2 ms·
If it's a valid criticism of a significant issue, why would it be necessary for the target of a criticism to fund it? Surely there would enough injured parties
by stretchwithme 9y ago
If it's a valid criticism of a significant issue, why would it be necessary for the target of a criticism to fund it? Surely there would enough injured parties who have a reason to fund it.
- mulmen 9y agoWhat if the significant issue is that the injured parties do not have the resources to speak? The validity of criticism should not be linked to economic power of the injured.
- stretchwithme 9y agoAnyone can voice a criticism. And ask others to assist. Ask. Not compel. You no longer have freedom of speech if you are forced to promote ideas you don't believe in.
- mulmen 9y agoI agree that the target of criticism should not be required to fund that speech and that the freedom of speech also applies to the right to not speak. My comment deals with your second sentence. > Surely there would enough injured parties who have a reason to fund it. You suggest that criticism is valid only if the injured have the economic power to speak. This is a dangerous way to determine validity because it forms a feedback loop where those with economic power suppress the speech of those without.
- spacemanmatt 9y agoThis is all inside the scope of private employment. Freedom of speech never entered into this equation.