31 ms·

Fix that title: 'in US law' The US has a long culture of endorsing freedom of speech in public, regardless of the presence or government. It's a US principle,

Fix that title: 'in US law' The US has a long culture of endorsing freedom of speech in public, regardless of the presence or government. It's a US principle, which of course resulted in the insistence that the constitution be amended to support it in government activities. By no means is Freedom of Speech supposed to begin and end with that amendment.

Spivak 3y ago
We do? What's your definition of free speech that people in the US actually adhere to? There are plenty of things you can't say that will cause people to not associate with you, block you, not hire you, not do business with you, refuse you service, ban you from community spaces and events, and at the margins lay you out flat. As a litmus test the number of physical spaces I could theoretically carry around or display a confederate flag is basically limited to inside my house and public sidewalks. As soon as you step into somewhere privately owned people will absolutely kick you out for it. You have cultural freedom of speech inasmuch as regular citizens can't use violence in the way the state does but literally every other consequence that can be imposed by private citizens is imposed for speech.
- abfan1127 3y ago
  being free to say things does not preclude you other free individuals to deny you freedom of association with them.
  - Spivak 3y ago
    Yes but what does cultural freedom of speech even mean when it comes to the interactions between private citizens if not that? You have the freedom to say <blank> and won't be arrested for it is legal freedom of speech. You have the right to say <blank> and Johhny can't smash your teeth in for it is just the law against assault. Stated differently what would a society where there is a legal right to free speech but not a cultural principal of free speech look like and how is it different than the US right now?
    - smoldesu 3y ago
      It means whatever the private citizens decide it to mean. That's kinda what freedom, democracy and the pursuit of happiness is; like how we treat our economy, but with ideas. Lightly regulated, with compensation where damages can be proven. Nobody sells insurance for hurt feelings, though.
    - violiner 3y ago
      You've edited this at least twice since I started to write so who knows what this will by the time I hit 'reply', but this is really weird. If I can't choose not to associate with someone because of something they said then freedom of association just doesn't exist. If I can't kick someone out of my business because of something they've said then I just don't have control over whom I do business with. In a society with a cultural principle of free speech people would be able to exercise their right to say heinous things, and decent people would exercise their right to not have anything to do with those people, and the heinous thing saying people wouldn't whine about it, except disingenuously, because despite all their protestations they would actually understand that their right to free speech should not compel me to have them in my club, church, business, whatever.
      - enoch_r 3y ago
        I don't think you're actually grappling with the idea of "a cultural principle of free speech" here. If I imagine a culture with the maximum level of respect for free speech as a principle - a strong cultural belief that the best way to reach the truth is by debating ideas, even terrible ones - I imagine a culture in which a Nazi can state their piece at a bar, and then everyone calmly discusses their opinions and why they're wrong. If I imagine a culture with a minimum level of respect for free speech, I imagine a culture in which I might say something anodyne, like "the minimum wage should be increased," and lose all the friends who disagree with me. Think, for example, about high school debate. In the past, it was an arena in which various controversial proposals were thrown out and discussed. It had a high level of respect for free speech as a principle. Nowadays, some debate judges say things like (this is an actual quote): > I will no longer evaluate and thus never vote for rightest capitalist-imperialist positions/arguments... Examples of arguments of this nature are as follows: fascism good, capitalism good, imperialist war good, neoliberalism good, defenses of US or otherwise bourgeois nationalism, Zionism or normalizing Israel, colonialism good, US white fascist policing good, etc. Everyone here is exercising their freedom of speech. That doesn't mean they're showing equal respect for the free expression of ideas.
- linksnapzz 3y ago
  This is a relatively recent phenomena, w.r.t. the confederate flag.
- Bud 3y ago
  Apparently this has to be reiterated: https://xkcd.com/1357/ https://xkcd.com/1357/
ethanbond 3y ago
> The US has a long culture of endorsing freedom of speech in public so long as you're the right color/gender/sexuality/faith/wealth status for the particular time and place in question (and it applies in every direction -- there is stuff you effectively cannot say in rural Alabama just like there's stuff you effectively cannot say in lower Manhattan). This has always been the case and is in fact itself a component of free speech: other people are allowed to call you an idiot fuck and not associate with you.

