4 ms·
Anyone who argues in favor of coercion over persuasion, in favor of PayPal suspending accounts and Stanford creating institutionalized snitching - anyone like t
by BrainVirus 4y ago
Anyone who argues in favor of coercion over persuasion, in favor of PayPal suspending accounts and Stanford creating institutionalized snitching - anyone like that clearly considers themselves a part of the orthodoxy and believes all the coercion will flow the other way. For them free speech, indeed, poses a significant danger... of losing their power over others.
- anigbrowl 4y agoI question your premises, which treat quite disparate things as interchangeable and ignore temporality, and don't really address the previous points at all. It's equally possible that people might want a channel for anonymous complaints because they don't feel comfortable or safe articulating their unhappiness over an issue in public - that is, they feel their own speech to be chilled, directly or indirectly. Your argument seems to rely on the assumption that that can't be the case, based on events that have happened subsequently - as if the news from today about Paypal is necessarily a consequence of the Cambridge (not Stanford) litigation, when it might be in response to something else entirely; the substack author didn't bother to mention any recent controversies, perhaps assuming that her audience were already following the group's fortunes closely.
- canistista 4y agoIf you are talking about white identity then yes, lawfare is absolutely used to silence them. The purpose of the portal was to snitch on white people for wrong think and it was taken down for a legal reason.