I just wish people would recognize “Freedom of speech isn’t freedom from consequences” is one of the most fascist things ever said.
Like, there are so many better ways to phrase the underlying thought that don’t sound like you’re about to sentence someone to the mines for insulting the state.
“Freedom of speech isn’t a guaranteed platform”
“Freedom of speech only applies to governmental censorship”
“Freedom of speech applies to more people than just you, chucklefuck”
I’m curious as to what you think about the actual meaning of those sentences, then. Do you think that there ought to be protection against consequences, regardless of what one says? Should there be any exceptions at all? What is the domain of applicability? Certain types of expression, certain types of topics, intended audience, etc?
Edit: oh and what about freedom from? Is there any situation in which a person has a right to shut someone down from “expressing themselves” to them without their consent?
I just wish people would recognize “Freedom of speech isn’t freedom from consequences” is one of the most fascist things ever said.
Like, there are so many better ways to phrase the underlying thought that don’t sound like you’re about to sentence someone to the mines for insulting the state.
“Freedom of speech isn’t a guaranteed platform”
“Freedom of speech only applies to governmental censorship”
“Freedom of speech applies to more people than just you, chucklefuck”
Etc etc
I’m curious as to what you think about the actual meaning of those sentences, then. Do you think that there ought to be protection against consequences, regardless of what one says? Should there be any exceptions at all? What is the domain of applicability? Certain types of expression, certain types of topics, intended audience, etc?
Edit: oh and what about freedom from? Is there any situation in which a person has a right to shut someone down from “expressing themselves” to them without their consent?