Read this thread, as it lays out what apparently serious people are thinking with their bare faces hanging out in public. 1/https://twitter.com/JeffreyASachs/status/1014886694909300738 …
Eh, a contract generally bundles a set of "rights" and obligations for both parties, so you get more of both. nb, though: In the narrow/legal sense the "heckler's veto" is using the cops to coerce the theater owner to shut down the performance in the name of public safety.
-
-
Which is to say the heckler's veto is an authoritarian exercise that deprives both speaker and audience of various 'rights' at gunpoint. If you're a revolutionary communist, you're OK with that, bc no ethical consumption under capitalism or something.
-
(And of course there are no such things as natural rights, and nothing to stop the revcoms except other people's guns, but that's how the discourse is encoded.)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
How did the cops come into this? Earlier this was about loud mobs.
-
It's in the definition of heckler's veto. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler's_veto …
-
I was, however, thinking about the discussion in the "common" terms described later in that article.
-
I was hazy on the distinction myself until I read up on it. The Current Discourse mashes them together.
End of conversation
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.
. Banned in Sweden. SubGenius, Zhuangist, white-hat troll. Defrocked mathematician. Brain problems.