3 ms·
> they don’t even think we should be allowed to argue for more housing. They don’t think we are even entitled to a fair hearing. We should all recognize that si
by epistasis 9mo ago
> they don’t even think we should be allowed to argue for more housing. They don’t think we are even entitled to a fair hearing. We should all recognize that silencing your political rivals is beyond the pale and that complaints like this one, even if they end up going nowhere, can have a chilling effect on activists and ordinary people who want to exercise their rights.
Don't worry, there are sooo many free speech absolutists that will come out of the woodwork to protect this dastardly attempt to stifle speech through abuse of legal procedures.
No? Where did all those absolutists go?
- slibhb 9mo agoHi I'm right here
- epistasis 9mo agoNice! Any thoughts on this matter, as in does it get you outraged as a free speech absolutist?
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- bpt3 9mo ago[flagged]
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- paulddraper 9mo agoI like free speech. I also oppose mandatory licensing. (In this case, to practice law) The latter is the accusation, it seems impossible it’s not thrown out.
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- bhupy 9mo agoThis comment is a hilarious example of: https://x.com/AustingrahamZ1/status/1029385497213366279?lang=en https://x.com/AustingrahamZ1/status/1029385497213366279?lang...
- joe_mamba 9mo agoTHat's basically my activity on HN. 10% arguing why I like pancakes, and 90% replying to the stream of people accusing me of hating waffles.
- anonymars 9mo agoFlashbacks... https://dilbert-viewer.herokuapp.com/2001-11-05 https://dilbert-viewer.herokuapp.com/2001-11-05
- metalliqaz 9mo agoYeah but waffles have been historically excluded from the breakfast table. /s
- epistasis 9mo agoFor this to be anything like "so you hate waffles" there would have to somebody going around declaring to all that "all breakfast foods are good and can not be criticized" and them only showing up to defend pancakes on the basis of "all breakfast foods" but then deafening silence when waffles or bacon or scrambled eggs get trampled on in a far more prevalant manner. Even the one reply to me from a self-proclaimed absolutist didn't bother to defend the political speech and petition of government, just said that they were present!
- relaxing 9mo agoNo, this is not the phenomenon that post is referring to.
- paulddraper 9mo agoThe phenomenon is "I believe X" and the reaction is "SO YOU DON'T BELIEVE Y." Elsewhere people have reacted to a situation by saying "I believe this is okay, because free speech." But those people didn't include this specific incident, so they apparently don't believe in this one.
- fnordpiglet 9mo agoThey were sued by the current administration and recorded as domestic terrorists,held down and sprayed in the face by irregular paramilitary with extrajudicial powers, detained without probable cause or charges, investigated by the FBI in the dead of night, placed on no fly lists, post retirement rank demoted, fired, laid off, swatted, delivered pizza in the name of dead relatives, and all the wonderful stuff that’s making America great again.
- iamnothere 9mo agoFree speech should obviously be protected in all circumstances including this one. I don’t know what you are going on about, but it’s probably the unfortunately common and flawed perception that anyone who supports “free speech” right now is an unprincipled right winger who only supports it for their ideological allies.
- zahlman 9mo agoWhich strikes me as bizarre, first because it requires that fallacious assumption and secondly because it requires mapping NIMBY onto the right wing. Which arguably tracks with what one would naturally expect from free-associating words like "conservative", but the evidence doesn't show me any strong correlations except possibly in the opposite direction (considering the evidence of new housing starts vs. local voting patterns).
- orangecat 9mo agoYeah, I find NIMBY vs YIMBY arguments interesting because they're almost entirely orthogonal to traditional left vs right. This alignment chart is the best I've seen; for me you can just circle the whole bottom center: https://www.reddit.com/r/transit/comments/1dz4ssk/where_are_you_on_the_buildnobuild_chart/ https://www.reddit.com/r/transit/comments/1dz4ssk/where_are_...
- bigstrat2003 9mo agoAt times like this I like to quote Chris Rock: > Everyone wanna get down with a gang in America these days. "I'm liberal!" "I'm conservative!" Be a fucking person, ok? No good, decent person is all one thing. I got some shit I'm liberal about, and I got some shit I'm conservative about. I think he's absolutely right, and that labeling things as "left" or "right" is a thought-terminating cliche that one should strive to avoid. What matters is the idea, not which faction people might stereotype it with.
- bombcar 9mo ago
- dlcarrier 9mo agoMy theory is that the major parties are currently going through another swap of ideals, so the free-speech absolutists don't have a home. The regions that give the strongest support to the Democrats, like Marin County in California, don't want anything built, are actively kicking out ranchers that have lived there for generations, are adamantly against anyone calling anyone else something offensive, and are in general against what was classically liberal. Meanwhile, rural Texas counties that give the strongest support to the Republicans are for worker protections, generally against government-prohibitions on insulting someone, are increasing in their support for populism, and so on. The Democrats used to support free-speech absolutists, who are no longer welcome there, but the Republicans are just opening up to the ideal, and don't fully support it yet.
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- iamnothere 9mo agoI am not even sure it’s a swap. I see a lot of RW sentiment lately that libertarian principles are self-defeating, and the only thing that matters is Straussian friend-enemy distinction. Basically, the extreme wings of both parties are seizing power and preparing for battle, while the moderate wings are tuning out. (Or to put it another way, more of the center is becoming politically independent.) Traditional ideological lines break down under these conditions, because the important thing is damaging your enemies, not maintaining ideological consistency.
- ls612 9mo agoIt’s driven by a fundamental shift in political economy. Technology centralizing power and making computation and communication (and thus control) cheap means that politics becomes a winner take all industry, in the parlance of the valley. Those who have read more than a little history understand what being the loser in such a contest means and thus the rush to the extremes and the escalation spiral (and of course the associated democratic backsliding) you see not just in the US but in most western countries.
- zahlman 9mo agoPlease speak plainly. It comes across like you allege that "free speech absolutists" would betray their principles due to aligning with NIMBYs (I read "protect" as "protect against", because otherwise it makes even less sense). But where on Earth does that assumption come from? If your intent is not to sneer at a political outgroup (based on a prediction, not even actual conduct) when why adopt this tone?
- rurp 9mo agoMany prominent Republicans in recent years have railed against censorship and espoused a strong belief in free speech principles. Then they got back into power last year and most of those same people did a complete 180 and have been happily supporting censorship of speech that they don't like.
- zahlman 9mo agoHere is where I would normally ask you: > Can you name one such individual and give examples of each phenomenon? But it seems that you conflate "Republicans" who are actually members of government with people who simply support the party; and anyway the concept of "free speech absolutism" is inherently not partisan. The existence of 1A defenders on either side of the aisle (or representing any niche interest) doesn't say anything about the existence of principled, consistent 1A defenders.