Where did this idea come from?
Of course freedom of speech means freedom from the bloody consequences what else could it mean?
If I punish you for saying something you are not free to do that. "You can say what you want, we'll just shoot you for it!"
Imagine this. - I think you are lam3 so I decide to share my feelings in the next presentation you are going to make. Free speech right?
Of course freedom of speech means freedom from the bloody consequences what else could it mean?
This is a basement dweller's misunderstanding of what freedom of speech is. "Freedom from consequence" implies that you are free to say whatever you want, while other people are not. But if other people are not free to say whatever they want in response to what you say, then we don't have freedom of speech, now do we?
Freedom of speech means that with very exceptions, you can say whatever you want, and the government can't silence you. It does not mean that other people have to agree with what you say, or tolerate it, or provide an outlet for it.
Importantly, it also does not mean that an employer must continue to employ you if the employer disagrees with your speech. Because I think all of you basement dwellers can agree, if employers were required to employ you like that, it'd be socialism, and socialism is bad, amirite?
Where did this idea come from?
Of course freedom of speech means freedom from the bloody consequences what else could it mean?
If I punish you for saying something you are not free to do that. "You can say what you want, we'll just shoot you for it!"
Another point: The consequences they impose are often disproportional to the assumed infraction of some sensibilities and are exacerbated by two things:
1. Dynamics of social media, i.e. once an accusation gets traction it can spiral out of control.
2. A very vocal minority sees ra/cis/m or se/xis/m everywhere, regardless what someone has said or done it will always be interpreted in the most negative way.
Usually the argument relies on freedom of association - you're free to disagree with me politically, and I'm free to boycott/pressure your employer if they don't fire you, or boycott/pressure any sort of social media platform that doesn't ban you from being able to publicize your opinion.
This has a first-pass appeal, but in the age of social media we're seeing that this sort of dynamic is allowing for people to target a large number of others who are complete strangers living thousands of miles away, and this is creating a society-wide chilling effect in a way that is largely unprecedented. Obviously this glib "speech has consequences" dismissal of these concerns would not be embraced by these people if this technology developed in say the sociocultural context of the 80s and it was being used to cancel sodomites and sinners.
Of course freedom of speech means freedom from the bloody consequences what else could it mean?This is a basement dweller's misunderstanding of what freedom of speech is. "Freedom from consequence" implies that you are free to say whatever you want, while other people are not. But if other people are not free to say whatever they want in response to what you say, then we don't have freedom of speech, now do we?
Freedom of speech means that with very exceptions, you can say whatever you want, and the government can't silence you. It does not mean that other people have to agree with what you say, or tolerate it, or provide an outlet for it.
Importantly, it also does not mean that an employer must continue to employ you if the employer disagrees with your speech. Because I think all of you basement dwellers can agree, if employers were required to employ you like that, it'd be socialism, and socialism is bad, amirite?
Saying “basement dweller” again and again doesn’t make you smart. If anything, it makes your low Aye Que show.
Usually the argument relies on freedom of association - you're free to disagree with me politically, and I'm free to boycott/pressure your employer if they don't fire you, or boycott/pressure any sort of social media platform that doesn't ban you from being able to publicize your opinion.
This has a first-pass appeal, but in the age of social media we're seeing that this sort of dynamic is allowing for people to target a large number of others who are complete strangers living thousands of miles away, and this is creating a society-wide chilling effect in a way that is largely unprecedented. Obviously this glib "speech has consequences" dismissal of these concerns would not be embraced by these people if this technology developed in say the sociocultural context of the 80s and it was being used to cancel sodomites and sinners.
Woke culture plus network effects are a toxic combination
Of course freedom of speech means freedom from the bloody consequences what else could it mean?This is a basement dweller's misunderstanding of what freedom of speech is. "Freedom from consequence" implies that you are free to say whatever you want, while other people are not. But if other people are not free to say whatever they want in response to what you say, then we don't have freedom of speech, now do we?
Freedom of speech means that with very exceptions, you can say whatever you want, and the government can't silence you. It does not mean that other people have to agree with what you say, or tolerate it, or provide an outlet for it.
Importantly, it also does not mean that an employer must continue to employ you if the employer disagrees with your speech. Because I think all of you basement dwellers can agree, if employers were required to employ you like that, it'd be socialism, and socialism is bad, amirite?Saying “basement dweller” again and again doesn’t make you smart. If anything, it makes your low Aye Que show.
I never said it made me smart. I'm just pointing out how embarrassingly dum the "freedom from consequence" meme is. It's not freedom of speech if only you can say whatever you want. A properly raised six-year-old can understand that.