It is, you know. You support freedom of speech by not preventing speech. Even when I was at my most anti-religious, I would not have gone into a church or mosque & shouted the vicar/imam down coz I thought they were speaking horrible nonsense. Other people wanted to hear.https://twitter.com/DavidKlion/status/971016050702766080 …
-
-
So basically, Christina sent him a cheeky tweet once so now fuck free speech and a respect for intellectual discourse in a university setting forever.https://twitter.com/DavidKlion/status/971014581345837056 …
-
One might say that's a bit of an overreaction on David's part.
-
(For his sake he should never, ever, come to Australia; sassing each other is a national pastime and mandatory rite of initiation here)
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I don’t know about Europe but in the US, the activist playbook is “Rules For Radicals,” by Saul Alinsky. He instructs to talk over end never listen to your opponent, it’s a 0 sum game. Very bad for a culture.
-
The true result of “Rules for radicals,” will be perpetual nihilistic revolution because there will always be a ruling class, that’s just how cultures operate.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
You are applying standards of reason and courtesy that he willfully rejects. You do it so well that it is a pleasure to watch, but the real problem with this mentalility is more insidious than not getting reason or being rude.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Has anyone done a study of how many intersectional feminist vs “other” talks have been interrupted by protested in a period of time? Numbers would speak for themselves
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I've begun to think that's exactly what people should start doing. Let them live in the world they have made.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
There's an obvious difference between heckling a speaker and trying to prevent speech. Presumably the former is OK. I wonder if this guy recognizes the distinction and if so whether he supports the "right" to prevent speech. Seems that he does if the speaker can speak elsewhere.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I'm convinced this particular line of argument is a desperate, flailing attempt to defend the indefensible. The mental gymnastics required to present the act of stopping someone else's opinion being heard as freedom of expression is breath-taking.
Thanks. 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.