3 ms·

What is it you want to say but feel you can’t? No one will lock you up... https://www.xkcd.com/1357/ https://www.xkcd.com/1357/

by freen 8y ago

ThrowawayR2 8y ago
> What is it you want to say but feel you can’t? Okay, here I go: "Modern progressives aren't liberals because freedom of speech is a core tenet of liberalism and therefore they should be treated as a hazard to the liberal movement." There, I said it; I feel better now. Thank you for your kind invitation.
- freen 8y ago
  You seem to be making precisely the error illustrated in the XKCD comic, confusing social consequences of speech with legality. Where are modern progressives arguing to use state power to make some speech illegal?
  - freen 8y ago
    Moreover, recent events seem to indicate that it is precisely conservatives who are interested in using state power to silence speech: https://medium.com/s/oversight/devin-nunes-has-a-cow-and-free-speech-is-endangered-90ae649dc569 https://medium.com/s/oversight/devin-nunes-has-a-cow-and-fre...
    - ThrowawayR2 8y ago
      And your point is ...? That conservatives attempting to silence speech makes the lesser attempts of progressives to silence speech okay by comparison? That both conservatives and progressives are birds of a feather in their attempts to limit freedom of speech?
      - freen 8y ago
        One is keen on using state power: lawsuits and the office of the president. The other simply uses speech in response. You seem to think that critical speech should be less protected that bigoted speech. I’m baffled by that position.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - freen 8y ago
      Conservatives are keen on using the power of the state to limit speech. And you are apparently keen on using state power to limit my ability to react to the speech of others.
  - ThrowawayR2 8y ago
    > confusing social consequences of speech with legality If people went to a certain country and they said "We have freedom from self incrimination, just as the US does; the government is not allowed to force a confession from an alleged criminal. However, the victim and their family or friends may force a confession from the alleged criminal in any way they please.", then those people would undoubtedly say "Your country does not have freedom from self incrimination at all!" If people went to a certain country and they said "We have freedom of speech, just as the US does; the government is not allowed to suppress or tamper with what an individual says. However, those who disagree with what they said may inflict 'social consequences' on that individual until their lives are ruined.", then people would undoubtedly say ...? In short, it should be blindingly obvious that freedom of speech includes both protection from government intervention as well as protection from members of the public who seek to inflict harm^H^H^H^H"social consequences" because they disagree with what was said. It is dismaying that a man of Randall Munroe's intelligence should make such a blatant logical error in his comic. Sadly, it's not even the only error in that comic.
    - freen 8y ago
      "However, the victim and their family or friends may force a confession from the alleged criminal in any way they please." Who is doing the forcing? Is it the state? If so, then I agree with you. If it isn't the state, with all of the force it entails, your argument is irrelevant and invalid. You seem to be conflating social norms with state power. We can't lock up an asshole just because they are an asshole, but we sure as shit can refuse to socialize with them. What would you want to be different?
    - freen 8y ago
      You want consequence free speech? You seek to limit my ability to react to what someone has said? You want to force me to host nazi comments on my blog? You want to force me, personally, to provide a platform for hate and bigotry and not chastise bigots? I can’t call someone an asshole? I can't fire someone because they are an asshole?

What is it you want to say but feel you can’t? No one will lock you up... https://www.xkcd.com/1357/ https://www.xkcd.com/1357/

by freen 8y ago

What is it you want to say but feel you can’t? No one will lock you up... https://www.xkcd.com/1357/ https://www.xkcd.com/1357/

ThrowawayR2 8y ago

> What is it you want to say but feel you can’t? Okay, here I go: "Modern progressives aren't liberals because freedom of speech is a core tenet of liberalism and therefore they should be treated as a hazard to the liberal movement." There, I said it; I feel better now. Thank you for your kind invitation.

freen 8y ago
You seem to be making precisely the error illustrated in the XKCD comic, confusing social consequences of speech with legality. Where are modern progressives arguing to use state power to make some speech illegal?
- freen 8y ago
  Moreover, recent events seem to indicate that it is precisely conservatives who are interested in using state power to silence speech: https://medium.com/s/oversight/devin-nunes-has-a-cow-and-free-speech-is-endangered-90ae649dc569 https://medium.com/s/oversight/devin-nunes-has-a-cow-and-fre...
  - ThrowawayR2 8y ago
    And your point is ...? That conservatives attempting to silence speech makes the lesser attempts of progressives to silence speech okay by comparison? That both conservatives and progressives are birds of a feather in their attempts to limit freedom of speech?
    - freen 8y ago
      One is keen on using state power: lawsuits and the office of the president. The other simply uses speech in response. You seem to think that critical speech should be less protected that bigoted speech. I’m baffled by that position.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - freen 8y ago
    Conservatives are keen on using the power of the state to limit speech. And you are apparently keen on using state power to limit my ability to react to the speech of others.
- ThrowawayR2 8y ago
  > confusing social consequences of speech with legality If people went to a certain country and they said "We have freedom from self incrimination, just as the US does; the government is not allowed to force a confession from an alleged criminal. However, the victim and their family or friends may force a confession from the alleged criminal in any way they please.", then those people would undoubtedly say "Your country does not have freedom from self incrimination at all!" If people went to a certain country and they said "We have freedom of speech, just as the US does; the government is not allowed to suppress or tamper with what an individual says. However, those who disagree with what they said may inflict 'social consequences' on that individual until their lives are ruined.", then people would undoubtedly say ...? In short, it should be blindingly obvious that freedom of speech includes both protection from government intervention as well as protection from members of the public who seek to inflict harm^H^H^H^H"social consequences" because they disagree with what was said. It is dismaying that a man of Randall Munroe's intelligence should make such a blatant logical error in his comic. Sadly, it's not even the only error in that comic.
  - freen 8y ago
    "However, the victim and their family or friends may force a confession from the alleged criminal in any way they please." Who is doing the forcing? Is it the state? If so, then I agree with you. If it isn't the state, with all of the force it entails, your argument is irrelevant and invalid. You seem to be conflating social norms with state power. We can't lock up an asshole just because they are an asshole, but we sure as shit can refuse to socialize with them. What would you want to be different?
  - freen 8y ago
    You want consequence free speech? You seek to limit my ability to react to what someone has said? You want to force me to host nazi comments on my blog? You want to force me, personally, to provide a platform for hate and bigotry and not chastise bigots? I can’t call someone an asshole? I can't fire someone because they are an asshole?