15 ms·
Leaving aside threats of violence, which are properly illegal, what you're arguing for here is for free speech to be limited to the expression of ideas with whi
by duncan_bayne 10y ago
Leaving aside threats of violence, which are properly illegal, what you're arguing for here is for free speech to be limited to the expression of ideas with which you agree.
- jolux 10y agoThis is true in the extreme but to reduce white supremacy to a mere disagreement is reductive and also willfully naive, I think.
- duncan_bayne 10y agoAnd it's the extreme that matters. Free speech is a human right.
- s73ver 10y agoI don't think so. They have the right to not be arrested for spouting their trash. They are not entitled to a platform to shove that in everyone else's face.
- duncan_bayne 10y agoI think we're in agreement here. My point was relating to the legal freedom of speech, not any obligation on Twitter's part re. the use of their platform.
- s73ver 10y agoNot at all. I'm not calling for the government to arrest white supremacists just for spouting their garbage. However, I am stating my support for Twitter and everyone else to be able to exercise their free speech rights to not associate with them.
- duncan_bayne 10y agoSorry, I must have misread your post. I thought you were lumping "garbage speech" in with threats of violence, which are illegal. Yes, it's Twitter's platform, and so entirely their choice whose speech happens there.
- the8472 10y agoBut doesn't that mean twitter isn't a platform for free speech, since only twitter-approved speech gets through, and therefore can't defend free speech rights of its users since they do not exercise such speech on twitter?
- s73ver 10y agoNo. Because there is a world of difference between speech and harassment. Not to mention, Twitter is a business. Their business depends on having users. If too many of their users leave the platform because they are constantly being assaulted by white supremacist drivel or being harassed by other users, then they're in trouble (kinda like they are now)
- duncan_bayne 10y agoI'm still uncomfortable with the use of terms like 'assault' for protected speech, because I've seen people use equivocation between speech and assault to shut down free speech. Meta: I'm _so_ twitchy about this stuff. I'm sorry if that's lead me to read your posts less charitably than I should :(
- dpark 10y agoOf course not. Twitter also has a right to free speech and can exercise that by telling whoever they want to leave their platform.
- duncan_bayne 10y agoStrictly speaking, that's them exercising their property rights, not their free speech rights.