[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Censorship in Debian



On 04/01/2019 14.34, Steve McIntyre wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 01:39:27PM +0100, Christian Kastner wrote:
>> On 21/12/2018 01.27, Paul R. Tagliamonte wrote:
>>> We are not a Government.
>> 
>> We don't have a _Sovereign_ Government, but a Government we most 
>> certainly have.
>> 
>> We are a body of people bound by a Constitution; this body has 
>> Officials acting on its behalf; we vote to represent our
>> interests; we delegate powers; we subject ourselves to powers,
>> etc.
> 
> Only for very limited areas. Debian does not have the power to tell 
> us how to live outside of our collaboration with Debian. It's a very
> limited organisation.

Yes. The extent of any government is on a spectrum (consider two
governments: one totalitarian, the other libertarian), and every
government has a certain jurisdiction, which can be defined by any means
(territorial, as modern nations do; personal, as it was during
feudalism; spiritual, as is is with religions; etc.).

Because, of this, government's jurisdictions can overlap (and frequently
do).

> The worst censure that can be applied is to be removed from that 
> organisation. That does not compare to the possible removal of 
> liberty (or even life!) that is amongst a Government's powers.

The fact that one government lacks powers another government has does
not make negate the existence of the former.

We agree on this: Debian's is a (very!) limited form of government.
However, I argue that censorship is within these limits.

>>> Please don't conflate Debian ensuring we have a healthy
>>> community with Government censorship,
>> 
>> This action was not performed  by the community, but by an Official
>> acting Debian's behalf. Consequently, it _was_ government 
>> censorship.
> 
> Rubbish. A refusal by Debian to publish on somebody's behalf is not 
> at all the same as government censorship.

While it is true from a technological point of view that Debian is
publishing something, considering the nature of Debian and the fora in
question, refusing someone a voice in these fora is (to me) akin to a
sovereign government banning speech on public property. Like shutting
down Speaker's Corner in Hyde Park. Debian's fora are digital, not physical.

I stated in my previous mail that censorship can be justified. I
mentioned this because I'm aware of the stigma that comes with the word.
But censorship is not categorically wrong, just as homicide isn't
categorically wrong (it's justified in self defense, for example).

But when it's done, it should be acknowledged as such. And ideally,
there should be checks & balances in place, and a certain amount of
transparency.

--
Christian Kastner





Reply to: