No possible effect you can think of on the next Asian YA author thinking of writing about slavery in Asian? Or a future publisher of that novel?
-
-
Replying to @jeremy_gans
I'm not saying it's not having an effect, I'm saying calling this silencing is a ridiculous overreach. It's equating an unfortunate allusion with laws restricting freedom of speech
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
Yes, but as I previously pointed out, the letter doesn't equate these things with 'silence'. It expressly equates that with 'narrow[ing] the boundaries of what can be said without the threat of reprisal' and 'greater risk aversion'.pic.twitter.com/I890Fsm9Mj
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jeremy_gans
It uses the word silence later on. And the "threat of reprisal" is a bit meaningless, virtually everything comes with some "threat" of "reprisal" As to risk aversion, is the pendulum swinging against racism worse than the previous situation?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
As already discussed, that later use was 'trying to silence or wish away', and was juxtaposed with 'exposure, argument and persuasion'. The pendulum and comparison you describe is the subject of the ENTIRE first paragraph. Surely you don't object to that para?pic.twitter.com/oOwr7bEWvA
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jeremy_gans
Only insofar as it's vacuous nonsense. The statements are so general that they could literally apply to anything, then some vague appeal to Trump as an attempt to establish some left-wing creds. It's standard "both sides" absurdity
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
So, 'Donald Tump' is 'a real threat to democracy' is too vague? What wouldn't be vague on your view?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jeremy_gans
Sorry what? That's not the bit that's vague. This sentence could mean literally anything - what "ideological conformity" are they talking about and what in the world does it have to do with Trump's authoritarianism?pic.twitter.com/fiSn89Y0zE
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @jeremy_gans
And this phrase is meaningless. What "dogma and coercion" are right-wing demagogues exploiting on "both sides"? It all reads as if they really want to say "let people be racist/homophobic" etc but can't bring themselves to say itpic.twitter.com/3G8ViUxGAi
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
The reference to 'dogma and coercion' is explained in the next sentence: 'a vogue for public shaming and ostracism, and the tendency to dissolve complex policy issues in a blinding moral certainty.'pic.twitter.com/Cp9XL03kmv
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
But...that's just as vague? The point is that the first paragraph could be read as a defense of basically any opinion
-
-
Replying to @GidMK
So you’re objection to the letter is that it doesn’t have a specific list of bad opinions? Just Trump?
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.