3 ms·
I wonder about the implications of this WRT free speech in general. While ostensibly, free speech is a pillar democratic societies, not all forms of expression
by iwwr 15y ago
I wonder about the implications of this WRT free speech in general. While ostensibly, free speech is a pillar democratic societies, not all forms of expression are actually allowed (think: porn or public nudity).
This implies that free speech is less about the content, but about the freedom to assemble and exchange information. That is, freedom manifests itself in self-selected groups of peers, who can then moderate the content of their communities.
"Free speech" is not a guarantee for a platform for any particular message, but rather a promise (by political powers) not to suppress free private exchanges of information; while public spaces (streets, squares, airwaves) may still be moderated.
- techiferous 15y agoWith respect to free speech and, in general, freedoms within a group, it's important to realize we're dealing with two boundaries. The first is the rules the group agrees on that are enforced. The second are your own personal boundaries that you choose. I think the tendency is to make the enforced rules light; we like to tip the balance in the favor of more freedom as much as possible. That said, this works best if individuals make an effort to be genuinely concerned about the interests of others in the group and therefore draw much more conservative boundaries around their own behavior. In other words, groups need lots of social restrictions on behavior to work well, but it works best when each individual has a lot of room to decide what those boundaries are. Only the egregiously bad behavior is formally addressed as a group. Sometimes people don't realize there are two boundaries going on and rationalize rude behavior under the umbrella of freedom or free speech.