Spivak 3y ago

We do? What's your definition of free speech that people in the US actually adhere to? There are plenty of things you can't say that will cause people to not associate with you, block you, not hire you, not do business with you, refuse you service, ban you from community spaces and events, and at the margins lay you out flat. As a litmus test the number of physical spaces I could theoretically carry around or display a confederate flag is basically limited to inside my house and public sidewalks. As soon as you step into somewhere privately owned people will absolutely kick you out for it. You have cultural freedom of speech inasmuch as regular citizens can't use violence in the way the state does but literally every other consequence that can be imposed by private citizens is imposed for speech.

abfan1127 3y ago
being free to say things does not preclude you other free individuals to deny you freedom of association with them.
- Spivak 3y ago
  Yes but what does cultural freedom of speech even mean when it comes to the interactions between private citizens if not that? You have the freedom to say <blank> and won't be arrested for it is legal freedom of speech. You have the right to say <blank> and Johhny can't smash your teeth in for it is just the law against assault. Stated differently what would a society where there is a legal right to free speech but not a cultural principal of free speech look like and how is it different than the US right now?
  - smoldesu 3y ago
    It means whatever the private citizens decide it to mean. That's kinda what freedom, democracy and the pursuit of happiness is; like how we treat our economy, but with ideas. Lightly regulated, with compensation where damages can be proven. Nobody sells insurance for hurt feelings, though.
  - violiner 3y ago
    You've edited this at least twice since I started to write so who knows what this will by the time I hit 'reply', but this is really weird. If I can't choose not to associate with someone because of something they said then freedom of association just doesn't exist. If I can't kick someone out of my business because of something they've said then I just don't have control over whom I do business with. In a society with a cultural principle of free speech people would be able to exercise their right to say heinous things, and decent people would exercise their right to not have anything to do with those people, and the heinous thing saying people wouldn't whine about it, except disingenuously, because despite all their protestations they would actually understand that their right to free speech should not compel me to have them in my club, church, business, whatever.
    - enoch_r 3y ago
      I don't think you're actually grappling with the idea of "a cultural principle of free speech" here. If I imagine a culture with the maximum level of respect for free speech as a principle - a strong cultural belief that the best way to reach the truth is by debating ideas, even terrible ones - I imagine a culture in which a Nazi can state their piece at a bar, and then everyone calmly discusses their opinions and why they're wrong. If I imagine a culture with a minimum level of respect for free speech, I imagine a culture in which I might say something anodyne, like "the minimum wage should be increased," and lose all the friends who disagree with me. Think, for example, about high school debate. In the past, it was an arena in which various controversial proposals were thrown out and discussed. It had a high level of respect for free speech as a principle. Nowadays, some debate judges say things like (this is an actual quote): > I will no longer evaluate and thus never vote for rightest capitalist-imperialist positions/arguments... Examples of arguments of this nature are as follows: fascism good, capitalism good, imperialist war good, neoliberalism good, defenses of US or otherwise bourgeois nationalism, Zionism or normalizing Israel, colonialism good, US white fascist policing good, etc. Everyone here is exercising their freedom of speech. That doesn't mean they're showing equal respect for the free expression of ideas.
linksnapzz 3y ago
This is a relatively recent phenomena, w.r.t. the confederate flag.
Bud 3y ago
Apparently this has to be reiterated: https://xkcd.com/1357/ https://xkcd.com/1357/

ethanbond 3y ago

> The US has a long culture of endorsing freedom of speech in public so long as you're the right color/gender/sexuality/faith/wealth status for the particular time and place in question (and it applies in every direction -- there is stuff you effectively cannot say in rural Alabama just like there's stuff you effectively cannot say in lower Manhattan). This has always been the case and is in fact itself a component of free speech: other people are allowed to call you an idiot fuck and not associate with you.