Commenter Archive

AvatarComments by greginak in reply to Oscar Gordon*

On “From Elizabeth Picciuto: The Real Free Speech Violations

Well yeah that is his magic. Of course it's not going to happen. It's more the ironic juxtaposition of that with the letters. This particular bugaboo is a thing that has been around RW media for a while which the only reason he has even heard of it. Still i doubt there is time for anything to actually even start to come of it even without court cases.

"

Thus displaying why "free speech defenders" are more often just partisans who aren't actually helping the cause they claim to defend.

"

That's probably part of it. I think Stephen Miller explains part of it still. But major football conferences are shrinking their schedules. Foreign visa students are nothing compared to football in terms of effect. They can teach visa stu's one on one, but without football it aint gonna be the same.

"

LOL. He is threatening to take a benefit away from one group of people for speech he doesn't like. I guess that isn't a threat to free speech then. Carry on.

"

Breaking news on the free speech front. The prez tweeted this:
"Too many Universities and School Systems are about Radical Left Indoctrination, not Education. Therefore, I am telling the Treasury Department to re-examine their Tax-Exempt Status..."
(Yeah i could have linked the tweet, but i wasn't taught how to do that in my lib indoctrination camp)

Firstly, of course this is bull squat, nothing will happen, it's the blusterest bluster that ever blustered even from him. Second, isn't this the kind of free speech threat that FS advocates are concerned about and should provoke a strong reaction.

But for F's sake no more damn open letters.

On “Thursday Throughput: Missing COVID Deaths Edition

The lowest estimate for what we need to get herd immunity i've read is 60% which no place is near. Even in spain which got hammered i think a recent study only found 5% of people had antibodies. It seems like we are several waves of infection from HI.

On “From Elizabeth Picciuto: The Real Free Speech Violations

The point of noting True Threats is to find a speech restriction that has complete( almost i guess) support. Yeah there are a lot of things that go towards making something a True Threat. And still it's a speech restriction we maintain as somethings need to be out of bounds.

We are discussing where the out of bounds line, or area, is. Not that there is a line.

"

Free speech doesn't do that. FS isn't data about how society or individuals within a society are doing. FS is just one part, an important part, but only one element of a decent society. As an example for a long time sexist comments about women or sluts at gay people were fine and excepted. Now they aren't generally accepted in the workplace but are still common in a lot of social media. There are even social consequences for those comments sometimes. That could be seen as a decrease in free speech which it is. Some previously fine comments are now out of bounds. But that is also a direct improvement for the subjects of those comments.

"

All this proves is that because of how Romney was treated the R's were driven at twitter point to support Trump.

"

Like i said that is a seperate discussion from free speech. That whole free society thing means we will have lots of divergent and hostile views in one country. But there is some level of toxicity that is beyond the bounds of what a free society can tolerate ( deliberate use of the word tolerate). We put true threats out of bounds as an example. That is limit on speech most of us are just fine with. Some of us might even say we are to tolerant of threats by dismissing them as just shitposting on twitter or something like that.

"

If only the world was so simple as to be well understood in short simple, though good, phrases.

"

This is one of the major blind spots of many free speech defenders. There are still nazi's. Antisemitism and general bigotry are common. Free speech doesn't disinfect. Never has, never will. It's still good and important, but it doesn't clean away the moral covid from our society. If we want toxic elements gone we need to make it go away. That is separate discussion about what is toxic and how to do it in a free society. But free speech won't get us there.

"

Social networks give lots of power to people good at stoking outrage and in a very democratic manner. This is , like everything, good and bad. Democracy is great except when out of control mobs can hurt people. In some cases, like JKR, getting roasted on twitter etc isn't being cancelled or social death or some other hyperbole. It's free speeching and she is a whiner.

As has been said in other threads, it's a case by case thing. Which is why anodyne letters can be fine on their own yet miss so much of what is going on.

On “From Freddie deBoer: Ending the Charade

That would be a good idea. Nunes lawsuit is still a direct attack on people mocking pols. I'm not surprised you are pissed about it. That the "OMG cancel culture" people haven't made more of an uproar, sadly, doesn't surprise me.

