5 ms·

Free speech while extremely important cannot be used as a blanket cover to say whatever you want and expect not to suffer consequences. I’m free to call my girl

by yibg 7y ago

Free speech while extremely important cannot be used as a blanket cover to say whatever you want and expect not to suffer consequences. I’m free to call my girlfriend stupid every day, but I should expect the consequence of soon being single. There are clearly mob reactions to things, but there are also clearly inappropriate speech that should have consequences. What he said here wasn’t in isolation as some idle musing. context matters. He wasn’t talking about the theoretical of a 19 year old. He was talking about this in context of Minsky being a 74 year old man with a 17 year old girl. Maybe he wasn’t aware of the impact of his words, but that shouldn’t get him a free pass.

ThrowawayR2 7y ago
> Free speech while extremely important cannot be used as a blanket cover to say whatever you want and expect not to suffer consequences. That's what Joe McCarthy and the House Committee for Un-American Activities (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism) said to leftists, union organizers, communists, and others in the 1950s. Is that the kind of company progressives prefer to keep, intellectually speaking? Apparently the only difference between progressives and conservatives is which sacred cows that they're willing to mob you for for insulting. Fellow liberals, I beg of you, take heed; progressives are not our friends.
- kazagistar 7y ago
  Or maybe they both value something higher then free speech when push comes to shove. For the far left its equality and protections of the vulnerable. For the far right is race, country, tradition and religion. So that seems like a pretty big difference actually.
- widowlark 7y ago
  The difference in your example is that McCarthy was a government official, attacking political ideas, making what he did an absolute violation of free speech from the perspective of the first amendment. Is this really your best example?
  - ThrowawayR2 7y ago
    I wonder where progressives get the silly idea that the Enlightenment philosophers that birthed liberalism said "Punishing people for speaking is bad if the government does it but its 100% A-OK if a mob does it." Perhaps you could show us some citations?
    - widowlark 7y ago
      Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Reading is hard.
    - yibg 7y ago
      Because people listening to the speech also have the right to react to it. Or are you saying regardless of what you say I cannot take action because of it?
      - ThrowawayR2 7y ago
        > Or are you saying regardless of what you say I cannot take action because of it? "Take action", my, my, what a genteel phrase to describe ruining people's careers and personal lives. Very civilized of you. One wonders whether those crowds who stoned unbelievers in an earlier era would have simply described themselves as "taking action" as well? The answer to bad speech is good speech, period.
        deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
        foolinaround 7y ago
        the very fact that you feel the need to use a throwaway account to make this comment is sad
        yibg 7y ago

by yibg 7y ago

ThrowawayR2 7y ago

> Free speech while extremely important cannot be used as a blanket cover to say whatever you want and expect not to suffer consequences. That's what Joe McCarthy and the House Committee for Un-American Activities (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism) said to leftists, union organizers, communists, and others in the 1950s. Is that the kind of company progressives prefer to keep, intellectually speaking? Apparently the only difference between progressives and conservatives is which sacred cows that they're willing to mob you for for insulting. Fellow liberals, I beg of you, take heed; progressives are not our friends.

kazagistar 7y ago
Or maybe they both value something higher then free speech when push comes to shove. For the far left its equality and protections of the vulnerable. For the far right is race, country, tradition and religion. So that seems like a pretty big difference actually.
widowlark 7y ago
The difference in your example is that McCarthy was a government official, attacking political ideas, making what he did an absolute violation of free speech from the perspective of the first amendment. Is this really your best example?
- ThrowawayR2 7y ago
  I wonder where progressives get the silly idea that the Enlightenment philosophers that birthed liberalism said "Punishing people for speaking is bad if the government does it but its 100% A-OK if a mob does it." Perhaps you could show us some citations?
  - widowlark 7y ago
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Reading is hard.
  - yibg 7y ago
    Because people listening to the speech also have the right to react to it. Or are you saying regardless of what you say I cannot take action because of it?
    - ThrowawayR2 7y ago
      > Or are you saying regardless of what you say I cannot take action because of it? "Take action", my, my, what a genteel phrase to describe ruining people's careers and personal lives. Very civilized of you. One wonders whether those crowds who stoned unbelievers in an earlier era would have simply described themselves as "taking action" as well? The answer to bad speech is good speech, period.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      - foolinaround 7y ago
        the very fact that you feel the need to use a throwaway account to make this comment is sad
      - yibg 7y ago