4 ms·

You misunderstood my use of the term "unsympathetic". I meant it in the sense of being unsympathetic towards an opinion (the opinion that there is something un

You misunderstood my use of the term "unsympathetic". I meant it in the sense of being unsympathetic towards an opinion (the opinion that there is something unjust about gentrification) not towards the alleged victims of gentrification. My aim is to express an opinion: That tech workers have a right to live where they want to, and that it's not the right of the local community, or people claiming to represent them, to stop them living where they choose to and frequenting the businesses they choose to. Now this might be upsetting to people who think of themselves as victims of gentrification, but I didn't formulate this viewpoint for the purpose of upsetting them. If I have to change my viewpoint, or choose not to express it, because someone finds it upsetting, then that is not freedom of speech. So unless you think that people should be forced to curtail their speech and keep their opinions to themselves, whenever that opinion is offensive to someone who has (or feels they have) suffered some ill fortune, you should stop comparing what I proposed to do with willfully inciting violence towards myself.

caseydurfee 13y ago
"If I have to change my viewpoint, or choose not to express it, because someone finds it upsetting, then that is not freedom of speech." I don't think you really understand that "freedom of speech" refers to the actions of the government. It has nothing to do with what private citizens do in response to what you say. The first amendment doesn't protect you from blowback and it's not supposed to. Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism. However if you consider freedom of speech an issue between citizens, wouldn't the right to bear arms be the greatest enemy of freedom of speech? Seems like "an armed society is a polite society" is a recipe for a society where nobody speaks their mind for fear of losing their life...
- mc-lovin 13y ago
  Free speech is the point because if the government decided that expressing a political opinion counted as provocation in an assault or battery charge, this would probably violate the first amendment. Legally the issue is around assault and battery, but the underlying issue is freedom of speech. "The first amendment doesn't protect you from blowback and it's not supposed to." Correct that is what the criminal code, and the fascist police, are for. "Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism." This discussion is about violence, not criticism. "However if you consider freedom of speech an issue between citizens, wouldn't the right to bear arms be the greatest enemy of freedom of speech? Seems like "an armed society is a polite society" is a recipe for a society where nobody speaks their mind for fear of losing their life..." Possibly though I haven't heard of someone getting shot for expressing an opinion. Most people are afraid to go to jail for murder, while leftists who push and shove rarely even get charged.

caseydurfee 13y ago

"If I have to change my viewpoint, or choose not to express it, because someone finds it upsetting, then that is not freedom of speech." I don't think you really understand that "freedom of speech" refers to the actions of the government. It has nothing to do with what private citizens do in response to what you say. The first amendment doesn't protect you from blowback and it's not supposed to. Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism. However if you consider freedom of speech an issue between citizens, wouldn't the right to bear arms be the greatest enemy of freedom of speech? Seems like "an armed society is a polite society" is a recipe for a society where nobody speaks their mind for fear of losing their life...

mc-lovin 13y ago
Free speech is the point because if the government decided that expressing a political opinion counted as provocation in an assault or battery charge, this would probably violate the first amendment. Legally the issue is around assault and battery, but the underlying issue is freedom of speech. "The first amendment doesn't protect you from blowback and it's not supposed to." Correct that is what the criminal code, and the fascist police, are for. "Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism." This discussion is about violence, not criticism. "However if you consider freedom of speech an issue between citizens, wouldn't the right to bear arms be the greatest enemy of freedom of speech? Seems like "an armed society is a polite society" is a recipe for a society where nobody speaks their mind for fear of losing their life..." Possibly though I haven't heard of someone getting shot for expressing an opinion. Most people are afraid to go to jail for murder, while leftists who push and shove rarely even get charged.