This is the whole obnoxious mindset behind "cancel culture" culture, that it pre-emptively defines the "canceler" as wielding great and terrible power, it assumes the canceler is extremely popular and beloved and everything they do matters so fucking much
-
-
When you get spurious accusations hurled against you don't expect anyone to come to your defense then. Also nice strawman, literally no one thinks this about cancel culture.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
I expect people to defend me who like me, support me and agree with me on the issues and are otherwise decent people I don't expect chuds like Jesse to defend me on principled "free speech" "I disagree but will defend to the death" grounds Which is good because they don't
3 replies 2 retweets 42 likes -
I would really hope the people in my life would defend my right to free speech, regardless of if they like me, support me, or agree with me on any issue. Those are all beside the point. The ACLU didn't 'like' or 'support' the Skokie Nazis when they defended their speech.
4 replies 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @TeachTheClassic @arthur_affect and
That's the whole thing. The 1st Amendment Misappropriation Committee ONLY defends "freeze peach" that they (supposedly) "dislike" predominantly if it comes from bigots and trolls. It's a process of feigned neutrality that's actually (arbitrarily) very selective
1 reply 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @2plus2equals7 @arthur_affect and
Why do you write 'freeze peach' as if to mock our 1A rights? Would we be better off with a weaker 1A? If the state had total control of who has the right to speech like in China?https://www.rfa.org/english/news/china/control-12162020092149.html …
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @TeachTheClassic @2plus2equals7 and
No, it's to mock the idea that the First Amendment applies to "private-sector" consequences for speech to the point of actually calling for restrictions on speech
1 reply 1 retweet 26 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @TeachTheClassic and
Like saying that if I'm the CEO of a tech company I can't refuse business from users based on their "offensive political views", which is restricting my legal right to do as I wish with my money and my resources
1 reply 1 retweet 12 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @TeachTheClassic and
Or saying that people aren't allowed to exclude people from speaking at events at their organization, or from paying them to write for their publication Saying that the First Amendment somehow applies to ratioing people on Twitter until they feel bad and delete their account
1 reply 2 retweets 24 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @TeachTheClassic and
most of the complaints don’t have anything to do with actual first amendment violations (public university speech codes might be an exception) but apart from that, there may be a legitimate concern about a cultural change against free speech principles.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
I don't think it's possible to have a society where there's no such thing as "ideas that are beyond the pale" in terms of things you can't say without suffering severe social embarrassment and becoming unpopular We're fighting because we're just changing what that is
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @TeachTheClassic and
yeah that’s fine for sure. but that’s different than silencing ideas. If the ideas were really so unpopular we should let them be aired *more* so that the speakers suffer even more social stigma.
4 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @mpp75214 @arthur_affect and
You'll shift the Overton Window.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
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.