老虎机稳赢方法

“In the real world, however, the claim that censorship or enforced orthodoxy protects minorities and the marginalized has been comprehensively disproved, again and again and again. 鈥淐ensorship has always been on the side of authoritarianism, conformity, ignorance, and the status quo,鈥� write Erwin Chemerinsky and Howard Gillman in their book Free Speech on Campus, 鈥渁nd advocates for free speech have always been on the side of making societies more democratic, more diverse, more tolerant, more educated, and more open to progress.鈥�30 They and former American Civil Liberties Union president Nadine Strossen, in her powerful book Hate: Why We Should Resist It with Free Speech, Not Censorship, list the horrors and oppressions which have befallen minorities in the name of making society safe from dangerous ideas. 鈥淟aws censoring 鈥榟ate speech鈥� have predictably been enforced against those who lack political power,鈥� writes Strossen.31 In America, under the Alien and Sedition Acts, authorities censored and imprisoned sympathizers of the opposition party (including members of Congress) and shut down opposition newspapers; under the Comstock laws, they censored works by Aristophanes, Balzac, Oscar Wilde, and James Joyce (among others); under the World War I anti-sedition laws, they convicted more than a thousand peace activists, including the Socialist presidential candidate Eugene V. Debs, who ran for president in 1920 from a prison cell.32 In more recent times, when the University of Michigan adopted one of the first college speech codes in 1988, the code was seized upon to charge Blacks with racist speech at least twenty times.33 When the United Kingdom passed a hate-speech law, the first person to be convicted was a Black man who cursed a white police officer.34 When Canadian courts agreed with feminists that pornography could be legally restricted, authorities in Toronto promptly charged Canada鈥檚 oldest gay bookstore with obscenity and seized copies of the lesbian magazine Bad Attitude.35 All around the world, authorities quite uncoincidentally find that 鈥渉ateful鈥� and 鈥渦nsafe鈥� speech is speech which is critical of them鈥攏ot least in the United States, where, in 1954, the U.S. Postal Service used obscenity laws to censor ONE, a gay magazine whose cover article (鈥淵ou Can鈥檛 Print It!鈥�) just happened to criticize the censorship policies of the U.S. Postal Service.”
― Jonathan Rauch, The Constitution of Knowledge: A Defense of Truth