5 ms·

I'm not sure I follow. In all it's variants the ability to trace unpopular speech back to the speaker puts their life in danger and robs them of their freedom u

I'm not sure I follow. In all it's variants the ability to trace unpopular speech back to the speaker puts their life in danger and robs them of their freedom under threat of violence. Am I missing something? The United States, for example, wouldn't exist if Thomas Payne hadn't been able to publish his pamphlets anonymously.

JumpCrisscross 1y ago
> the ability to trace unpopular speech back to the speaker puts their life in danger and robs them of their freedom under threat of violence. Am I missing something Yes. Freedom of speech doesn't require privacy in most constructions as it typically concerns, first and foremost, publicly-made political speech. This finds its way into U.S. law through the expansion of the First Amendment's protections by its press and religion clauses [1]. [1] https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/amendment-01/06-difference-between-speech-and-press.html https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/amendment-01/06-diffe...
- stevenAthompson 1y ago
  You're almost certainly correct from a technical legal perspective (although I loathe the way legal experts extract "extra" meaning form the spaces between the words of the constitution). I was speaking from a more practical dictionary definition of the terms. From my perspective, you simply can't speak freely if the government (or your neighbors) might murder you for saying things they disagree with.
- AnthonyMouse 1y ago
  > Freedom of speech doesn't require privacy in most constructions as it typically concerns, first and foremost, publicly-made political speech. Suppose you're Thomas Paine and you want to advocate for the independence of America from Britain, and that Britain doesn't allow the government to punish anyone for what they say, but does prohibit anyone from publishing their writings anonymously. Then everyone knows exactly who Thomas Paine is, and even if there is no law against writing those things, there is now a constable poking into his business looking for some other pretext to arrest him, several legislators drafting bills that would negatively impact his livelihood and which will quietly be withdrawn if he would simply stop publishing such things, and a variety of private enterprises who now refuse to have anything to do with him in any capacity because they have business before the crown and fear any public association with their critic. How is it free speech if you're still getting punished for it?

JumpCrisscross 1y ago

> the ability to trace unpopular speech back to the speaker puts their life in danger and robs them of their freedom under threat of violence. Am I missing something Yes. Freedom of speech doesn't require privacy in most constructions as it typically concerns, first and foremost, publicly-made political speech. This finds its way into U.S. law through the expansion of the First Amendment's protections by its press and religion clauses [1]. [1] https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/amendment-01/06-difference-between-speech-and-press.html https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/amendment-01/06-diffe...

stevenAthompson 1y ago
You're almost certainly correct from a technical legal perspective (although I loathe the way legal experts extract "extra" meaning form the spaces between the words of the constitution). I was speaking from a more practical dictionary definition of the terms. From my perspective, you simply can't speak freely if the government (or your neighbors) might murder you for saying things they disagree with.
AnthonyMouse 1y ago
> Freedom of speech doesn't require privacy in most constructions as it typically concerns, first and foremost, publicly-made political speech. Suppose you're Thomas Paine and you want to advocate for the independence of America from Britain, and that Britain doesn't allow the government to punish anyone for what they say, but does prohibit anyone from publishing their writings anonymously. Then everyone knows exactly who Thomas Paine is, and even if there is no law against writing those things, there is now a constable poking into his business looking for some other pretext to arrest him, several legislators drafting bills that would negatively impact his livelihood and which will quietly be withdrawn if he would simply stop publishing such things, and a variety of private enterprises who now refuse to have anything to do with him in any capacity because they have business before the crown and fear any public association with their critic. How is it free speech if you're still getting punished for it?