"

Yeah. The suit was going on for months which is a serious issue for a lone person. He was trying to force the people to divulge their identities for having two mocking accounts. I think he was also suing google or twitter or some other giant corps which was just helping with the down payment on some lawyers third houses. Any free speecher worth their salt should have been pissed about it.

He looked the fool. But i doubt 10% of the people freaking about cancel culture have heard of him or know what the deal with him is.

It's not that "cancel culture" critics are wrong. But the myopia is stunning and plenty of it is just bad faith partisanship.

"

It avoided a while ton of free speech issues in a way that is common focusing mostly on how it effects prominent columnists who suffer very little of any the effects of being beaten by cops for protesting or losing their jobs for writing stuff.

There is a giant market and branding for saying non pc things. You can make a fortune at it even if what you are saying is conventional and old fashioned.

"

Did you read Elizabeth's piece? That is a good start to where the letter missed the mark. Not the letter was wrong, just missing a lot.

"

Obtw it was Sideshow Bob stepping on a rake. Just saying.

"

It would be a more productive talk about speech if it wasn't aimed only at the people you don't like. That is what provokes some of the bad reaction to this letter. It ignores lots of things and makes free speech a partisan hammer. E's article goes through a lot that. There are all sorts of free speech issues that seem to be ignored. So what is it that you care about: free speech or a bad faith hammer.

Did you see Hat's tweet today about being For social punishment of a guy making death/rape threats. If all you want is a hammer then have fun. There is a lot more going on though.

"

It cost small people real money to fight it. That seems like a problem.

"

There is a nugget of correct rebuttal in Freddie's post. There is a censorious segment in part of the left. It's not new; always been there. There is so much left out of the "OMG cancel culture" stuff that makes me wonder.

A lot of the issues with the Harpers letter and the conservative freak out (myopia) are laid out here by yet another former OT'er, Elizabeth.

https://arcdigital.media/the-real-free-speech-violations-7d8c4a74fcc

It's a really good piece and fine companion to Freddie's.

I'll add that while people are going on about CC, a sitting congressman Devin Nunes, has been engaged in a long series of harassing litigation about big companies and anon Twitter's peeps for mocking him. Nary a peep from the people afraid of cancel culture, yet it is a direct attack on free speech. Not to mention, though i am, the presidents attempt to squash two books about him, which seems anti free speechy.

On “Do All Lives Matter?

I didnt' see the R's all that willing to negotiate about the bill the D's passed in the house and authored by one of many African Americans.

On “Don’t Forget: Black Lives Matter

Is this supposed to mean something? The D's pushed for more reform then the R's. Nothing is changing at the Fed level right now. If the D's win they are more likely to get reform while the R's will spin another "repeal and replace" sack of nothing.

"

The thing all the easy symbolic stuff was done by companies. Changing laws is a completely separate thing that always takes more time and lifting. I've seen people lament how they didn't want Gone with the Wind to be still in wide spread availability and subject to a silly moral panic. Ur how about brands changing logos....yeah we got that but it has nothing to do with the laws.

It seems to me like a lot of protesters were saying what they wanted. One party tried to give them a some of what they wanted and one tried to give them very little. Pols heard what people wanted. I don't think calling reps would have changed anything. We have an election coming up so people can still call. And vote.

FWIW i'm glad all the confed statues are gone. It would have been better to do it formally but we have seen how difficult that has been. It would take decades to get them down and it is a travesty they were ever up in the first place.

"Partisan politics" sigh. This really says nothing. I know it's a common phrase, but it says nothing. Whose bill did you want? Which was better? Who was willing to negotiate? What will get done if the D's or R's win in November? Politics is inherently about groups putting stuff out there, sometimes negotiating, winning power then doing what they can. Politics always has different groups with different issues. If one side wins in Nov there is a lot more chance of significant change if the pressure continues to be applied. I hope that pressure stays and i think it will.

On “Do All Lives Matter?

I like this. But to go in different direction what is endlessly unfortunate about the US and how we attempt to discuss things is getting lost in three word phrases. Anybody with a shred of good will knows what BLM means since people have explained it approximately 10000 times. Same thing with Defund/Abolish the Police. But people keep coming back to the bumper sticker phrases. Sure sometimes there is actual debate of the issues. But we spend to much time on bumper stickers.

*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.