I don’t understand what you’re losing by pointing out where you agree with your opponents? Seems like good rhetoric to me, whether your audience agrees with your opponents or with you. Once you point that out you can still defend free speech on principle. https://twitter.com/l0m3z/status/1280916571628507136 …
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @Rongwrong_ @L0m3z
The ideology they both subscribe to doesn't include a principle of free speech for disagreeing with its substantive claims. Result is that the "centrists" tiptoe around the fact that they do secretly disagree. The wokeists immediately notice and call them out.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @CovfefeAnon @L0m3z
I don’t know what that ideology is, but Chomsky has defended a Holocaust denier. Some of the others have also defended speech that they substantively disagreed with, though they can’t top a Holocaust denier.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Ask them if debate about racial differences in intelligence and behavior should be allowed; they will all explicitly deny that it should be.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.