05Vielfalt

Wir sprechen offen und mit Respekt und Höflichkeit über jegliche Art von Unterschieden zwischen Menschen.

Academia (2)
Access (15)
Africa (8)
Animal Rights (1)
Anonymity (8)
Antisemitism (3)
Arab Spring (5)
Art (17)
Article 19 (2)
Atheism (2)
Australia (5)
Blasphemy (17)
Blogger (5)
Books (1)
Brazil (3)
Buddhism (2)
Burma (2)
Canada (3)
Celebrity (5)
Censorship (32)
Charlie Hebdo (2)
Child abuse (1)
China (8)
Christianity (14)
Civility (38)
Colonialism (1)
Copyright (8)
Corruption (2)
Defamation (23)
Democracy (24)
Denialism (3)
Denmark (3)
Discrimination (9)
Education (20)
Egypt (3)
Europe (4)
Exclusion (1)
Facebook (4)
Film (1)
Finland (1)
France (9)
Freedom (44)
Gaza conflict (1)
Genocide (5)
Germany (9)
Google (4)
Governance (12)
Hate speech (21)
Hinduism (1)
History (19)
Homosexuality (5)
Humour (2)
Hungary (1)
Hunger strike (1)
India (11)
Internet (41)
Internet companies (1)
Islam (21)
Israel (2)
Japan (2)
Journalism (23)
Kenya (2)
Knowledge (29)
Language (10)
Latin America (5)
Law (56)
Lese majesty (1)
Liberalism (14)
Libya (1)
Literature (5)
Media (45)
Memory laws (3)
Middle East (8)
Minorities (4)
Money (12)
Morality (9)
Multiculturalism (10)
National security (32)
Net neutrality (12)
Netherlands (2)
New Zealand (1)
Norway (1)
Nudity (5)
Occupy movement (1)
Open source (2)
Pakistan (3)
Palestine (2)
Piracy (2)
Poland (3)
Politics (55)
Pornography (11)
Power (55)
Privacy (22)
Protest (22)
Public Morality (31)
Race (1)
Radio (2)
Regulation (4)
Religion (38)
Reputation (18)
Right to information (47)
Russia (3)
Rwanda (1)
Satire (14)
Saudi Arabia (1)
Science (8)
Scientology (1)
Secrecy (1)
Singapore (2)
Snowden (1)
Social media (14)
South Africa (5)
Southeast Asia (2)
Sport (1)
Surveillance (3)
Syria (1)
Technology (21)
Terrorism (5)
Thailand (1)
Turkey (8)
Twitter (8)
United Kingdom (14)
United States (16)
Violence (29)
Whistleblowing (4)
Wikileaks (1)
Wikipedia (3)
YouTube (1)

			
					Should governments butt out of history?
				
Eric Heinze examines how states limit speech in order to control public awareness about the past.

					What is ‚dehumanising‘ speech?
				
Eric Heinze provocatively argues that no-platformers need to look into the mirror and examine their own blind spots. 

					Teresa M. Bejan discusses ‚mere civility‘, disagreement and the limits of toleration
				
Lewis Willcocks talks to Dr Teresa M. Bejan, Associate Professor of Political Theory at the University of Oxford, about her recent book ‚Mere Civility: Disagreement and the Limits of Toleration‘ (Harvard University Press) and what early modern debates over religion can teach us about diversity and discourse in the twenty-first century. 

					The Pnyx and the Agora
				
Designers need to pay attention to the architecture of theatres as possible political spaces, argues Richard Sennett.

					South Africa’s long walk to freedom of expression
				
Free speech holds the powerful to account and is essential to ending apartheid’s legacy of division, argues Nooshin Erfani-Ghadimi.

					Art with the ‘courage of thought’ is the best response to ‘hate speech’
				
Hungarian academic and performer Peter Molnar explains the importance of Gondolatbátorság to his ‘Hate Speech’ Monologues.

					Don’t blame news polarisation on the internet…it’s not the technology, stupid!
				
The internet does not guarantee polarised news, argues Richard Fletcher.

					The left’s version of hate speech: guilt by association
				
Leftists who argue for hate speech bans ignore the far left’s own version, argues Eric Heinze.

					Israel, no-platforming – and why there’s no such thing as ‘narrow exceptions’ to campus free speech
				
Eric Heinze argues that it is contradictory to the principles of free speech to criticise the Israeli ambassador to Britain online and then no-platform him at a university talk.

					Is there a universal right to free speech and what are its limits?
				
Timothy Garton Ash in conversation with Nigel Warburton, as part of the Philosophy in the Bookshop series at Blackwell’s, Oxford.

