shopify analytics tool

Speech wars

Ladies and gentlemen, something huge happened this last week.

While I was busy stomping out grass fires, the speech wars turned ugly with a vengeance. It's a battle for control of who gets to speak, what they get to say, and where and when they get to say it. It's a battle that threatens American freedom.

It's a battle for the heart and soul and future of the internet.

The internet is the last, best hope for freedom. It may be the last, best hope for humanity. But it can only fulfill that promise if people can say what they want, when they want, to who they want. There's no other way it can work. The only sure way to protect your free speech is to protect other’s free speech. Even if you don’t like what they are saying.

Especially if you don’t like what they are saying.

That doesn't mean you have to agree. Or be polite. Or even acknowledge it.

We need people arguing and waving fingers under each others noses. Competition keeps us honest. No one group and certainly no one person has all the answers.

Anyone who tells you differently is lying.

Americans are free to believe anything they choose. Americans are free to tell anyone what they want however they can.

Of course if they use force so others pay attention, they deserve the consequences.

Yes, Americans are free to speak and write as they choose. For now.

That's no guarantee that Americans can find someone to pay attention. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom to be heard. Freedom of the press does not mean freedom to be read. People can choose to notice you, or not. It's up to them. That's their freedom. Just because you have something to say doesn't mean it's something they want to hear. But you have the right to speak.

Except that's not good enough for some.

They think that if you say something that they disagree with, you must not be allowed to say it.

They think that if you might say something they disagree with, you must not be allowed to say it.

“Thou shalt not dissent.”

These people will use legal means if they can. Failing that, they will try removing your Moral Authority™ to speak by proving you are a despicable, deplorable, and dangerous person Who Just Might Tempt Others Into Degeneracy. Failing that, they will try to link you to the questionable behavior of others to prove you are unfit to speak. Failing that (or if they do not have time), they use violence against you.

You might think that hate speech is not free speech. You might think that you shouldn't have to listen to it. You might think that we need to “protect the children.” That's certainly your right.

But who decides what is hate speech?

From my experiences the last week or so, I know that many people believe hate speech is anything they don't agree with. Those folks were about a half step from condemning Republicans and libertarians along with the neo-Nazis and white nationalists, even though we hadn't done anything wrong. Even though we had no association with the neo-Nazis and white nationalists. Apparently we did not condemn the neo-Nazis and white nationalists fast enough. And apparently we didn't link violence exclusively with the neo-Nazis and white nationalists AND ONLY WITH the neo-Nazis and white nationalists.

Some of us even said that the neo-Nazis and white nationalists had the same free speech rights as everyone else. As long as they didn't use violence.

Some believe these sins violate Moral Authority™ enough to justify removing freedom of speech. Anyone sinful enough must be shunned until they atone for their sins. So domain registrars and web-hosting companies started removing hate-speech sites. Google announced a new initiative to screen against hate stories.

Somehow no conservative group was asked to participate. Libertarians are never asked to participate, we usually do anyway. But if the gatekeepers decide what is hate and what is not while excluding what is not morally approved, how long do you think anyone will be allowed to dissent?

Aside from the moral pretentious and the virtue signaling, let's look at the implications. People who believe that hate speech is not free speech also believe that certain people cannot be trusted to choose between bad and good. They believe that certain people can't learn from their mistakes and do better the next time.

So not only are they treating adults as children, but they are robbing tomorrow. Will you accept that?

Donald Trump and other politicos already want to restrict speech critical of their actions. It's only one step more to decide that no one can be critical of an elected official because after all they are Official and are only doing things For The Common Good.

And it's only one step more to declare since there is no criticism, there's no need for elections.

I'm going to cover the Speech Wars more and more. I have to. I want my tomorrows. You can fight for everyone's rights today. Or you can lose yours tomorrow. Your choice.

Your freedom.
Comments

from crux № 18 - choice and consequence

Our problem is that we excuse people from the consequences.

Read More...
Comments

Won't knife you in the back

In my experience, conservatives won't knife you in the back. They'll scream in your face, they'll tell you that you're wrong, but they're usually facing you.

Certain progressives will trot you out for the dog-&-pony show, drape an arm over your shoulder, smile for the cameras, and then slide the knife in so smoothly you never feel it until after you start bleeding and they've moved away.
     — NeoWayland

Comments

NeoNotes — scapegoating "whites"

And yet scapegoating is alive and well.

Read More...
Comments

“Black, Millennial, Female and… Conservative” from Prager University

“Antonia Okafor, a young, single, black woman, recently discovered that's she's a racist, sexist, misogynist. How in the world did this happen? None other than Antonia Okafor explains.”

Read More...
Comments

from crux № 11 - Ultimate truth

I've seen the arguments in enough other contexts to distrust anyone who claims rationality prevents any opposing view. Even more so when they dismiss any other possibility unheard because they have the Ultimate Truth That Must Not Be Questioned.
     — NeoWayland

Read More...
Comments

from crux № 9 - Testing ideas

We need our beliefs and convictions tested by people who don't agree with us.

Read More...
Comments

from crux № 1 - hate crimes

I've never agreed with the “hate crime" nonsense.

Read More...
Comments

from crux № 10 - the system

We've been taught that government is supposed to govern and control the other guy.

That's the guy who is the problem.

Not us. Never us. It's not our fault.

Read More...
Comments

NeoNotes — Pardon…

It would not honor my faith, and it dishonors the Divine as I perceive it. It would require me to break oaths & promises that are at least as important to me as yours are to you.

Read More...
Comments

NeoNotes — Liberty should be the goal

We need solutions that don't exile people politically.

Read More...
Comments

Mixing science and politics

“The Real War on Science”

Read More...
Comments

NeoNotes — People. Are. Pissed. Off.

People had their trust stolen and now they are almost ready to smash.

Read More...
Comments

NeoNotes — The real "for their own good"

I'm libertarian. If I had my way, the government would be much smaller and not pushing either a progressive agenda or a conservative one. I'm convinced that a big reason WHY this is happening now is because conservatives built the Big Institutions to keep things working Their Way™ and progressives took them over for the exact same reason.

I don't believe the answer is in who gets to call the shots.

I think the solution is stopping people from meddling with other people's lives so that those other people HAVE to take responsibility for their own choices.

Because that's the real 'for their own good.'

NeoNotes are the selected comments that I made on other boards, in email, or in response to articles where I could not respond directly.

Comments

NeoNotes — Political fringe and crazy ideas

The political fringe and their crazy, insane ideas

Read More...
Comments

NeoNotes — Dangerous beast

Perhaps the biggest difference between libertarians and conservatives/progressives is that conservatives and progressives view government as a Way To Get Things Done.

Libertarians see government as an extremely dangerous beast that if kept at all, must be severely hobbled and and three-quarters starved.

For the safety of the community.

NeoNotes are the selected comments that I made on other boards, in email, or in response to articles where I could not respond directly.

Comments

Twitterfied - updated

But here’s the thing. They make no secret of their opinion. If they think I am wrong, they tell me and they tell me why.

Read More...
Comments

Leap of faith

My goal isn’t winning internet arguments, it’s freedom.

Read More...
Comments

Choose your right

I believe that economics and morality should be based in free choice.

Read More...
Comments

Why I MARGINALLY prefer conservatives over liberals

Given a choice, I'd rather not deal the fanatic versions of either. There really should be more libertarians in the world, but I can't force that choice on any one. Read More...
Comments

Original Pagan•Vigil FAQ

Just the FAQs about my Vigil

Read More...
Comments
2017       2016       2015       2014       2010       2009       2008       2007       2006       2005