3 ms·
> After all, you’re saying you oppose “cancel culture”, surely that opposition has to take some form somewhere, right? Presumably, those groups mainly would tr
by infamia 5y ago
> After all, you’re saying you oppose “cancel culture”, surely that opposition has to take some form somewhere, right?
Presumably, those groups mainly would try to increase awareness and support free speech (get in the news, post articles like on this site, encourage activism like what John Cleese did, etc.), while others might lobby the government to oppose/support laws around freedom of speech. As I originally stated, this is all entirely self-consistent, as long as everyone is free to speak.
- ashtonkem 5y ago> support laws around freedom of speech. And that’s where my alarm bells started to go off. I have never heard an anti-“cancel culture” bill that doesn’t end up being authoritarian and anti-free speech gobbley gook. After all, the only solutions here are to restrain the free speech of the “mob”, or to restrict the free association rights of businesses and other people. It’s always very poorly thought out, unconstitutional junk that’s at best thrown out to sate the culture war crowd with the desperate hope that the courts will strike it down before we’re stuck with the actual consequences. At worst, it’s actually an authoritarian push by cynical politicians who hope to use it as a cudgel to beat their opponents with the power of the state.