This has been the big, loud drum free speech advocates have banged for years. And yet, let's actually think about the realities, not the theoreticals.pic.twitter.com/U5l1r73wzy
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
This has been the big, loud drum free speech advocates have banged for years. And yet, let's actually think about the realities, not the theoreticals.pic.twitter.com/U5l1r73wzy
The thing about that point is I'm not sure it's true at all, even remotely. Are BLM activists currently feeling the same protections given to neo-Nazis? Antifascists? Environmental activists? The answer is a resounding no.
"We can't stop Nazis because if we do they'll go after Black activists!"
Black activists: 




There's a lot of fretting that a thing might happen. Except that thing is already happening at scale, so..... Maybe we ought to rethink our fears about that thing.
We already have laws that specifically protect marginalized populations. Those laws haven't really been distorted to be used against those populations in any broadly meaningful way, although there have been and are currently attempts to do so (e.g. Damore).
Why should we treat speech laws any differently? We shouldn't, but we do, because the country is built on a founding myth, and American free speech concepts are that myth writ large.
Furthermore, the idea that free speech is an antidote to tyrrany is laughable. Look around. ICE. Pipelines. Trump. There's a lot of fucking tyrrany out there, how's speech working out stopping it? We can't even get the New York Times to say the word "lie."
The issue is we've focused on free speech as a concept instead of the thing that free speech was supposed to protect. In this sense, the ACLU is doing *precisely* the thing that they have been warning about.
I'll respond in the Greek tradition, and say that the ACLU displays hubris--leading to catastrophe--because it has refused to take into account all factors. Instead it wants to apply the norms, regardless of future consequences. See: Antigone, play by Sophocles.
I like the newer greek traditions, the ones led by students ;)
Hola you can read it here: Thread by @EmilyGorcenski: "I actually want to talk about this article a bunch because it is exceptionally important. This has been the big, loud dr […]" https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1002168293166329856.html …
See you soon. 
+ What is rarely mentioned is the 1952 SCOTUS decision (written by an ACLU co-founder!) that, in upholding a ban on the distribution of racist propaganda, reflects arguments now being made by those rightfully critical of the ACLU's absolutist approach: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/343/250/case.html …pic.twitter.com/72Z1Os3vIM
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.