3 ms·
>If I asked someone here to defend free speech beyond the obvious first few feints and lunges, they'd fall. Don't want to sound dismissing, but where outside s
by ovi256 14y ago
>If I asked someone here to defend free speech beyond the obvious first few feints and lunges, they'd fall.
Don't want to sound dismissing, but where outside scholarly work is it necessary to defend free speech beyond the obvious first few feints and lunges ? Public debate and policy making rarely go beyond those first feints and lunges, plus some vote gathering.
So, if it has no practical purpose, you can argue it's worth doing for itself, but then you'd just position itself near that modern madhouse, contemporary poetry.
- intended 14y agoIn India? Its importance is pretty huge. This is the case with an obvious argument like free speech. Have a debate on something like civil liberties and rights, or the Aadhar scheme and you will draw blanks. Or comprehensive and confident arguments against something as basic as superstition. I'm sure after a series of disasters and a home grown enlightenment movement which grows out of religious adventurism we could learn the same lessons as the west. The question is do we have to?