My Free Speech Means You Have to Shut Up
popehat.substack.com
My Free Speech Means You Have to Shut Up
1–10 of 189 posts
Re: My Free Speech Means You Have to Shut Up
#2You'll notice he has not banned them from X.
Free speech does not come without taking legal responsibility for that speech.
Re: My Free Speech Means You Have to Shut Up
#3You'll notice he has not banned them from X. Free speech does not come without taking legal responsibility for that speech.
The same holds true for the other side, right? Everyone's speech has consequences and only some can afford to silence others through the power of money, law, personality or just being an asshole.
Re: My Free Speech Means You Have to Shut Up
#4Musk's incoherent stance aside, the author is afaik a lawyer, and has a habit of conflating the ideal of free speech, with the 1st amendment. Placing advertisers and billion-dollar corporations as arbiters of what may enter the public sphere is counter to the spirit of free speech, even if it complies with the 1st amendment.
There may be no simple legal means to prevent it (to get ahead of the usual "oh so you want government to force people to do business with X" replies), but that doesn't make the problem go away. I suspect even the author would realize this if, e.g., speaking up for LGBT rights got you fired from 90% of all jobs. Which, ironically, is illegal, but I won't hold my breath on the author complaining what an unconstitutional imposition on the 1st amendment rights of free speech and free association the Civil Rights act is.
Re: My Free Speech Means You Have to Shut Up
#5You'll notice he has not banned them from X. Free speech does not come without taking legal responsibility for that speech.
The same holds true for the other side, right? Everyone's speech has consequences and only some can afford to silence others through the power of money, law, personality or just being an asshole.
Jup. If everybody is allowed to say whatever they want, the side with the sticks will use it to threaten those with slightly less sticks into silence.
Which ironically means that collectively speech will be more free if you prohibit certain types of it for all. A free society doesn't strictly have to tolerate anti-free-society positions like those of ISIS terrorists or neo-nazis — some (including Karl Popper) would say that a free society that wants to stay free, has a duty to be intolerant towards the intolerant.
Free speech, US-style was never about freedom, it was always about who wields the stick.
Re: My Free Speech Means You Have to Shut Up
#6Earlier quoted context omitted.
The same holds true for the other side, right? Everyone's speech has consequences and only some can afford to silence others through the power of money, law, personality or just being an asshole.
Jup. If everybody is allowed to say whatever they want, the side with the sticks will use it to threaten those with slightly less sticks into silence. Which ironically means that collectively speech will be more free if you prohibit certain types of it for all. A free society doesn't strictly have to tolerate anti-free-society positions like those of ISIS terrorists or neo-nazis — some (including Karl Popper) would s…
Frankly, if the society is so fragmented that the court of public opinion doesn't get genuine neo-Nazis laughed out of town, I don't think the primary issue is whether Xitter (I like that term LOL) or other platforms strictly uphold free speech. I think we'd better fix the people first, either the neo-Nazis or everyone else, so that they don't have a foothold on the Internet or in ways that matter.
Re: My Free Speech Means You Have to Shut Up
#7" In my view, too many critics of “cancel culture” are recklessly promoting not the speech of the powerless, but the censorious resentment of the powerful."
Yep, to often when i see these anti woke, cultur war, anti cancel culture critics.
What they are actually doing is attacking people's free speech and defending the authoritarians that are actually trying to limit speech and other rights.
They convinced themselves that free speech should protect them from criticism. When criticism is free speech.
Re: My Free Speech Means You Have to Shut Up
#8Musk's incoherent stance aside, the author is afaik a lawyer, and has a habit of conflating the ideal of free speech, with the 1st amendment. Placing advertisers and billion-dollar corporations as arbiters of what may enter the public sphere is counter to the spirit of free speech, even if it complies with the 1st amendment. There may be no simple legal means to prevent it (to get ahead of the usual "oh so you want g…
The “ideal” of free speech would uphold everyone being able to speak in whatever manner they choose. If you’re an economic loser as a result, that is not a failure of free speech, that is a failure of society to protect you from free speech.
You’ve inadvertently stumbled on the exact reason that “free speech absolutism” is absolutely asinine nonsense (Musk’s incoherent/idiotic implementation aside), and why some speech restrictions should at least be discussed, even outside of a US/First Amendment context.
Re: My Free Speech Means You Have to Shut Up
#9" In my view, too many critics of “cancel culture” are recklessly promoting not the speech of the powerless, but the censorious resentment of the powerful." Yep, to often when i see these anti woke, cultur war, anti cancel culture critics. What they are actually doing is attacking people's free speech and defending the authoritarians that are actually trying to limit speech and other rights. They convinced themselves…
Let me divert from Musk specifically for a moment.
The "anti woke cancel culture critics" are in fact concerned with the inorganic, overwhelming influence that a specific family of ideologies has today over the means of modern communication. Observe the similarity with the left themselves, who are concerned with the inorganic, overwhelming influence that a specific class of wealthy people have today over the means of modern production.
Massive advertising companies banding together to protect a specific narrative is as "free speech" as a bunch of colluding megacorps is "free market". And as much as the left resist the disproportionate influence of oligarchs on economy, the proponents of the actual free speech will resist the disproportionate influence of ESG-driven advertising giants on information.
Re: My Free Speech Means You Have to Shut Up
#10Musk's incoherent stance aside, the author is afaik a lawyer, and has a habit of conflating the ideal of free speech, with the 1st amendment. Placing advertisers and billion-dollar corporations as arbiters of what may enter the public sphere is counter to the spirit of free speech, even if it complies with the 1st amendment. There may be no simple legal means to prevent it (to get ahead of the usual "oh so you want g…
The “ideal” of free speech would uphold everyone being able to speak in whatever manner they choose. If you’re an economic loser as a result, that is not a failure of free speech, that is a failure of society to protect you from free speech. You’ve inadvertently stumbled on the exact reason that “free speech absolutism” is absolutely asinine nonsense (Musk’s incoherent/idiotic implementation aside), and why some spee…
> If you’re an economic loser as a result, that is not a failure of free speech
This neatly avoids the question of whether we should want advertisers and multi-billion dollar corporations to be gatekeepers of the public sphere. As usual, laissez-faire when things are going my way, anti-discrimination and disparate impact laws when they're not.