					The defence of free speech in Hungary
				
Timothy Garton Ash, in a lecture at Central European University, entitled Free Speech and the Defence of an Open Society, argues that liberalism and liberal democracy, which has historically given voice to the powerless against the powerful, is under threat. 

					Should Indian politicians be allowed to appeal to voters based on their religion, race, and caste?
				
Udit Bhatia discusses a landmark ruling concerning the conduct of elections and its potential to stifle democratic debate.

					An introductory guide to the ten principles
				
Our social media team have created a new way to explore the 10 principles on Youtube.

					Attacked, threatened and criminalised: LGBTI freedom of speech in Nigeria
				
Jude Dibia explores the criminalisation and violence faced by the LGBTI community after the Same-Sex Marriage Prohibition Act.

					Is dangerous speech free speech?
				
Expression can be dangerous, but that should not necessarily make it a crime. Jeffrey Howard evaluates the best argument for banning hate speech. 

					What next for Rhodes Must Fall?
				
Free Speech Debate organised a panel discussion on the Rhodes Must Fall campaign and its future. In this video and its highlights, panelists debate the range of issues surrounding the campaign and its impact on free speech. Panelists include Dr David Johnson, Professor David Priestland, Sizwe Mpofu-Walsh and Monica Richter.

					The Jawaharlal Nehru University affair
				
Udit Bhatia discusses the Indian government’s use of colonial-era laws against sedition and its failure to protect protestors taken into police custody.

					5 podcasts and our 10 principles on the BBC
				
Timothy Garton Ash introduces his BBC broadcasts and online version of the Free Speech Debate principles.

					Leslie Green on Right Speech
				
Leslie Green argues that Buddhist ideas about avoiding divisive, abusive and false speech can help us live together well in free societies.

					When is speech dangerous?
				
Jonathan Leader Maynard examines the difficulties in assessing and managing the role of speech in violence.

					Should universities practice no-platforming?
				
In these video highlights for Free Speech Debate, panelists debate whether “no-platforming” ought to have a place in modern universities. Student discussants included Sizwe Mpofu-Walsh, Barnaby Raine, Monica Richter, Damien Shannon, Chi Chi Shi, and Charles Vaughan.

					‚No-platforming’ on university campuses: political correctness and the subversion of free speech
				
Monica Richter argues that no-platforming is more about censoring unpalatable views than protecting marginalised groups.

					Don’t ban no-platforming
				
Sizwe Mpofu-Walsh argues that no-platforming is an expressive act that can expand the field of debate, rather than the denial of free speech.

					Ten arguments for – and against – ‘no-platforming’
				
Eric Heinze sets out the flaws in the commonly heard arguments for no-platforming.

					‚Oxford University has no regard for black life‘
				
Sizwe Mpofu-Walsh argues that Oxford has shown itself to have no regard for black life in its decision not to remove the statue of Cecil Rhodes.

					Cecil Rhodes in Oxford: from unnoticed statue to political scapegoat
				
Monica Richter argues that the inward looking Rhodes Must Fall campaign detracts from greater issues of social justice.

					Ken MacDonald: Should British universities be responsible for counter-terrorism?
				
In this interview, Ken Macdonald, formerly Britain’s Director of Public Prosecutions and now Warden of Wadham College, Oxford, talks about the importance of free speech and the introduction of „prevent“ duties to universities.  He also comments on the Rhodes Must Fall campaign.

					Why people shouldn’t feel the need to censor themselves
				
Roger Scruton argues that self-censorship can be as much a threat to free speech as its government equivalent.

					Why we should defend the right to be offensive
				
Free speech can make for uncomfortable listening, argues Roger Scruton, but it needs to be defended even when it gives offence.

					Vielfalt
				
Wir sprechen offen und mit Respekt und Höflichkeit über jegliche Art von Unterschieden zwischen Menschen.

					Rae Langton: Why an understanding of silence is important to free speech debates
				
In this interview for Free Speech Debate, renowned Philosophy Professor Rae Langton speaks about the value of philosophy for our understanding of free speech and discusses aspects of her work on pornography and the silencing of women. 

					Die kulturellen Schäden von Vergewaltigungspornographie
				
Erika Rackley und Clare McGlynn erörtern, welche Beweise es für die schädlichen kulturellen Einflüsse von Vergewaltigungspornographie gibt. Die Autoren argumentieren, dass man diesen Einflüssen am besten mit Aufklärung entgegenwirkt.

1 2 Weiter »

Suche

Anmelden

Sprache