If You're For Free Speech, You're For Free Speech For Everybody
Even -- yes -- including people who are speaking about how you shouldn't be allowed free speech. Or people who are putting on a play you think shows terrible things.
Being for free speech means letting them have their say in whatever talk they're giving or play they're putting on -- not squashing their speech by running up on stage or shouting them down.
Being for free speech especially means not putting a chill on others who'd speak similarly through making them fear violence from you and your co-"religionists."
Here's the lead up to my free speech policy. (My actual policy is at the link within the tweet and also just below.)
To those tweeting me, "Betcha don't stand up for free speech of..." ("people on the right/left/people w/phantom limbs...), Amy's policy: pic.twitter.com/ipivDic3KO
— Amy Alkon (@amyalkon) June 18, 2017
A typical recent exchange from Twitter over this post, "Interrupting A Play That Offends You Is Not Free Speech; It's Free Thuggery":
I'm proud to defend the free speech of liberals & conservatives; warmongers & pacifists; bores, whores, & all nutjobs w/something to say.
— Amy Alkon (@amyalkon) June 18, 2017
If you are giving a speech or putting on a play, I absolutely support your right to do it without being shouted down or otherwise stopped from sending your message -- though I may picket outside and/or denounce your point of view as idiotic twaddle on the Internet and in newspapers.
As is my right.
And then there's your right to denounce me and my thinking similarly. And so on, and so on.
That's how we advance society -- through talking and allowing talking, not violence and speech squashing.
Well that sounds civilized. Too bad we're not.
Far easier to scream and whine about how (a) people have been doing (b) for years so now no one can be mad when (c) people start doing the "same thing"
Yes, I know. **I'm wrong** to think that we could be better at this "civilization" thing. But the 'civil' part seems too difficult, I guess.
drcos at June 19, 2017 6:26 AM
And then there's the people who think that their freedom of speech includes the freedom to deny a channel to speech that they don't like, by heckling, shouting down, "de-platforming", computer and network hacking, doxxing, threatening, blocking entrances to venues, organizing mobs, setting off fire alarms during productions, up to rioting and physically assaulting speakers and performers. Don't get me wrong, no one should be required to support or subsidize the production of speech that they don't approve of (one reason the National Endowments for the Arts/Humanities need to be eliminated or go private). However, there's a big difference between that, and denying someone the use of a venue or channel that they have paid for, or denying some speakers use of a public space depending on their viewpoint, or denying an audience's right to see or hear or read speech that they want to be exposed to.
Cousin Dave at June 19, 2017 6:46 AM
Phantom Limb was an idiot. There, I've said it. And while I know the whole purple leotard is superhero/villain traditional formal wear a guy with as much fashion sense as his home displayed should be able to dress in a much more flattering manner.
http://teamventure.org/vbwiki/Phantom_Limb
As for the actual topic, I agree. You can't be for free speech and go around preventing others from talking. But at the same time I can't get worked up over this one event. Civil behavior is a prisoner's dilemma problem. If one group refuses to act in an appropriate way they extract outsized harms on those around them. In the end everyone acts in an uncivil manner so that the harms are spread fairly.
Ben at June 19, 2017 7:21 AM
Meanwhile.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/06/19/supreme-court-upholds-offensive-trademarks-form-free-speech/100618478/
More immediately, until there is a cost delivered unto the illiberals who want to shut down speech, with violence if necessary, they'll continue acting out.
Yeah, I'm looking at you, UCB administration, city of Berkeley, Middleton College administration. You chose to look the other way whilst actual crimes were committed. Unlike[2] many who acted out, you should know better.
[1] which will benefit the Washington Redskins, much to the annoyance of the illiberals
[2] a benefit of the doubt, given my estimation of their education
I R A Darth Aggie at June 19, 2017 8:38 AM
Popehat has an expert take on this.
Both Amy and IRA Darth Aggie will be gratified.
Jeff Guinn at June 19, 2017 8:46 AM
What about Washington Post reporters tweeting out the home address of Trump supporters:
http://www.dailywire.com/news/17671/washington-post-reporter-tweets-out-home-address-joseph-curl
Snoopy at June 19, 2017 9:38 AM
What about Washington Post reporters tweeting out the home address of Trump supporters
They should be summarily fired. I'm sure they'll be able to score a gig at some click bait site, or perhaps MSNBC.
Also, given the precedent set in the following case, anyone who goes to Sheriff Clarke's home and ends up dead, those doing the doxxing should be held liable for those death(s).
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2017/06/16/shes-accused-of-pushing-him-to-suicide-now-a-judge-has-decided-her-fate/?utm_term=.7d141434d835
I think that sets a horrible precedent, by the way. Think of it as judging words to be as dangerous as bricks, baseball bats, or large calibre firearms.
I R A Darth Aggie at June 19, 2017 12:47 PM
Regarding whatever racial implications this has for the Washington Redskins, I was amazed to read this passage from ESPN this morning:
By "helped," they mean quarterbacked the team that overwhelmed Elway in his prime by 32 points.Well, Williams has always been a humble and earnest guy. Kaepernick he is not. But achievement is achievement!
So when reading that, my first thought was Black man can't get a break in America. The guy WON the fucking Super Bowl.
Crid at June 19, 2017 7:57 PM
Wiki says he was the SB MVP.
"Helped."
Crid at June 19, 2017 7:58 PM
Saying you believe in something without working toward it is grace on the cheap.
There are a lot of people whose careers should be ruined over their lack of action.
What has happened to them?
Belief without action, without organization without 30% of the population even saying it's a crime is pretty appalling.
That is how Prohibition failed. A large minority of people kept getting away with not respecting the law and everyone else said 'why bother'?
So all this 'belief' while bad things are willfully allowed to happen by AUTHORITIES doing nothing?
What good does your belief do for me?
FIDO at June 20, 2017 7:58 AM
But to allay any concerns: I am as free speech as Amy and the leadership of the Democratic party is.
If my thugs, by chance, do bad things to Democrats, I will show the same vim and vigor, saying pious things, asserting ancient rights and I will call upon the authorities to deal with them just as much at the Mayors of Portland and Berkeley.
Oh...um...hmm.
So what does my sanctimony do for a Leftist? The same things his pomposity does for me.
FIDO at June 20, 2017 9:15 AM
Leave a comment