less progressive views in the minds of those who see themselves as progressive, unpopular views for some people. To je jen jeden příklad toho, jak výraz nazvat to, co je vnímáno jako méně progresivní názory v myslích těch, kteří sami sebe považují za progresivní, pro některé lidi nepopulární názory. 这只是一个例子,说明在那些认为自己是进步的、不受欢迎的观点的人的心目中,这种表达方式被认为是不那么进步的观点。 These should not be allowed to be spoken to those people and I think, to some extent, the rise of the Trump phenomenon is a reaction against the so-called political correctness of our society which says that these views are acceptable and these are not acceptable. My feeling is we should be free to express our views. Now, one has to be responsible. Nyní musí být člověk zodpovědný. 现在,我们必须要负责任。

I should say freedom of expression also includes the idea that there’s a free market of ideas. So if you’re in a country where the government controls 80-90% of the media, directly or indirectly like in Russia, then while a very small portion of the media can express whatever views they want, the 80-90% of the media controlled by the government is basically used to demonize those people who oppose the sort of mainstream line that’s pounded into people through government-controlled media. 因此,如果你在一个政府直接或间接控制 80-90% 媒体的国家,就像俄罗斯一样,那么虽然极小部分媒体可以表达他们想要的任何观点,但 80-90% 的媒体可以表达他们想要的任何观点。政府控制的媒体基本上是用来妖魔化那些反对通过政府控制的媒体向人们灌输的主流路线的人。

Now, the media in the West is not always right. Individual journalists may have their axe to grind, certain publications, radio or TV channels have their political perspective, but the idea is that you have a free market and the greater the variety of opinions, the greater the freedom to express these opinions, the greater the freedom of a means to express these without being cowed into saying you shouldn’t say this, you shouldn’t say that, the healthier for society. Ultimately, the way we defeat fascism and other totalitarian or intolerant ideologies is by making sure that we maintain this freedom of expression so that even unpopular ideas are free to be expressed.

I rambled on a bit longer, but I want to set the stage for Steve’s Café and freedom of expression. 我啰嗦了一会儿,但我想为史蒂夫咖啡馆和言论自由奠定基础。 As long as you’re not being fowl-mouthed or personal invective, so forth and so forth, you’re absolutely welcome. Solange Sie nicht unhöflich oder persönlich beschimpft werden, usw., sind Sie absolut willkommen. It’s the best guarantee we have for a number of other freedoms. Thanks for listening, bye for now.