Been told a few times lately that I need to reserve terms like 'denial of freedom of speech' 'authoritarian' & 'censorious' to law & gov.
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose
Argument is that if I use these terms to criticise anti-freedom attitudes in individuals & groups, they lose impact when governments do it
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
It's certainly true that overuse or hyperbolic use of a word reduces its impact which is needed when serious human rights abuses happen.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
However, laws & governments are determined by ppl & I think we need to address authoritarian & censorious ideas before they get that far
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
Telling someone they can't say some things, don't get to say some things, have wrong identity to say some things is not literally censorship
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
But it is a censorious attitude. And it can be argued with. And we do need the word 'censorious' to point out the problem.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
Informal rules can be described as 'authoritarian' even if they have no legal power if they dictate restrictions rather than freedoms.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @PeterHase2014
Not at all. Thank you. Please speak away. I might not always answer but I see you.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I usually say that when people are teasing me.
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.