Offensive speech should be protected, but, if you speak only to offend, you're still an asshole. Classical Liberals are making a strategic error defending offensive speech in particular so often, instead of free speech in general.
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @Evolving_Ego
As soon as you insinuate that speech in general is protected, but offensive speech is less so, people will declare speech they don't like as offensive. And those that use it will be declared assholes. Which is exactly what happens. Do you need examples?
5 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
I don't think what you're saying here is inconsistent with what I'm saying. I'm saying, yes, offensive speech should be protected. But it's a strategic/rhetorical mistake to be framed into defending it so much.
0 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @telephotic @Plinz
I guess we would have to figure out what the "goal" is, in light of which the strategic options are being judged.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
In practice, most people that identify with a political camp are unable to understand the arguments of other camps, but perceive them as attempts to be deliberately evil and offensive. It may even be offensive to try to understand the other side (like "incels" or "Trump voters").
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.