A lot of debates that sell themselves as being about free speech are actually about power. And there's *a lot* of power in being able to claim, and hold, the mantle of free speech defender.
-
-
There's one universal rule though: when people try to gain power by suppressing speech, they never acknowledge that this is their goal. The stated goal is always to protect some thing, or some group, from the malign influence of their opponents' ideas.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
@ezraklein could you have@paulg on your podcast?Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The current debate is not about free speech per se, its about consequences. You still cant be criminally prosecuted for saying something objectionable (with some exceptions). What the "free speech defense" side is arguing for is defense against consequences.
-
If the exercising of free speech puts one at risk of personal and professional ruin, one doesn’t really have free speech.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
The greater power would be allowing as much free speech as possible & winning your arguments in a fair way. Unfortunately, there's too many weak people who don't want to that now... only the weak fear free speech.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The effect of free speech that promotes intolerance might be a net loss in freedom due to less total tolerance. It also places those most loudly intolerant in power.https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance …
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.