• MrJameGumb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    some guardrails would need to be put in place to prevent Trump or others from turning around and using that to silence critics or journalists

    That’s the real issue though, isn’t it? No matter what “guardrails” you put in place someone is always going to find a way to exploit any kind of restrictions like this for their own selfish purposes

    • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Exactly. The issue you run into is always that bad-faith actors are going to intentionally misuse laws and regulations, unless you write them to be very narrow. Most laws dealing with censorship need to be at least a little broad so that minor tweaks don’t allow the targeted material to be tweaked to avoid regulation. But as soon as it’s broad enough to prevent really repellent speech, it can be used against people that are already marginalized.

      “Re-education” is an interesting question though. How are you defining that? We already know that we would sharply reduce recidivism rates if we made sure that incarcerated people were put in substance abuse programs and given access to college degree programs. (And those college programs cost less in the long run than recycling people through the criminal justice system again.) Does that count as re-education? What about having group therapy, so that people who had hate-crime multipliers had to confront their racism, etc.? Is that re-education?

      • MrJameGumb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        To me the examples you listed would just fall under “education”. The term “re-education” heavily implies imprisonment and forced brain washing.

        • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          If the condition of parole is successfully completing substance abuse treatment, isn’t that a forced–or heavily coerced–brain washing? If it isn’t, then what’s the bright line between them?

          • MrJameGumb@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            The person in this scenario could still choose to go to jail instead of rehab. They could also slack off in rehab and start using again once they are released if they so chose. Obviously these are not ideal solutions but the person still has some kind of choice in the matter. Hopefully they would take it seriously and choose not to go back to drugs.

            “Re-education” would be if they were sent to some kind of Clockwork Orange style reprogramming process where these choices were taken away from them, making them unable to ever do drugs again wether they wanted to or not.