5 ms·

Agreed. Someone stated the other day on something similar and it matches up pretty well, it went something like: "...you have the right to free speech, not con

Agreed. Someone stated the other day on something similar and it matches up pretty well, it went something like: "...you have the right to free speech, not consequence free speech"

umvi 8y ago
There's also an oft-posted xkcd (https://xkcd.com/1357/ https://xkcd.com/1357/) that's related. It makes me really uneasy though. I'm starting to think free speech should be protected in non-government situations as well. Because otherwise you can get your job/project/social media account/etc. destroyed by mobs if you happen to have an opinion that's not politically fashionable at the moment. I could just be reading it wrong, but "you have the right to free speech, but not their consequences" seems to have an implicit "...because me and my friends will gang up and hound you if you say something we don't like" hanging at the end of the sentence
- DanBC 8y ago
  No, it means "you have freedom of speech, but I don't have to pay for your megaphone".
  - umvi 8y ago
    In this specific case, maybe, but in general that doesn't seem to be true. In the case of Brendan Eich, Elia Schito, and other random developers, it's "you have freedom of speech, but I don't like what you are saying (or doing) so I'm going to gather a mob and destroy some aspect of your life to teach you a lesson"
    - SauciestGNU 8y ago
      I think what happened to Eich et al is a perfect example of "the remedy to bad speech is more speech." Everything that happened to Eich was a result of people organizing speech and associating with each other freely to amplify the power of their voices.
  - ameister14 8y ago
    That's not what the XKCD says - it literally says yelled at, boycotted or banned
weberc2 8y ago
I distinctly remember liberals condemning this line of reasoning 20 years ago (and rightly, in my view). It’s really remarkable how fungible principles are with respect to tribes and circumstances.

Agreed. Someone stated the other day on something similar and it matches up pretty well, it went something like: "...you have the right to free speech, not consequence free speech"

umvi 8y ago

There's also an oft-posted xkcd (https://xkcd.com/1357/ https://xkcd.com/1357/) that's related. It makes me really uneasy though. I'm starting to think free speech should be protected in non-government situations as well. Because otherwise you can get your job/project/social media account/etc. destroyed by mobs if you happen to have an opinion that's not politically fashionable at the moment. I could just be reading it wrong, but "you have the right to free speech, but not their consequences" seems to have an implicit "...because me and my friends will gang up and hound you if you say something we don't like" hanging at the end of the sentence

DanBC 8y ago
No, it means "you have freedom of speech, but I don't have to pay for your megaphone".
- umvi 8y ago
  In this specific case, maybe, but in general that doesn't seem to be true. In the case of Brendan Eich, Elia Schito, and other random developers, it's "you have freedom of speech, but I don't like what you are saying (or doing) so I'm going to gather a mob and destroy some aspect of your life to teach you a lesson"
  - SauciestGNU 8y ago
    I think what happened to Eich et al is a perfect example of "the remedy to bad speech is more speech." Everything that happened to Eich was a result of people organizing speech and associating with each other freely to amplify the power of their voices.
- ameister14 8y ago
  That's not what the XKCD says - it literally says yelled at, boycotted or banned

weberc2 8y ago

I distinctly remember liberals condemning this line of reasoning 20 years ago (and rightly, in my view). It’s really remarkable how fungible principles are with respect to tribes and circumstances.