I'm skeptical of your claim here. But aside from that, surely there will always be *some* people who are pro-censorship. There mere existence of those people doesn't necessarily mean there's always a significant free speech crisis.
It's amazing how many people claim the fact David Rubin, Sam Harris, et al have access to media outlets proves there's no free speech problem when they would *in an instant* permanently deprive them of their access if they could.
-
-
-
Where did I say there was a free speech crisis?
-
Fair - I should have used the word "problem," not "crisis."
-
I didn't say there was a problem either! I was commenting on the irony of denying there's a problem because X has access to mainstream media while at the same time wanting to get rid of X's ability to access the media if it at all possible.
-
I think that there's a lot of vagueness in the view you're attributing. There's a huge difference between (for example) "I think the NYTimes shouldn't print editorials by flat earthers" versus "I think the gov't should outlaw printing editorials by flat earthers."
-
Right, but the people I'm thinking of aren't merely saying the NYT shouldn't print editorials by flat earthers - they'd also press a button to prevent it if they could. It's not the mere expression of an opinion.
-
Unless they've actually, earnestly said that, this seems like a strawman. But maybe they have.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
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.