3 ms·
> The US has strong free speech protection The US literally just told (e.g., [0]) all scientists working for it they are not permitted to publish papers or spe
by dmd 2y ago
> The US has strong free speech protection
The US literally just told (e.g., [0]) all scientists working for it they are not permitted to publish papers or speak at conferences or travel. What the US "has" is irrelevant when laws are being ignored.
[0] https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/revised-and-extended-what-s-happening-inside-nih-and-nsf https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/revised-and-extend...
- marcinzm 2y agoThat's an employer telling employees what to do? Google can tell the same thing to it's employees and does. I don't see the relevance to the government telling other entities what to do.
- dmd 2y agoThe employer is the US federal government, in this case.
- marcinzm 2y agoAnd employees signed contracts which allow the government to tell them how to do their jobs or fire them. Just like any other employer. Harvard did not.
- Teever 2y agoSure. But is it a good thing that their employer did this in this situation? Is it a normal thing for the US government to do? Why or why not? Do other government do this? Which ones and for what reasons?
- MattGrommes 2y agoThe federal government isn't just "an employer", it's an extension of the public will funded with public money and should work toward the public good.
- marcinzm 2y agoThe topic is if the federal government is ignoring free speech laws in this specific instance. I'm arguing it's not. As for public good, you'd probably find it depressing what the majority of Americans view as good.