4 ms·
No, you're imagining complications that don't exist. The very boring answer is that if two people (or groups) want to exercise their right to free speech at the
by ambrozk 5y ago
No, you're imagining complications that don't exist. The very boring answer is that if two people (or groups) want to exercise their right to free speech at the same time, the government is charged with fairly apportioning the space to each of them in turn, in such a manner that both will ultimately be able to express themselves. If one of the parties feels the government is unfairly restricting their right to speech, they can take the government to court, and the court will adjudicate the dispute.
What people are describing as "cancel culture" is a totally different phenomenon.
- ModernMech 5y ago> the government is charged with fairly apportioning the space to each of them in turn, in such a manner that both will ultimately be able to express themselves. But even if you have the space according to whatever schedule is set up, I and all my friends can still go to the square while you are talking, and we can open our mouths to scream at the top of our lungs for as long as we like. Right? That's unrestricted free speech, is it not? For the government to come along and tell me to close my mouth, that would abridge my free speech rights. > What people are describing as "cancel culture" is a totally different phenomenon. I'm not sure. I've seen the term applied to almost any kind of restriction of speech, no matter how benign or justified. It's so broad as to be meaningless at this point.