5 ms·
While I agree with your general sentiment, free speech absolutism is meaningless in employment settings without something like militant labor organizing to defe
by claudeganon 7y ago
While I agree with your general sentiment, free speech absolutism is meaningless in employment settings without something like militant labor organizing to defend it. It’s not protected in many cases and they can always just fire you and exhaust your resources in any resulting legal battle.
If you had a union on the other hand, it could stipulate protection of this kind of speech as part of the employment contract and marshal the resources to mount an actual, meaningful defense if your employer were to try these tactics.
- andrekandre 7y ago> While I agree with your general sentiment, free speech absolutism is meaningless in employment settings without something like militant labor organizing to defend it. couldn’t that also be accomplished though employee ownership? e.g. without the militancy?
- claudeganon 7y agoAbsolutely! Co-ops are a great way to enshrine these protections as well.
- rumanator 7y ago> While I agree with your general sentiment, free speech absolutism is meaningless in employment settings without something like militant labor organizing to defend it. Sounds an awful lot like a socialist euphemism for an ideologically-motivated blend of censorship.
- iamasoftwaredev 7y agoI don't see how you can possibly get that from the comment. Socialism, yeah okay. Pro-censorship?