| sebastian_dangerfield |
07-18-2020 01:53 PM |
Re: Objectively intelligent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
(Post 529348)
I'm not sure what "the sentiment of the letter" is, so let's be more concrete.
:
What Are You Fighting About?
Free speech defenders cast their argument as upholding first principles, but it’s not. A substantial majority of Americans agree that:
1) The government should not use state power to punish people for expressing their opinions, especially opinions about the government.
2) In general, influential private actors — employers, media outlets, universities, crowds, etc. — should not use their power to punish people for expression, whether or not they agree with the substance.
3) Some expressions are beyond the pale, and private actors should use their power to reduce the space in which those expressions are socially acceptable.
While both sides of this debate cast it in sweeping, sometimes civilizational terms, the entire thing takes place within point three: Which expressions should be beyond the pale, and how should private actors punish transgressions?
Is there anything here you disagree with?
|
No. The argument is one of degree within points two and three. And that seems and probably is an easy debate between people like us.
The problem is there exist a huge number of morons in the country who believe that disagreement with their orthodoxy deserves severe punishment by powerful private organizations. And their right to request such punishment is itself free speech.
This I think will create a bifurcated public square. There will be conversation like what we have here, and there will be shouting among the morons.
The problem is, corporations respond to the morons. There aren’t enough of us to buy their products, so they must punish a few of those the mob demands to be sacrificed.
We can spot the morons and ignore them, but for content producers and public figures there remains a chilling effect. You see this playing out already. Privately, everyone rolls their eyes at the most extreme voices, but publicly everyone pretends to take them seriously to avoid becoming a target of their ire.
I think this is bad because it allows the dimwits to remain extreme and think it’s acceptable. They fail to develop critical thinking and become more orthodox. Society splits into Those Who Know Better and The Mobs of Imbeciles.
I guess it’s a self-correcting problem, as it allows the extreme right and extreme left to battle over who are the bigger idiots while the rest of us go about our business. But these nuts vote. |
